Allison Baden-Clay - GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD #43

[marlywings]

There were far too many posts about the Jayant Patel case so I've moved them all to the following case thread which I've opened in WS "up to the minute" section....


[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201907"]Australia - Jayant Patel Case - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]


ETA: posts about the murder of Macleay Island resident, Liselotte Watson, have been moved to the following thread...


[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8560020"]Australia - Macleay Island,Brisbane - 85yr old Liselotte Watson, murdered in her own - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[Humdinger]

I too think that she believes he is innocent. I think that she will believe it forever and at all costs!
I also think that she's able to ignore the evidence no matter how damning, she'll never see things the way others do!

 

[Karo]

Thankyou, you could be right.

Do you think OW may have grown more suspicious since Day 1 when Allison went missing?

I can understand the thinking that until she hears a confession she won't believe it, but do you think that deep down she must have serious doubts? If that's the case then her mind would be in constant turmoil.

I expect she does have doubts when she allows herself to think about it, however I really think she dismisses them because the alternative is too difficult to comprehend, if you get what I mean. Her focus is on his innocence and again we don't know what he has told her so until someone shows her proof that cannot be denied, her mind will forever see his innocence. All my opinion of course and I could be wrong too.

 

[they'll get you]

I believe that OW really thinks her brother is innocent of murder. I am uncertain about her belief that he is not guilty of anything but she gives the impression to me that unless she has a confession or some defining proof that can't be questioned she will never believe it, much like a mother who believes her children would never lie to her.
If she was pretending or lying I dont think she would have repeated the fell down a hole statement to the police.

Or unless she disliked Allison and preferred TM as a sister-in-law and believes he was under unfair pressure? I just don't get it either.
The 'fell down the hole statement' could have been a lighthearted comment possibly to sideline the police to think there is nothing wrong (and now go away). Otherwise I can't get my head around the stupidity.
AGAIN BC's lack of respect for our police.

 

[LadyBird1]

I believe that OW really thinks her brother is innocent of murder. I am uncertain about her belief that he is not guilty of anything but she gives the impression to me that unless she has a confession or some defining proof that can't be questioned she will never believe it, much like a mother who believes her children would never lie to her.
If she was pretending or lying I don't think she would have repeated the fell down a hole statement to the police.

That she "reported" those words also appears another "sleep deprived" statement. Even if it was tongue in cheek, under the circumstances, it was worse than appalling.
That she should whisk the children off at the moment the police arrived saved a potentially very sticky situation. Had they yet been debriefed? Properly BC style debriefed? Including putting the fear of God into their minds should they say one single word about what happened.
IMO, OW thinks her brother is innocent equally as much as he thinks he is innocent.

Oops I should clarify that first sentence. IMO The interview between Constable Ash and GBC shows all the hallmarks of a sleep deprived night. Um uh IMO

 

[The Falcon]

I always thought courtrooms were designed so you can see the accused plainly. Why is there a cubicle style set-up. Will he be front and centre if this goes to trial. Perhaps at commitals the accused is sheilded by the current set-up giving less tension in the room. It sounds like some people are in seats where the accused is totally out of their vision. How frustrating to not see his body language and changes of expression.:blushing::seeya::rocker::banghead::behindbar:bedtime::ufo:

 

[linette]

I expect she does have doubts when she allows herself to think about it, however I really think she dismisses them because the alternative is too difficult to comprehend, if you get what I mean. Her focus is on his innocence and again we don't know what he has told her so until someone shows her proof that cannot be denied, her mind will forever see his innocence. All my opinion of course and I could be wrong too.

It is possible, for sure. Alot of people do prefer to continue with their own thoughts rather than face the pain of the truth. Happens alot especially when it concerns family.
Maybe she was the 'protected one' being the only girl and regardless of her age maybe it's still a bit like that when it comes to the BC's?

I am just pretty sure that deep down she HAS to have doubts.

 

[ozazure]

I think Olivia knows believing he killed her is a reasonable thing to think. Whether she knows deep down or not, I am not convinced. I can imagine her supporting him with full knowledge of his crime. I am hoping the reality is she genuinely finds it unthinkable.

 

[bearbear]

i really find it hard to understand if you are innocent of a crime. you let yourself be dragged off to prison without kicking and screaming your innocence! and all members of your family protesting your innocence!?
also, if your son is accused of murder, why would you avoid at all costs being called to give evidence, if he was innocent then its a simple matter of telling the truth, which you would gladly do wouldnt you?
maybe gbc told ow a story and she finds it easier to believe, eg they were fighting, allison fell and hit her head, or allison overdosed, hes trying the spare the girls memory of their mother etc etc, so she knows he was there when she died but it was all an accident? my opinion only

 

[jamie233]

This might be a really dumb question, so bear with me.

In the event that this does go to trial, does the jury have access to original witness statements (e.g GBC business partners) or do they rely on the testimonies from the trial only?

 

[alioop]

This might be a really dumb question, so bear with me.

In the event that this does go to trial, does the jury have access to original witness statements (e.g GBC business partners) or do they rely on the testimonies from the trial only?

