Search results

Separation of people involved in the same crime is so they can't discuss it and tell each other what they are telling their own lawyers or investigators or what those people are telling them. Often one ends up giving evidence against the other in return for a lesser charge or sentence...

just a general comment. Even if he had been convicted of manslaughter he would not have received Allison's insurances as that is an unlawful killing like murder, just basically lacking intent.

He could appeal to the High Court of Australia but has to seek leave to appeal first. It's unlikely though.

That article quotes Sharon's son Eli as saying both his mum and dad came up to visit him the weekend before she disappeared. This doesn't add up with them being supposedly estranged. But maybe they were putting on a show for their kids? I just find it confusing.

Ladybird, speaking generally I believe appeals for murder convictions are par for the course so to speak. Mostly legal aid would pay so there is nothing to lose to try to get a conviction overturned, even to a lesser conviction with a lesser sentence.

Interesting excerpt from a book "Why did they do it" about murderers with personality disorders. Didn't even know GBC would be in the article until I read it today. http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/what-drives-a-dad-to-murder-his-sons/story-fnu2q5nu-1227475281984

I didn't see her or Nigel even though I was having a good look around once I sat down but the person sitting next to me said they were up the front. I see from media pics that they were there. There were lots of Allison's family but I don't think her brother or sister were there.

Happy to do it. Love listening to lawyers talk law stuff! I didn't think the defence contradicted themselves, but they were certainly making repetitive suggestions that went against the rules of circumstantial evidence and the extent of proof required. It was all a bit odd actually. I guess...

These are my notes of today’s appeal. Most is word for word so if bits appear disjointed thats why. My comment for background- in a circumstantial case the prosecution does not have to prove beyond reasonable doubt every piece of evidence. Rather it is the whole of the evidence put together...

It's done. I will write up my take on it all but I feel there are serious flaws in the appeal and it won't be successful.

Sounds correct to me BN.

Law list is up. Appeal to be heard at 10.15am Banco court, Supreme Court before 3 judges. Perhaps they don't think it's going to take very long as there is another appeal scheduled in same court at a time not before 10.30. I think the Baden Clay appeal will take more than 15 mins...

I am planning on going to the appeal on Friday so will report back.

Tony Moynihan won't be handling the appeal for the prosecution now as he has been appointed as a judge of the District Court. http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/tony-moynihan-qc-will-replace-judge-hugh-botting-on-district-court/story-fnn8dlfs-1227414837223

Yes, all those things are valid speculation. Also the police can't pick and choose which pieces of evidence they hand over to the defence. It all has to be handed over including anything that may exonerate the accused, which means evidence that they are not guilty.

When someone is charged, the police and the prosecution have to gather all the evidence and get it ready in what is a called a brief, basically a folder/ box to give to the defence. They serve it on the defence by delivering it to the lawyer's office. Sometimes they do it in stages as they have...

Will get onto this later tonight when house is peaceful!

I wonder if it was VS idea or MS to post the items? I agree that it was likely Stephanie's personal effects like jewellery, and maybe her handbag and phone.

Marcus' reply of "I have never been there" is very semantic of him given he is in very serious trouble. If I was innocent and was asked the same question I think my answer would be more along the lines of "because I am innocent of the charges" and not playing silly buggers with the magistrate...

Welcome to the discussion couldyounot. Thanks for clarifying that it's Grafton where Sharon lived.