ARREST!!! Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 -#23

[CaseClosed]

I find this case so tragic and almost completely beyond my comprehension that something like this could occur in what appeared to be an ordinary family to others.

Can someone please tell me why GBC would still be proclaiming his innocence when the police have obvious proof of his guilt.

Also why his legal team are going for a bail application if the police have proof he has committed this terrible murder. How could he get bail under these circumstances?

I simply cannot get my head around how someone could murder the Mother of their 3 little girls and then callously premeditately dump her body in the bush. Absolutely beyond shocking!!

Other posters have explained that it is very difficult to get bail in a murder case. Any accused, who is not prepared to confess, will try and get away with the crime. Nobody knows yet what evidence the prosecution have and if it will prove that he in fact killed her. I hope police have enough for a conviction.

 

[XyzQuestions]

The poster who gave the information re someone speaking to Allison in the pick up line on the Thursday is post number 801 on the previous thread. The posters "name" xyzquestions, and that was her first post.

Sorry I still can't do the pasting between thread, I am a computer dullard.

Hi SpratsMum - I have emailed and asked WebSleuths to verify me as an insider. I am a Brookfield local Mum and my daughters attend the school with the B-C girls. Quite a few of my other Brookfield Mum friends read this forum and told me about it. I had not heard about it before (probably because none of us had been so close to such a horrific crime before). I did not know the B-Cs very well - I would classify them as acquaintances.

As for the school cross-country - as a mum I would have loved to have attended but as I work I was unable to attend - perhaps Allison also had something she had to do on that day? However she did pick the girls up on the Thursday from the school.
Hope this clarifies my statement somewhat

 

[grannie]

I always judge my books by the cover and am rarely wrong.
However, when it comes to people, I am never eager to judge based on body language, now, we do have those people who read body language, so should we use it? 45 years ago, maybe we didn't.
I have no idea if GBC is guilty of what he has been charged with, his face now shows devastation, why didn't that show last week, last month, when it was relevant to what the public were thinking.
I have not read enough of this forum to know how others see him but I get the idea on other places that he exudes guilt.

I shall try to answer. I personally do not judge by body language, but face is different. The photos of GBC I have previously seen did not resonate with me for some reason. To me, he seemed stressed and distracted, which is understandable. I am not sure how to describe his latest photos, but in my opinion, there are signs of suppressed anger on his face. Just my feeling. I could not support it with any facts or templates for emotions. I would be glad to be wrong in this case.

 

[Seeking]

I understand what you are saying and I bet they will want to see him at stages when they are older. I just dont think they should be forced to go to keep him happy.

My father was accused of killing my mother but not charged as there was not enough evidence, her body was never found so that made it more difficult. He did the "she went for a walk and never came home " line too.

Anyway we were forced to stay with him until my grandmother stepped in. Now I remember this man being cruel, abusive and full of hate, evil man.

When I was older I did want some contact with him, dont know why but I did. It did not end well but I gave it a go. I have hated this man for as long as I can remember, to the point of it making me very bitter.

I avoided all family events where I knew he would be. Anyway when I had kids they didnt have any grandparents and I felt guilty about that esp as he lived a 15 min drive away. I did not tell my young children about my history with him.

I took them to a family event where he was and they met him and did this more often so they had a chance to know him. Over time I watched him carefully with my kids and I can honestly say that he really loved them. He ended up being a wonderful grandfather and my kids loved him.

We had a falling out about ten years ago and I have only spoken to him once at my brothers funeral, real awkward then again I ran into him on Mothers Day visiting my Nan. When my daughter had children she asked me would I be upset if she contacted him and let him see her kids. To be honest I felt betrayed as now an adult she knew what he did and still wanted to see him, double standards I know. Of course I told her it didnt bother me but it bothered me very single time haha. When she would talk about him I said I dont want to hear about him.

Anyway my daughter sees him often and he is a big part of her childrens life, he has taken them all over the world on holidays. When I saw him with them I again saw the deep love I saw when he was with my kids.

Funny thing is he is visiting my daughter in the morning and she wants me to come and bring my other two kids as he hasnt seen them in 10 years. I dont know if I will go, this case had made old feelings come up again for me so I will see.

