Allison Baden-Clay - GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD #43

[LadyBird1]

If there was any evidence found of middle of the night calls when he said he was asleep we would have heard about it by now. So I think it is fairly safe to say there aren't any, either mobile or landline.

What if he was using a separate phone? And one that hadn't been confiscated.
And how many phones did he have?

 

[FirstTimer]

All MOO.

My first impressions of OWs statement outside court was desperation, which is understandable, the evidence so far seems pretty damning. However, I also felt it she was trying to convince herself he is innocent. After all when one mulls things over in one’s head you can come up with all sorts of explanations and reasoning, if you then convey that to someone verbally it somehow validates that what you were convincing yourself of is actually fair, true and fact. Who else has she got to bounce things off to in court? No-one! So she goes to the media.

There are absolutely no other supporters there with her, no posse that were there at bail hearings, no other family. I know that if my son was accused of a crime, and in court for a hearing I would do anything I could to help him. My face would be there for all to see that I was supporting him. But, these guys don’t. Not there at all, no support, only one person and she does not say anything until the 11th hour on day 3. Desperation? I reckon.
It’s not surprising then when you cast your mind back to the first few days. If my wife had gone for a walk and not returned at her normal time, I believe my actions would be as follows:

• Ring her phone continuously for at least 30-45 minutes – not send texts to her on how busy I was because I had to get my kids ready for school.
• If still no answer, get a neighbour to watch the kids while I got in the car and follow her walking route. Leaving my phone number with the neighbour to ring if she arrived while I was out – rather than have a shower, shave and a sh#t and get ready for work.
• I would be on the phone while I was in the car to all my friends and family that lived close by to help me search – not call mommy and daddy and sissy over to help clean the house because it was messy.
• If after an extensive search still no sign, return home and phone the police – he did phone the police, but after not searching at all.
• Then in the ensuing days while a search is going I would be at the search site waiting for news. Even if I was told not to go looking – the Dickies were there in droves waiting for news, not searching, but waiting – not going to work and engaging lawyers on the first day.
• My parents, my siblings, my friends would all be at the search site waiting and giving support – not hiding away at home performing heinous acts of so called affection in a garage.
• If the media were hounding me I would be telling them all what had happened, what we were doing at the search site, what we were hoping for, commending the Police and SES on the tireless work they were doing so far – don’t believe they thanked the police or SES once during the search, certainly not publicly.
• As soon as my wife’s body was found I would be racing to the site where she was, wanting to see her and identify her, no matter what anybody said.

But, I guess we are not dealing with a normal person or family. I fail to see any evidence, action, interview that puts any doubt in anyone’s mind that he doesn’t have anything to hide. Put it this way, when talking to your friends, family, workmates, acquaintances or even strangers on a bus or train and the topic of this case comes up do any of them believe he did not have anything to do with the disappearance of his wife? I can only speak for myself, but I guess you all experience the same answer – NO!

Unfortunately we can only speculate and we have to go through the justice system, look at all the evidence and have faith that justice will be done.

The saddest parts of all this is three beautiful girls have lost their Mother and could potentially lose their Father too. After all is said and done, he is still their Daddy. Heartbreaking. I hope no-one ever has to go through what they have gone through and will continue to go through, unfortunately that will not happen.

Cheers.

 

[captb]

Yes and Yes. But not a lot of help. Nothing much in there we don't already know.

Thanks Doc - just to be sure we're talking about the same thing - have you seen the Telstra records themselves? For ABC's phone? Did they just produce billing data? Even that sometimes has the english name for the exact Cell that the device was connecting to. As I'm sure you know, iPhones continually connect to the net, establishing an IP connection so they can log into Apple services such as iMessage.

There is much lower level info on the carrier end (not the iOS locationd service's consolidated.db iOS cache files which are what the device logs - although it changed in iOS 6 - no longer records what cell towers it sees - but ABC's iphone would have most likely have been iOS 5 - the QPS forensic techs could confirm this from iTunes backups on their imaged computers).

And some is downright puzzling, until you realize how an iPhone "locates" all towers in the vicinity even though it doesn't connect to them. The location data, in particular, is pretty useless - it suggests his phone connected to multiple towers, VERY widely spaced, most not being in line of sight of any one spot even when triangulated, and with identical timestamps.

See here for why the location data from the phone and from the telcos would be not much use, especially in an area like Brookfield with sparse distribution of towers:

Sure thing - these are logs from the 'point of view' of the mobile phone - there are similar logs on the carrier end - measurements of response time between base station & mobile device. You've probably seen that each base station has multiple aerials - they cover roughly 50 degrees of area - the carrier can log which aerial on that particular station is receiving the cell signal... and triangulation is possible and if the Telco is willing (sounds like it was Telstra in this case) then they can actively attempt to locate the mobile device. I'm sure there must be at least three antennas that could 'see' Allison's phone.

