The Verdict Waiting Room

[Amee]

The girls go back on the Monday the 21st. Middle daughter is in the same class as my youngest daughter.

:tyou:

 

[Timmy]

Good, they know he lied under oath.

That's definitely a start in the right direction!

 

[squizzey1]

Have they moved schools? I thought they were still at Brookie?

no not at Brookie , don't know where they are but no longer there with my granddaughter

 

[Freya1977]

Amee, when we get the next flurry of activity, would you like me to do the same as how we just did - you do David & Kate and I'll pick up all the other ones? I just don't want to tread on your toes

 

[Inspector]

no not at Brookie , don't know where they are but no longer there with my granddaughter

How traumatic for them. First they lose mum, then dad, then move schools, all whilst trying to grieve and be a kid.

 

[sheldor]

Yes, however, from a legal point of view, just because he covered up after the fact does not mean he actually intended to kill in the first place. I know I think the same as you with all that he did, just trying to look at it purely from the way the law may view it- what the judge instructed the jurors and how they may interpret it. JMO

Yes, that's right. Some people kill unintentionally and try and cover it up. But it makes it very hard to then go back and argue manslaughter if your first defence is that you didn't do it in the first place. It's like when some people accused of rape say oh no, I don't even know her, but then when DNA evidence proves that sexual intercourse took place, they change their story and say, oh no that's right, I did have sex with her but she consented!

 

[Maigret]

The suspense is killing me

 

[Thinking]

Good, they know he lied under oath.

Yes - they just need to decide whether he did it because the truth would implicate him, or for some other possible reason

 

[Amee]

Amee, when we get the next flurry of activity, would you like me to do the same as how we just did - you do David & Kate and I'll pick up all the other ones? I just don't want to tread on your toes

sure,that will be great. I missed your post before, sorry. :loveyou:

I was in the tweet zone :blushing:

 

[squizzey1]

Yes, however, from a legal point of view, just because he covered up after the fact does not mean he actually intended to kill in the first place. I know I think the same as you with all that he did, just trying to look at it purely from the way the law may view it- what the judge instructed the jurors and how they may interpret it. JMO

Yes, that's right. Some people kill unintentionally and try and cover it up. But it makes it very hard to then go back and argue manslaughter if your first defence is that you didn't do it in the first place. It's like when some people accused of rape say oh no, I don't even know her, but then when DNA evidence proves that sexual intercourse took place, they change their story and say, oh no that's right, I did have sex with her but she consented!

that's what I thought, too good analogy

 

[Amee]

IT is day 19 of the trial of former Brookfield real estate agent Gerard Baden-Clay, 43, who stands accused of murdering his wife Allison Baden-Clay, 43, on April 19, 2012.

Baden-Clay has pleaded not guilty in the Supreme Court in Brisbane.

A jury of seven men and five women yesterday retired to consider a verdict at 11.10am.

It deliberated for five hours before returning to the jury room again today at 9.30am.

Justice John Byrne asked the jury to re-enter the court room at 10.10am.

In response to a note from the jury, Justice Byrne took them through sections of his summing up.

The jury speaker said he was not able to identify the passage the jury wanted more information on, instead referring a question from Justice Byrne to another panel member.
Courtroom sketch of Gerard Baden-Clay. Illustration: Brett Lethbridge

Courtroom sketch of Gerard Baden-Clay. Illustration: Brett Lethbridge

The juror identified the section as being to do with the evidence of Baden-Clay and whether he told lies.

Justice Byrne reread the passage to the jury.

“If you conclude that the accused lied because he realised that the truth would implicate him in killing his wife, you would need carefully also to consider whether the lie reveals a consciousness of guilt merely with respect to manslaughter as distinct from also revealing an intention to kill or to cause grievous bodily harm,” he said.

“You may only use the lie about cutting himself shaving – if it is a lie – as tending to prove the element of murder of an intention to kill or to cause grievous bodily harm if, on the whole of the evidence, the accused lied because he realised that the truth of the matter in that respect would show that, in killing his wife, he had intended to kill her or to cause her grievous bodily harm.

“It may be that, even if you were to find that the accused lied about his facial injuries because he realised that the truth would show him to be the killer, still you would not conclude that the lie shows that he realised that her death after scratching him with her fingernails would show that he had killed her intentionally.”