It is probably about time to just forgive him and let it go.

I am sincerely sorry Bayside for the painful things you have experienced in your life. Thank you for sharing your story with us. I hope that you continue to heal throughout your life.

I am sorry that I can't write too much as I am on my IPhone. I just wanted to add that I agree that in the circumstances "the girls shouldn't be MADE to see their dad to keep him happy.". GBC has a right to request to see them. They or the authorities have a right to refuse if appropriate. There is also nothing wrong also with the girls possibly wanting to see him or have some contact with him. Perfectly understandable either way.

 

[TheStupidTree]

On the top photo Hans Reiser.

Some sleuths may be interested in reading about the Hans Reiser case in the USA in 2006-2007. Hans Reiser (44 y.o. at the time) was a high profile Linux programmer who killed his estranged wife. He defended his charges vigorously in a murder case with no body, no crime scene, no reliable eyewitness and virtually no physical evidence (the only physical evidence in the case was a trace of his wife's blood on a pillar inside Hans’ house and a trace in his car), and prosecutors were prepared to rest his case. But Reiser tried vigorously. He provided so implausible explanations to circumstantial evidence against him that the jurors concluded that he was lying. And then the unthinkable happened. Reiser agreed to make a deal - he pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of 2nd degree murder, and the part of a settlement agreement was disclosing the location of his wife's body. Only 5 days prior to the deal he vigorously maintained his innocence.

He also behaved very strangely during the investigation. I thought when they found his car the passengers seat was completely removed. He had an unbelievable explanation for that too.

I hope for the sake of Allison's daughters and her parents, they are left alone. The "long road ahead" for all of them looks daunting to me. What a tragic situation from every angle.

 

[CaseClosed]

I am sincerely sorry Bayside for the painful things you have experienced in your life. Thank you for sharing your story with us. I hope that you continue to heal throughout your life.

I am sorry that I can't write too much as I am on my IPhone. I just wanted to add that I agree that in the circumstances "the girls shouldn't be MADE to see their dad to keep him happy.". GBC has a right to request to see them. They or the authorities have a right to refuse if appropriate. There is also nothing wrong also with the girls possibly wanting to see him or have some contact with him. Perfectly understandable either way.

Also, we don't really know what the girls have been told about the circumstances. They may have been told that their father had to go away for a little while hence they will be staying with grandma and grandpa. They are very young to really comprehend, and they will want to see their father at some point and I don't think it should be denied. There are probably professionals advising the Dickies as to when and how this should be done.

 

[Karo]

I shall try to answer. I personally do not judge by body language, but face is different. The photos of GBC I have previously seen did not resonate with me for some reason. To me, he seemed stressed and distracted, which is understandable. I am not sure how to describe his latest photos, but in my opinion, there are signs of suppressed anger on his face. Just my feeling. I could not support it with any facts or templates for emotions. I would be glad to be wrong in this case.

I can't help hoping he is innocent, of, at least, murdering her. Having seen photos of him prior to this tragedy, I see a huge difference in his facial expressions. It made me think he knew something and knew he couldn't say anything for fear of making a mistake.
Now, to me he looks like he is "dead inside" I have felt like that, after the death of a child. However, I was like that from the first minute, I didn't cry, scream, nothing, many years later, I still don't. I can't talk about it either and probably never will.
I think, it was probably an accident but if so, why do anything to conceal her death?

 

[plentyofnous]