Here's a graphical of what I mean by triangulation:

http://www.al911.org/wireless/triangulation_location.htm

I'm not sure if Telstra support directly querying mobile phone devices in-built GPS chips for their location - often termed 'Cell pinging' - gives a much more accurate. Eg. http://pursuitmag.com/locating-mobile-phones-through-pinging-and-triangulation/

I think I read that her phone was still on for 13 hours? It is very likely that there sadly might not have been enough time to rustle up tech resources from Telstra...

There is a lot more crime in the USA so this happens all the time. Years ago it took a long while (eg. http://consumerist.com/2008/09/17/verizon-refuses-to-help-locate-body-of-missing-woman-for-four-days/) but now it is used a lot more. Some might say a lot less privacy law as well - which might be the other reason this is not widely used here...... although the Jill Meagher case seems to have got good evidence from Vodafone (not Telstra) cell tower movements to help solve that case.

 

[GEANIE]

Yes Geanie, TM's twins are about that age or perhaps a little older. There are no older or younger children. :twocents:

Thank-you Makara for confirming that.

 

[squizzey1]

If there was any evidence found of middle of the night calls when he said he was asleep we would have heard about it by now. So I think it is fairly safe to say there aren't any, either mobile or landline.

Ali do you think QPS are holding back on some important stuff. It is amazing what Vic Police kept quite in the Jill Meagher case. Just wondering

 

[alicat]

Sounds travels exceptionally well at night. 1km is next to nothing at night. Different matter in the day time.

I am 1km from the bridge. Last night I heard traffic on what I believe to be Mount Crosby Road.

 

[lycheefarmer]

Yep. When someone says "as far as I know" or "to the best of my knowledge" it still leaves the door wide open. If they were to add "... but I'm going to do my best to find out." then you'd take them more seriously.
But if they just say that and don't want to know anything more than you just tend to discount what they've said.

Or maybe she's speaking for herself and not claiming to speak for the whole BC family. After all her parents may be called as witnesses too. If she claimed to speak for them some posters would be screaming "collusion" and if she doesn't the same posters accuse her of hedging. Testimony is only valid for yourself!

 

[Obsessor]

All MOO.

There are absolutely no other supporters there with her, no posse that were there at bail hearings, no other family. I know that if my son was accused of a crime, and in court for a hearing I would do anything I could to help him. My face would be there for all to see that I was supporting him. But, these guys don’t. Not there at all, no support, only one person and she does not say anything until the 11th hour on day 3. Desperation? I reckon.

respectfully snipped

:goodpost: FirstTimer. One would think that being the last man standing, the penny might be about to drop for Olivia.
I hope for the rest of her family it does. Her blinded and unwaivering support for him will ruin them financially if it hasnt already.

 

[LadyBird1]

<modsnip>
It proves that:
Sounds travels exceptionally well at night. 1km is next to nothing at night. Different matter in the day time.

 

[Obsessor]

Or maybe she's speaking for herself and not claiming to speak for the whole BC family. After all her parents may be called as witnesses too. If she claimed to speak for them some posters would be screaming "collusion" and if she doesn't the same posters accuse her of hedging. Testimony is only valid for yourself!

I dont think there was a suggestion she was speaking for anyone but herself. The point was that there have been no formal statements provided by the BC's and no co-operation during the investigation either, and for Olivia to claim she believes otherwise is questionable.

"THE parents of Gerard Baden-Clay refused requests for further information and interviews during the massive effort to solve the death of his wife, Allison, police claim in court documents."

 

[GEANIE]

I dont think there was a suggestion she was speaking for anyone but herself. The point was that there have been no formal statements provided by the BC's and no co-operation during the investigation either, and for Olivia to claim she believes otherwise is questionable.

"THE parents of Gerard Baden-Clay refused requests for further information and interviews during the massive effort to solve the death of his wife, Allison, police claim in court documents."

EGGS-ACT-LY:banghead::jail:

 

[Judicious]

It proves that:
Sounds travels exceptionally well at night. 1km is next to nothing at night. Different matter in the day time.

so true, I just copied a small phrase from one of our books and found it very interesting...

sound transmits farther at night and is related to refraction of sound waves. First, sound is the vibration of air, and it is a kind of wave motion. The propagation of sound wave is faster in hot air and slower in cold air. Therefore regions of air at different temperatures have different refractive indices. When sound wave propagates in air whose temperature changes with altitude, refraction of air happens. Sound will move towards areas with lower temperatures. In the daytime, when the sun shines the earth, the air near the earth surface is hotter than the air above. Sound waves will be refracted to the sky (Fig. 1). On the contrary, at night the air near the surface is cooler and sound waves are refracted to the earth surface

 

[Inspector]

Lycheefarmer, I would love to hear your version of events? What do you think of the evidence presented in court this week? I'm genuinely interested in your point of view.

