The Crown v Gerard Baden-Clay, 25th June - Trial Day 10, Week 3

[drsleuth]

It was also revealed on Wednesday that someone connected Gerard Baden-Clay's mobile phone to a charger at 1.48am on April 20, 2012, even though he had told police he was asleep at the time.

On Thursday, Baden-Clay is expected to be invited to give evidence in his defence but has the right to decline.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/aa...s-Allison-Baden-Clays-pain.html#ixzz35e4HSdlJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/aa...s-Allison-Baden-Clays-pain.html#ixzz35e46zWOy
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

BBM: When was this discussed in court today. I must have missed it??

 

[Cattail]

It was also revealed on Wednesday that someone connected Gerard Baden-Clay's mobile phone to a charger at 1.48am on April 20, 2012, even though he had told police he was asleep at the time.



On Thursday, Baden-Clay is expected to be invited to give evidence in his defence but has the right to decline.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/aa...s-Allison-Baden-Clays-pain.html#ixzz35e4HSdlJ

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook





Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/aa...s-Allison-Baden-Clays-pain.html#ixzz35e46zWOy

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook



BBM: When was this discussed in court today. I must have missed it??

I believe it was included in the things agreed to by both sides which was read out at the end.

 

[Aliwonders]

The girl, aged eight,
She said her dad had a scratch on his face from his old razor.

``He scraped himself with his old shaver thing, this morning, you could see it, just a little scratch,’’ she said.

The girl said she asked him why there was a scratch on his cheek and he told her he cut himself.

She said her father had no scratches on his face when she went to bed that night.

The girl said her father cut himself before on his cheeks while shaving.

She said her father was wearing his work clothes when she woke up that morning, a white shirt and black pants.

But then she said she first saw her father wearing his pyjamas when she woke up and had ``foam’’ on his face.

She said her father did not often come into her room with foam on his face although, he had a couple of weeks ago

10-year-old
The girl said she woke up at 6.30am.

The girl said her father told her he had scratched himself shaving and had covered it with a Band-Aid.

``He said he scratched it about three times in a row because he had really old razors,’’ she said.

She said her father usually shaved after he had a shower.
http://m.news.com.au/QLD/fi11726703.htm

So he took the razors to his parents place to keep using it????

 

[Total]

No, not take his own life, just covering up the scratch marks and other marks on his torso with seatbelt impressions. 'Just a little bit hurt'...my A...., that family is all nutso.

It was also revealed on Wednesday that someone connected Gerard Baden-Clay's mobile phone to a charger at 1.48am on April 20, 2012, even though he had told police he was asleep at the time.

On Thursday, Baden-Clay is expected to be invited to give evidence in his defence but has the right to decline.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/aa...s-Allison-Baden-Clays-pain.html#ixzz35e4HSdlJ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/aa...s-Allison-Baden-Clays-pain.html#ixzz35e46zWOy
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

BBM: When was this discussed in court today. I must have missed it??

It was in the list of matters agreed between Prosecution and Defence this afternoon before pandemonium broke out

 

[Aliwonders]

The girl, aged eight,
She said her dad had a scratch on his face from his old razor.

``He scraped himself with his old shaver thing, this morning, you could see it, just a little scratch,’’ she said.

The girl said she asked him why there was a scratch on his cheek and he told her he cut himself.

She said her father had no scratches on his face when she went to bed that night.

The girl said her father cut himself before on his cheeks while shaving.

She said her father was wearing his work clothes when she woke up that morning, a white shirt and black pants.

But then she said she first saw her father wearing his pyjamas when she woke up and had ``foam’’ on his face.

She said her father did not often come into her room with foam on his face although, he had a couple of weeks ago

10-year-old
The girl said she woke up at 6.30am.

The girl said her father told her he had scratched himself shaving and had covered it with a Band-Aid.

``He said he scratched it about three times in a row because he had really old razors,’’ she said.

She said her father usually shaved after he had a shower.
http://m.news.com.au/QLD/fi11726703.htm

So he took the blunt razor to his parents place to keep using it....while he grew a beard!!

 

[Total]

Great point Aliwonders. Who in all seriousness would keep using a razor that does terrible things to your face AND you are growing a beard!?

 

[WhatTheHey]

Oh Praise The Lord! Alioop has arrived!
Alioop is at the building!

Yes, i agree! Great to have Alioop about as we head into the legal nitty gritty!
Another question for Ali:
- What are the possibilities/ likelihood of a plea change at this stage? Could GBC slink his way into unlawful death, manslaughter, insanity or something along those lines?
Thanks again Alioop for you level-headedness, and reminding us that the prosecution know EXACTLY what it's doing with available evidence..:loveyou:

 

[alioop]

But I still think the evidence re he search should have been included? It could have been a happy coincidence, the fact is he did search the term a day before his wife went missing, isn't that enough to still include it as evidence....obviously I'm not a criminal lawyer!!

This is the type of information that I was trying to give examples of in terms of being interesting to us but not worthwhile evidence. This had a clear and convincing explanation by GBC backed up by the good wife episode on at the same time they were all watching tv. So the defence would have been all over it and be seen to have a win on that piece of evidence. So it would not have helped the prosecutions case at all in my opinion and would have been an unnecessary distraction from the good evidence. That's why they didn't raise it.