The jury retired again to consider its verdict.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-outside-sources/story-fnihsrf2-1226984982501

 

[Freya1977]

sure,that will be great. I missed your post before, sorry. :loveyou:

I was in the tweet zone :blushing:

Oh I know the feeling!! :scared:::scared:

 

[PrimeSuspect]

...or someone not knowing how jury deliberations work?

:giggle:

 

[BJsleuth]

:grouphug: :chillpill: :cup: :coffee:

Here you go, take what you want!

 

[Inspector]

Does anyone know what children are told in these situations? I'm not asking anything about the girls, as they are the innocent victims here. What is an age appropriate explanation?

 

[Freya1977]

The Gerard Baden-Clay murder trial took a dramatic twist yesterday when the judge warned the jury not to seek outside help in their deliberations.

The former Brisbane real estate agent has pleaded not guilty to murdering his wife Allison and dumping her body under the Kholo Creek bridge in April 2012.

The jury was sent out to begin its deliberations after Justice John Byrne finished his summing up.

But after two hours of deliberations the jury came back into the courtroom and it emerged that one of them had downloaded an overseas guide to jury service from the internet.

Justice Byrne sent the jurors back with a warning not to use any outside aids or seek to receive any new information.

"Clearly the direction has not been observed by one [juror]," Justice Byrne said.

"That juror has apparently downloaded from the internet material on how a juror might approach its great responsibility on deliberating on [a] verdict.

"What was done was wrong. I am, however, grateful it was brought to my attention."

He reiterated that assistance must come from the court only and not an external source.

"You scarcely need to know what some overseas commentator speaking about a very different system of jury trials happens to think," he said.

The jury returned to its deliberations but was sent home for the day at about 4:00pm and will resume its deliberations on Friday.

Allison's body was found on the creek bank 10 days after her husband reported her missing from their Brookfield home.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/24427681/baden-clay-murder-trial-jury-retires-to-consider-verdict/

 

[Freya1977]

A QUEENSLAND Supreme Court judge has scolded the jury in the Gerard Baden-Clay murder trial after a juror downloaded a foreign ‘how to deliberate’ guide from the internet.

The seven-man, five-woman jury had been deliberating for less than an two hours when Justice John Byrne called the jurors back into the courtroom to issue a stern warning about an “important matter”.

“I had expected that my direction, given twice orally and once in writing that you must not inquire outside the courtroom about anything (that relates) to the trial was clear and emphatic,” Justice Byrne said.

However, he said one juror had made the mistake of downloading from the internet an overseas commentator’s guide to jury deliberations.

“What was done was wrong,” Justice Byrne said.

He said that he understood a juror’s job was difficult, and important, but any assistance must come from “the court, and only from the court, and not some external source”.

“In any event, you have...a guide to jury deliberations (in the jury room), which is approved by the court.”

“You scarcely need to know what some overseas commentator speaking about a different system happens to think.”

He confiscated the document.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...deliberate-guide/story-e6frg6nf-1226984131813

 

[squizzey1]

Does anyone know what children are told in these situations? I'm not asking anything about the girls, as they are the innocent victims here. What is an age appropriate explanation?

don't know , but they would be old enough to know whats going on especially because of the media coverage, Dickies couldn't hide that and probably wouldn't want to JUST MY OPINION

 

[Freya1977]

Baden-Clay jury seek judge's advice on intent to kill

UPDATE: The jury in the Gerard Baden-Clay murder trial has asked Justice John Byrne to read them a section of his summing up about lies and intent to kill.

Justice Byrne told the jurors they might find it puzzling but he must read the relevant lines to them in the court.

"If you conclude the accused lied because he realised that the truth would implicate him in killing his wife, you would need carefully also to consider whether the lie reveals a consciousness of guilt merely with respect to manslaughter as distinct from also revealing an intention to kill or to cause grievous bodily harm," he said.

"You may only use the lie about cutting himself shaving - if it was a lie - as tending to prove the element of murder of an intention to kill or to cause grievous bodily harm if, on the whole of the evidence, the accused lied because he realised that the truth of the matter in that respect would show that, in killing his wife, he had intended to kill her or to cause her grievous bodily harm.

"It may be that, even if you were to find that the accused lied about his facial injuries because he realised that the truth would show him to be the killer, still you would not conclude that the lies shows that he realised that the death after scratching him with her fingernails would show that he had killed her intentionally."

The jury has resumed deliberations.

http://www.qt.com.au/news/baden-clay-trial-verdict/2315451/

 

[squizzey1]

http://www.qt.com.au/news/baden-clay-trial-verdict/2315451/

really feel things are warming up and a verdict is not too far away