IMO the surprise visit at Toowong to detain GBC was a very strategic move by QPS. IMO they could have alerted his highly respected and learned Lawyer to have GBC attend voluntarily with him. Why do I think it was strategic, well IMO the QPS need to question / interview the children and they were not able to, so the best way was to wait for GBC to move back into the residence at Brookfield. Why is this important, because of the Procedure needed to gain access to the children.
I ll explain further, DOCS would have been informed of an arrest/detention and would have taken custody of the children if there was concern for their welfare. If they were with the BC s then I assume that that arrangement should have been suitable for them to remain with them during this assessment period. DOCS would have to Apply to a Magistrate immediately for a TAO (Temporary Assessment Order) which places the “care and control” of the children with DOCS for 3 days in order to make a proper assessment of where the children should be placed. They can apply for an extension of assessment however they should be following the Family Court Principles which usually is causing as little disruption to their routine, what they are familiar with and used to, where their friends are, school etc, and in the absence of any danger / threat or unsuitability, then they should be placed with their best interests at the forefront of any decision. Why is this important, well ultimately the Family Court could/should decide where the children reside and who should make decisions about their short and long term welfare. Any decision that is made in the Family Court will override any decision made by any State Qld Dept.
Why is this important, because whoever has “care and control” of the children could allow QPS to interview them, I am assuming Dickies will, BC s wouldn’t, a massive difference to any relevant evidence.
However, it is interesting to note here that if and when any Application is made to the Family Court by the BC s, normally you need a strong case to alter the status quo ie where the children currently are comfortable, with willing and able carers, amongst other things such as assessments made previously etc until a proper determination/ Application could be made, which could be some 2 years away. I think the subsequent abuse of the Police by the BC s in informing them of an arrest would form part of this assessment as to “unsuitability” and thus allowing QPS access to the children s evidence. If the children were still living at BC s, then the Dept would not (in a normal world) have any reason to alter their custody. However the media seemed to have played their part in this, how do they justify camping out at the BC s where the children are previously, but now leaving them alone while they are at the Dickies, DOUBLE STANDARDS.
As we operate in an Adversarial Justice System, applications/complaints have to made by people, evidence presented and determined by that evidence. Decisions are not made just because they should or everyone thinks they should. This process is for everyone’s protection, not just for this case. Put yourself in similar shoes to try and grasp the severity of the process. Who should determine where your children are placed if you are sick, hurt etc and couldn’t t care for them. Should the media camp outside your place because it makes them money until such time as they are placed somewhere else. If you can grasp this, then you will see similarities to the stolen generation of indigenous where improper manipulation and process and opinion was used to alter their rights.
IMO custody of the children and the ability to allow questioning ( probably involving TV programming) will form part and a major part of the DPP s brief and the strategic move without informing the Lawyers, GBC moving back to Brookfield and the subsequent “care and control “ of the children’s best interests have resulted in QPS and DPP “outplaying, outlasting and outwitting” GBC and his legal team. IMO very poor advice to move back home, a fatal error.
IMO IMO IMO IMO

 

[Elspeth]

On the top photo Hans Reiser.

Some sleuths may be interested in reading about the Hans Reiser case in the USA in 2006-2007. Hans Reiser (44 y.o. at the time) was a high profile Linux programmer who killed his estranged wife. He defended his charges vigorously in a murder case with no body, no crime scene, no reliable eyewitness and virtually no physical evidence (the only physical evidence in the case was a trace of his wife's blood on a pillar inside Hans’ house and a trace in his car), and prosecutors were prepared to rest his case. But Reiser tried vigorously. He provided so implausible explanations to circumstantial evidence against him that the jurors concluded that he was lying. And then the unthinkable happened. Reiser agreed to make a deal - he pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of 2nd degree murder, and the part of a settlement agreement was disclosing the location of his wife's body. Only 5 days prior to the deal he vigorously maintained his innocence.

When I saw the photo I assumed he must have been one of GBC's lawyers...

 

[louisepiglet]

Has anyone considered the thought the senior BC's may have rolled over on GBC to save themselves, they have said that there are no further arrests planned.. IMO

Maybe a deal was made that GBC would make a statement if his parents were given immunity.

 

[factfinda]

May be some comments on Ch10 tonite re these procedural issues.

I saw those interviews but unfortunately they only aired a couple of sentences from each of the academics commenting on the case. One was from UQ and the other was from QUT. A frequent complaint I hear about the media is that you can do a lengthy interview and provide all sorts of relevant information but then it's edited down to a couple of phrases due to time constraints. It would be great if television reporters could upload all the full interviews to their websites after the broadcast.