 

[drsleuth]

It was in the list of matters agreed between Prosecution and Defence this afternoon before pandemonium broke out

Thanks. It all got a bit crazy there for a while :facepalm:

 

[alioop]

Great point Aliwonders. Who in all seriousness would keep using a razor that does terrible things to your face AND you are growing a beard!?

Someone who can't afford a replacement.

 

[alioop]

Yes, i agree! Great to have Alioop about as we head into the legal nitty gritty!
Another question for Ali:
- What are the possibilities/ likelihood of a plea change at this stage? Could GBC slink his way into unlawful death, manslaughter, insanity or something along those lines?
Thanks again Alioop for you level-headedness, and reminding us that the prosecution know EXACTLY what it's doing with available evidence..:loveyou:

Thanks WTH. I think there is not likely to be any plea changes by GBC. I don't think the prosecution would agree anyway. They will take their chances with the jury on the murder charge.

 

[drsleuth]

Alioop: how do they come up with the " list of matters/evidence agreed between Prosecution and Defence"

Sorry if this is a stupid question :blushing:

Some of the things on that list were not mentioned in the trial ( that I am aware of ) hence the jurors would not have heard it??

For eg the phone being put back on the charger @ 1:48am

 

[Couldbe]

When I got my children phones they were in my name as at the time they had no licence to provide id.

Cattail ....... or maybe the phones were in the names of their Father (they share custody of the boys week about.

 

[Cattail]

Cattail ....... or maybe the phones were in the names of their Father (they share custody of the boys week about.

Yes could be

 

[Zim]

I think The Good Wife search was related to the searching of 'taking the fifth'.
It was the internet search during the Morning Ablutions which referenced 'self-incrimination' if I'm not mistaken..

YAY Tishy !
You got it in one !
I was sure someone else would get there before me !

 

[LadyBird1]

No, not take his own life, just covering up the scratch marks and other marks on his torso with seatbelt impressions. 'Just a little bit hurt'...my A...., that family is all nutso.

That car crash, if I'm not mistaken; occurred, whilst G was on on his way to Indooroopilly Police Station to have his torso etc photographed.
IMO Those photographs would have been highly incriminating. There must be some sort of law about photographing lower body parts ad lib? I mean without permission. (I am not a law person)
However, any "buying time" tactics would have helped his innocent at all costs theory.

Reckon Doc W might be able to help here.....
Facial scars take ..... x days to heal (say about 3 days)
Chest scars takes ...... X days to heal (say about 5 days or so)
Other body injuries take ... xx days to heal, unable to be precise. (to within say a 48 hour time frame)

 

[alioop]

Alioop: how do they come up with the " list of matter/sevidence agreed between Prosecution and Defence"

Sorry if this is a stupid question :blushing:

Some of the things on that list were not mentioned in the trial ( that I am aware of ) hence the jurors would not have heard it??

For eg the phone being put back on the charger @ 1:48am

I am sure the phone being put on the charger was mentioned today when they were going through the phone records. Can someone confirm please.

They come up with the list by either the barristers talking on the phone or the solicitors talking. The solicitors probably each put in writing to the other side what they propose to be agreed facts, then narrow those lists down, perhaps by talking on the phone, until they agree.
There would also be discussion about the witnesses and order of witnesses.

 

[Aliwonders]

When this happened I didn't want to believe that GBC was guilty. I think I probably googled his C21 site and read the nice blog he had complimenting his lovely wife. But then the flaws appeared. The decent upstanding businessman, husband and father is having an affair. He is broke and has been doing dodgy deals. He has scratches on his face and then horror of horrors he has scratches and bruises on his chest!!! His marriage is flawed and his wife is unhappy. She has a huge life insurance policy and then to top it all off the mistress calls and tells him in no uncertain terms that he must inform Allison that she was going to be at the conference tomorrow!! Talk about pressure!!! At 8.30 that night Allison was with her family. She had her hair all prettied ready for tomorrow and she was excited about the coming conference. By 6.30 the following morning she is gone without trace.....out of her home...somehow...and is found 10 days later over the side of a bridge with her arms in her jumper which was tangled about her neck. May justice be done for the sake of her family. No matter what way you look at it it is very very sad.

 

[drsleuth]

I am sure the phone being put on the charger was mentioned today when they were going through the phone records. Can someone confirm please.

They come up with the list by either the barristers talking on the phone or the solicitors talking. The solicitors probably each put in writing to the other side what they propose to be agreed facts, then narrow those lists down, perhaps by talking on the phone, until they agree.
There would also be discussion about the witnesses and order of witnesses.

Thanks Alioop. So would this be done even before the trial starts?

 

[Freya1977]

Fair enough that was before she went missing. What about 10 minutes before he called the QPS he once again looked up the term "self incrimination"?

Sorry, but it was disvounted as the search was still in his phones browser, and when he opened the browser to search for the police website, the browser automatically refreshed, making it appear that the search was repeated. That's why this evidence was not presented by the prosecution, because it was debunked.

You can try this on your own smartphone. If you do a Google search, and close the browser before clearing the page, the next time you open the browser the same website will load.