Good question jamie. No I don't think the jury will see the witness statements except for the reports like the autopsy etc that get tendered as evidence. Evidence is mainly given orally so the situation now where Danny Boyle is just asking a couple of questions is not the same as at a trial. He will get the witness to explain in detail what he wants them to for the jury and then they will be cross examined in much the same way as has occurred at the committal. A trial will take a lot longer than the committal, probably weeks all up.

 

[Sleuthilicious]

I believe that OW really thinks her brother is innocent of murder. I am uncertain about her belief that he is not guilty of anything but she gives the impression to me that unless she has a confession or some defining proof that can't be questioned she will never believe it, much like a mother who believes her children would never lie to her.
If she was pretending or lying I dont think she would have repeated the fell down a hole statement to the police.

I agree completely. In my head when she say that "down the hole" comment I picture her shaking her head at her brother as if to tell him off for telling the kids something so stupid/awful. Probably thinking that they'd had a fight and Allison would be back soon.

I'm a sucker for innocence. I WANTED to believe GBC was innocent, I was horrified when people were pointing the finger at Jill Meagher's husband (and many were!) and I dearly hope the BC family truly don't know anything about the crime against Allison. I'm hoping they just cluelessly misread the entire situation and are deeply regretting it.

 

[alicat]

I just watched a show on CI on Neil Entwistle and how he murdered his wife and baby daughter. Even after the trial, after he was proven guilty, his family left the courtroom and made a statement saying his Neil's wife was the murderer, and she killed their child and Neil is an innocent man and was framed and now has to live in jail for something he didn't do.

Some families just don't like to hear the fact their children have done wrong unfortunately.

I wonder if, after all that is coming out in the hearing, these loyal friends of the B-C's are starting to really question his innocence?

 

[jamie233]

Good question jamie. No I don't think the jury will see the witness statements except for the reports like the autopsy etc that get tendered as evidence. Evidence is mainly given orally so the situation now where Danny Boyle is just asking a couple of questions is not the same as at a trial. He will get the witness to explain in detail what he wants them to for the jury and then they will be cross examined in much the same way as has occurred at the committal. A trial will take a lot longer than the committal, probably weeks all up.

Thank you Alioop.

I hope then that the prosecution takes the questioning along the lines of the original statements, without disclosing anything I think it provides insight into character of some key players.

I work in recruitment and often when we do reference checks we say 'it's about what they don't say as much as what they do say'.

 

[possumheart]

Some families just don't like to hear the fact their children have done wrong.

My brother has done things for which I am unable to forgive him. I can't say my mother completely forgives him, but he lives in a boarding house and she still worries whether he is cold, eating well etc. She will always love him. I see an ugly middle-aged man, she sees her beautiful baby boy. She is a completely rational person, my Mum.
A good book to read is 'We Need to Talk About Kevin' by Lionel Shriver. The movie didn't do the book real justice.

I hope that made sense. I'm down with g a s t r o. Not nice.

 

[EllaN]

I know a case where a person went to court for a terrible crime (not murder, but just as bad you work it out).It went to court and the person was convicted. The family and certain friends still support this person no matter what, and are blaming the police and everyone else to this day. This is something most of us don't understand, how anyone can support a family member who did commit a terrible crime. Maybe a psychologist on here can explain this to us.

 

[Inspector]

Good question jamie. No I don't think the jury will see the witness statements except for the reports like the autopsy etc that get tendered as evidence. Evidence is mainly given orally so the situation now where Danny Boyle is just asking a couple of questions is not the same as at a trial. He will get the witness to explain in detail what he wants them to for the jury and then they will be cross examined in much the same way as has occurred at the committal. A trial will take a lot longer than the committal, probably weeks all up.

Hi Alioop! Given your answer above, and the rapid dissemination of documents such as witness statements and autopsy documents via the Internet, is it likely GBC will have to have a judge only trial? I know there is a lot of pre-trial information being released in the JM case too. What are you thoughts on these high profile cases and the way lots of information is available to the public?

 

[Flinders]

A news report I just found

Gerard Baden-Clay shied from public gaze in court

by:Mike Bruce From: The Courier-Mail March 12, 2013 12:00AM

In the gallery there was a mixture of justice rubber-neckers, students, media and supporters of Allison Baden-Clay, swelling to about 100 people by the lunch adjournment.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...ic-gaze-in-court/story-e6freoof-1226595105748


Plus I read today that journalists can't report just the prosecution in court. That would be biased.

 

[Fuskier]

May I offer a part response Inspector? This topic was on early morning radio with a Criminal QC(SC). He acknowledged that a lot of information had been released into the public domain. He stated that once it had been submitted to Court, unless subjected to a supression order as some information was in the Jill Meagher case, it is a public document.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/ba...313-2fzhq.html
The Melbourne Magistrates Court registry released information after Deputy Chief Magistrate Felicity Broughton agreed to allow media access to the police brief of evidence against Adrian Ernest Bayley. Three of the photo books and the autopsy report were not allowed to be released because Ms Broughton said they were "very sensitive and very distressing".

 

[DunnoZo]

Does anybody on this site know if GBC has sleep issues, such as sleep apnoea where he might have to sleep with a mask on? I ask this because my OH does, and the machine tracks months of nightly usage......