ARREST!!! Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 - #22

[UnfoldingTruth]

Yes - but in hindsight it was maybe server congestion :dunno:

hmm, usually I just can't get in if its server congestion. i wonder if it was because it was in response to another post that appears to have been deleted(thankfully).

 

[Mani]

I think it just means he interferred with her body, by moving it from where she was killed to where she was found. They may relate it to Kholo creek, because thats where she was found.

If a person was murdered in one part of a house (for example) but moved by the murderer to another part of the house, wouldn't that be classified as interfering with a corpse?

So, if the location where Allison was found is not the place she was murdered, then it appears plausible that it would be classified as interfering with a corpse IMO.

 

[Strangeworld]

DEAR GOD I HOPE NOT!!! it did say that the house was the scene of the murder though, so lets pray for her that whatever happened, it was immediate

good point. She was murdered in her home, so other scenarios of been transported alive are not relevant.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

I thought I read that too but he mustn't have. Gee he is really making the Police do it the hard way. He is very arrogant imo. :maddening:

If he has nothing to hide why not consent?

It was reported today he has given consent. But had he not I believe the judge was prepared to order it(the DNA sample be taken).

 

[Mani]

:cheers: Giving a Big Shout Out to the Mods for their fairness. :yourock:


Welcome back Minni :tyou:

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

If a person was murdered in one part of a house (for example) but moved by the murderer to another part of the house, wouldn't that technically be interfering with a corpse?

So, if the location where Allison was found is not the place she was murdered, then it appears plausible that it would be classified as interfering with a corpse IMO.

Yes, thats what I was saying. The count they referred to it as being in relation to Kholo creek. And some posters were wondering then if she was not dead when she was taken there and he killed her there. But no. I think all it means is he moved the body there from where she was killed(the house by the sounds).. Interferring with a corpse can be as simple as moving it from one location(where murdered) to another.

 

[Midnight Louie]

Does anyone know if the police, forensic people etc are still at the Brookfield Road house this morning?

 

[Rational]

good point. She was murdered in her home, so other scenarios of been transported alive are not relevant.

I agree I hope that is not the case, but one of Hawkins posts keeps sticking in my mind about how the details of this case will be very confronting and difficult to hear for jurors etc.

 

[sheldor]

I just realised that there is another reason to be careful about what is posted on here (and other forums generally) and that is that GBC could possibly apply to have the trial heard away from Brisbane if he can show that because of the publicity and speculation that he is unlikely to get a fair trial. If this turns out to be the case, this might place an extra burden on family and witnesses who may have to travel quite some distance to give evidence at, or watch, the trial.

This is in fact what has happened in the Scott Guy case being heard currently in New Zealand, and it happened in another high profile case a couple of years ago where an accused, Clayton Weatherston, stabbed his ex-girlfriend to death.

This is just a thought. I am wary of posting these kinds of things as it seems to me that some of the posters who come on here saying these kinds of things get unfairly attacked (called bush lawyers, for instance) when, for my part, it is simply about being cautious in what we say. For the record I am a bona fide lawyer, although not practising in Australia.

 

[minni]

Yes minni, except I didn't say he( NBC)was not involved and is not guilty..I was talking if they/he are innocent. I can not possibly know if they are or not..But simply saying IF they are(and knew nothing and believed he innocent) then they would be also having a hard time of it I am sure.So we have no need to disagree, lol MOO

of course not Unfolding, I didnt meant to disagree with you , just stating my thoughts about NBC (my fingers type my thoughts before my head even gets a chance to analyse what I am saying half the time!!)
and you're right .... you didnt say NBC was guilty ...I just think that irrespective of IF he is guilty or not, he knew something yet did nothing
eace:

 

[coolcat]

If a person was murdered in one part of a house (for example) but moved by the murderer to another part of the house, wouldn't that be classified as interfering with a corpse?

So, if the location where Allison was found is not the place she was murdered, then it appears plausible that it would be classified as interfering with a corpse IMO.

I think it will turn out to be something more callous and devious. IMO

I think he has moved her body and probably inflicted a wound of some sort...Maybe after killing her he tried to make it look like he never had anything to do with it?

Lets face it...It took 8 weeks for Police to arrest him so there must of been some doubt?

There was something that made Police question whether he did this or not?

I can't wait to know more.....All these questions I have and want answered leave me sad...Because I know The Dickies and Allson's daughters must be wondering What? Why? How? and When? more then all of us....Those who never knew her but want answers and justice for her!