 

[CaseClosed]

I can't help hoping he is innocent, of, at least, murdering her. Having seen photos of him prior to this tragedy, I see a huge difference in his facial expressions. It made me think he knew something and knew he couldn't say anything for fear of making a mistake.
Now, to me he looks like he is "dead inside" I have felt like that, after the death of a child. However, I was like that from the first minute, I didn't cry, scream, nothing, many years later, I still don't. I can't talk about it either and probably never will.
I think, it was probably an accident but if so, why do anything to conceal her death?

I'm so sorry! - By charging him with "murder", police does not believe it was accidental. There is some premeditation element in it (I'm not saying "pre-planned" necessarily). Otherwise they would have charged him with manslaughter. IMO.

 

[jubillee]

He also behaved very strangely during the investigation. I thought when they found his car the passengers seat was completely removed. He had an unbelievable explanation for that too.

I hope for the sake of Allison's daughters and her parents, they are left alone. The "long road ahead" for all of them looks daunting to me. What a traffic situation from every angle.

I have never heard about the car seat being removed:waitasec:

 

[grannie]

Can someone please tell me why GBC would still be proclaiming his innocence when the police have obvious proof of his guilt.

I am far from legal stuff, but in my opinion, if it took the police 2 months to arrest him, they do not have much on him. May be it's supposed to work this way, who knows. I just think that if they did suspect him from the start, why they let him be with the children? I am also surprised that they only now begin to gather such a basic stuff like tv programmes and DNA samples. I was under belief that those very fundamental procedures have already been done. Again, I do not know the law and may be all this is in full agreement with the guidelines. JMO.

 

[plentyofnous]

I'm so sorry! - By charging him with "murder", police does not believe it was accidental. There is some premeditation element in it (I'm not saying "pre-planned" necessarily). Otherwise they would have charged him with manslaughter. IMO.

The sheer shock of being charged, not being prepared, and entering watchhouse would make him oblivious to the outside world. He would be more worried about his immediate environment and fellow inmates first and foremost.

 

[CaseClosed]

IMO the surprise visit at Toowong to detain GBC was a very strategic move by QPS. IMO they could have alerted his highly respected and learned Lawyer to have GBC attend voluntarily with him. Why do I think it was strategic, well IMO the QPS need to question / interview the children and they were not able to, so the best way was to wait for GBC to move back into the residence at Brookfield. Why is this important, because of the Procedure needed to gain access to the children.
I ll explain further, DOCS would have been informed of an arrest/detention and would have taken custody of the children if there was concern for their welfare. If they were with the BC s then I assume that that arrangement should have been suitable for them to remain with them during this assessment period. DOCS would have to Apply to a Magistrate immediately for a TAO (Temporary Assessment Order) which places the “care and control” of the children with DOCS for 3 days in order to make a proper assessment of where the children should be placed. They can apply for an extension of assessment however they should be following the Family Court Principles which usually is causing as little disruption to their routine, what they are familiar with and used to, where their friends are, school etc, and in the absence of any danger / threat or unsuitability, then they should be placed with their best interests at the forefront of any decision. Why is this important, well ultimately the Family Court could/should decide where the children reside and who should make decisions about their short and long term welfare. Any decision that is made in the Family Court will override any decision made by any State Qld Dept.
Why is this important, because whoever has “care and control” of the children could allow QPS to interview them, I am assuming Dickies will, BC s wouldn’t, a massive difference to any relevant evidence.
However, it is interesting to note here that if and when any Application is made to the Family Court by the BC s, normally you need a strong case to alter the status quo ie where the children currently are comfortable, with willing and able carers, amongst other things such as assessments made previously etc until a proper determination/ Application could be made, which could be some 2 years away. I think the subsequent abuse of the Police by the BC s in informing them of an arrest would form part of this assessment as to “unsuitability” and thus allowing QPS access to the children s evidence. If the children were still living at BC s, then the Dept would not (in a normal world) have any reason to alter their custody. However the media seemed to have played their part in this, how do they justify camping out at the BC s where the children are previously, but now leaving them alone while they are at the Dickies, DOUBLE STANDARDS.
As we operate in an Adversarial Justice System, applications/complaints have to made by people, evidence presented and determined by that evidence. Decisions are not made just because they should or everyone thinks they should. This process is for everyone’s protection, not just for this case. Put yourself in similar shoes to try and grasp the severity of the process. Who should determine where your children are placed if you are sick, hurt etc and couldn’t t care for them. Should the media camp outside your place because it makes them money until such time as they are placed somewhere else. If you can grasp this, then you will see similarities to the stolen generation of indigenous where improper manipulation and process and opinion was used to alter their rights.
IMO custody of the children and the ability to allow questioning ( probably involving TV programming) will form part and a major part of the DPP s brief and the strategic move without informing the Lawyers, GBC moving back to Brookfield and the subsequent “care and control “ of the children’s best interests have resulted in QPS and DPP “outplaying, outlasting and outwitting” GBC and his legal team. IMO very poor advice to move back home, a fatal error.
IMO IMO IMO IMO