 

[alioop]

Ali do you think QPS are holding back on some important stuff. It is amazing what Vic Police kept quite in the Jill Meagher case. Just wondering

Well yes and no. They are holding back info by way of not directly releasing info to the public like in Jill's case at the end of AB's committal, but not from the defence as they have to hand over all evidence whether it indicates guilt or innocence.
At the committal the only witnesses we are seeing give evidence personally are the ones chosen by the defence out of the 300 to 400 ( I cant remember the exact figure) Not all of those 300 are going to be crucial witness of course, but they include the ones who have given statements and reports and include the forensic and technical specialists.

I think that the 43 witnesses that the defence wanted to cross examine are mainly the crucial witness and we are hearing some of their evidence from their statements. So in that respect we are indirectly getting to hear some of the evidence gathered by the police.

3 more days left of witnesses next week will be interesting. I am wondering if we are going to hear witnesses that saw a vehicle/s/persons/GBC at the bridge.
Maybe someone who saw something at a roundabout would be good too.

I am sure that if this goes to trial we will hear evidence we hadn't heard previously but I don't know if it would be what one would call a bombshell if you know what I mean, just a lot more detail from a lot more witnesses. And of course a case presented a lot differently than is the process at a committal.

 

[squizzey1]

Well yes and no. They are holding back info by way of not directly releasing info to the public like in Jill's case at the end of AB's committal, but not from the defence as they have to hand over all evidence whether it indicates guilt or innocence.
At the committal the only witnesses we are seeing give evidence personally are the ones chosen by the defence out of the 300 to 400 ( I cant remember the exact figure) Not all of those 300 are going to be crucial witness of course, but they include the ones who have given statements and reports and include the forensic and technical specialists.

I think that the 43 witnesses that the defence wanted to cross examine are mainly the crucial witness and we are hearing some of their evidence from their statements. So in that respect we are indirectly getting to hear some of the evidence gathered by the police.

3 more days left of witnesses next week will be interesting. I am wondering if we are going to hear witnesses that saw a vehicle/s/persons/GBC at the bridge.
Maybe someone who saw something at a roundabout would be good too.

I am sure that if this goes to trial we will hear evidence we hadn't heard previously but I don't know if it would be what one would call a bombshell if you know what I mean, just a lot more detail from a lot more witnesses. And of course a case presented a lot differently than is the process at a committal.

Thanks Ali , great stuff as usual

 

[alicat]

It proves that:
Sounds travels exceptionally well at night. 1km is next to nothing at night. Different matter in the day time.

It was amazing actually. You know how you hear sounds around you, but because you are so used to them you don't take them in?

Well last night when I was lying there, with no background music/tv all I could hear was nature (the insects and the birds) and then one car went by out of the blue. And I thought WOW! That is going fast, it wouldn't be in one of the side streets, that has to be on Mt Crosby Road. And to hear 'just' a car driving along I'm sure you would be able to hear the sounds that occurred on the night Allison went missing.

 

[alicat]

Can someone clarify something re GBC:

Did GBC say HE was watching the Footy Show and then went to bed, or
* that Allison was watching the Footy Show and then he went to bed?

Thanks.

 

[marlywings]

Ok folks..that's about enough of attacking other members.

IF you have a problem with a post please use the alert button...that's what it's there for.

All members are welcome to post their opinions as long as they remain within TOS.

 

[Snails]

I dont think there was a suggestion she was speaking for anyone but herself. The point was that there have been no formal statements provided by the BC's and no co-operation during the investigation either, and for Olivia to claim she believes otherwise is questionable.

"THE parents of Gerard Baden-Clay refused requests for further information and interviews during the massive effort to solve the death of his wife, Allison, police claim in court documents."

In my opinion she is an attention seeker who wants to be the "heroine" of the clan. It's all well and good to be there to support your sibling who has been charged with murder, but leave the preaching til the end. There was no point in her making that speech. I think it made her look quite foolish and desperate. MOO

 

[squizzey1]

Can someone clarify something re GBC:

Did GBC say HE was watching the Footy Show and then went to bed, or
* that Allison was watching the Footy Show and then he went to bed?

Thanks.

I thought he said he went to bed and left her watching the footy show.