How could he have done this, What could possess someone to kill the person you once loved..The person you held in your arms and promised to protect...The person who bore your children....The person who loved all of your faults and defended you when others wouldn't....The person who stood by your side when you made terrible decisions...The person who gave up the world to take a back seat......All of these things make me shake my head- BECAUSE I SIMPLY CAN NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT TYPE OF PERSON DOES THAT!:maddening:

 

[minni]

:cheers: Giving a Big Shout Out to the Mods for their fairness. :yourock:


Welcome back Minni :tyou:

Thankyou Mani :blowkiss:

good to be back

 

[Rational]

I just realised that there is another reason to be careful about what is posted on here (and other forums generally) and that is that GBC could possibly apply to have the trial heard away from Brisbane if he can show that because of the publicity and speculation that he is unlikely to get a fair trial. If this turns out to be the case, this might place an extra burden on family and witnesses who may have to travel quite some distance to give evidence at, or watch, the trial.

This is in fact what has happened in the Scott Guy case being heard currently in New Zealand, and it happened in another high profile case a couple of years ago where an accused, Clayton Weatherston, stabbed his ex-girlfriend to death.

This is just a thought. I am wary of posting these kinds of things as it seems to me that some of the posters who come on here saying these kinds of things get unfairly attacked (called bush lawyers, for instance) when, for my part, it is simply about being cautious in what we say. For the record I am a bona fide lawyer, although not practising in Australia.

I agree we need to be careful, but as websites are worldwide and not limited to Brisbane this would be difficult, unless he wants to apply to have it heard in outer space

 

[J-Diggety]

My understanding of interfering with a corpse is that you cannot commit indecent or sexual acts on a corpse, or remove body parts.

Here it is:

34B. Offence to interfere with corpse of a human being

(1) A person must not intentionally-

(a) interfere sexually or commit an indecent act with a corpse of a human being; or

(b) unlawfully remove body parts from a corpse of a human being-

 

[Mani]

I just realised that there is another reason to be careful about what is posted on here (and other forums generally) and that is that GBC could possibly apply to have the trial heard away from Brisbane if he can show that because of the publicity and speculation that he is unlikely to get a fair trial. If this turns out to be the case, this might place an extra burden on family and witnesses who may have to travel quite some distance to give evidence at, or watch, the trial.

This is in fact what has happened in the Scott Guy case being heard currently in New Zealand, and it happened in another high profile case a couple of years ago where an accused, Clayton Weatherston, stabbed his ex-girlfriend to death.

This is just a thought. I am wary of posting these kinds of things as it seems to me that some of the posters who come on here saying these kinds of things get unfairly attacked (called bush lawyers, for instance) when, for my part, it is simply about being cautious in what we say. For the record I am a bona fide lawyer, although not practising in Australia.

Wise words

 

[DunnoZo]

Allison Sandy Stop saying Ummm.....moo

 

[minni]

My understanding of interfering with a corpse is that you cannot commit indecent or sexual acts on a corpse, or remove body parts.

Here it is:

that is rather upsetting isnt it?

 

[CaseClosed]

I just realised that there is another reason to be careful about what is posted on here (and other forums generally) and that is that GBC could possibly apply to have the trial heard away from Brisbane if he can show that because of the publicity and speculation that he is unlikely to get a fair trial. If this turns out to be the case, this might place an extra burden on family and witnesses who may have to travel quite some distance to give evidence at, or watch, the trial.

This is in fact what has happened in the Scott Guy case being heard currently in New Zealand, and it happened in another high profile case a couple of years ago where an accused, Clayton Weatherston, stabbed his ex-girlfriend to death.

This is just a thought. I am wary of posting these kinds of things as it seems to me that some of the posters who come on here saying these kinds of things get unfairly attacked (called bush lawyers, for instance) when, for my part, it is simply about being cautious in what we say. For the record I am a bona fide lawyer, although not practising in Australia.

Very early on, I asked the question if there was an alternative of moving a trial to another location and a poster responded that it would be in Brisbane no matter what.

 

[CaseClosed]

that is rather upsetting isnt it?

I think we are letting our imagination fly far away here. Just moving the body would result in this charge.

 

[J-Diggety]

that is rather upsetting isnt it?

Horrendous thought, I really hope that it is moving the position of the body and nothing further. The whole episode is terrible enough without having further atrocities revealed. if that is the case.