:goodpost: :tyou:

 

[Seeking]

Seeking, if you are not a writer, you should be! Another beautiful, yet heartbreaking post.

I am the child of a criminal, my mother. She has been in and out of prison (long term, 3-5yrs, each time) since i was about 7 years old, due to a heroin addiction and its associated crimes.

Thankfully, in my case, i had a wonderful Dad, who made up for my mothers complete emotional destruction by being eveything my siblings and i needed. He has since passed away, and on the day i lost him, i felt like i lost both of my parents.

As a child, until about the age of 15, i desperately clung to the hope that my mother would stop being the neglectful, spiteful, lieing, sneaky, self-centred and psychopathic person that she was, and miraculously turn into the type of mother that all of my friends had. Even at my young age, I knew that she had made the choice to hurt us, i knew that she was responsible for breaking my Dad's heart, my heart and my siblings hearts, yet, i remember at times that i would beg my Dad to get back together with her, in the hope of having a complete, happy family.

So yes, in my case, i did still want to see the parent who had destroyed all of our lives, even with the elementary understanding i had.

As i grew older, wiser and more aware of what we actually had to endure as a result of my mother choosing drugs over us, i began to resent her, and now, unfortunately, i feel almost nothing towards her. She has only seen one of my children, and i intend to keep it that way. I have no idea how i would feel if anything ever happened to her, or how i will react when she finally succumbs to the ill-health that is the result of her 'alternative' lifestyle. It's just sad, really!

Has it effected my adulthood? Absolutely! on the negative side, I have OCD, agoraphobia (both mild) and had a drinking problem when i was younger. In the middle ground, I am a paranoid wreck when it comes to protecting my own children... completely smother them with love I have to let them know how much i love them regularly, or i panic. They will be absolutely horrified when i embarrass them as teens, lol, but of course, this is also a good thing, as they know i am always there for them, and will love them unconditionally. On the absolutely positive side, i am a criminologist because of my experience, i am extremely empathetic (almosty to a fault), and i feel a strong social responsibility to fight for children's rights :heartbeat::scale:

I am sorry for the huge post. I started writing and it just all came billowing out :blushing:. Anyway, just my 2c, and all my personal opinion in order to highlight the experiences of a child with a rotten parent.

Thank you Dark Shadow for sharing your story. I am deeply sorry for these things that happened in your life.......but I am really glad to read about the positive ways that you have dealt with these painful things. It is an encouragement to us all. I also just wanted to add that I am not a "writer". Sorry this is brief.......on my IPhone. All the best as you make "new". In the next generation ...... Your children.......breaking the cycle.

 

[CaseClosed]

Maybe a deal was made that GBC would make a statement if his parents were given immunity.

News broadcasts reported that he did not speak nor make any statement whilst being held at Indro police station.

 

[Straitfan]

Does anyone know if ABC's siblings live close to her parents? IMO, though will be hard being removed from their routine and surroundings, would not think it is wise for them to be in that area for now. Other children can be cruel but to mention their school being close to the home...If one or both of ABC's siblings have children seems it would be good for the little girls to be placed with them, not that the grandparents wouldnt do a great job but just the overall family environment. My heart hurts so much for the 3 lil sweet girls...hard to think about their pain God Bless their little hearts..

 

[plentyofnous]

News broadcasts reported that he did not speak nor make any statement whilst being held at Indro police station.

If he had made any statement, then he wouldn t be applying for bail. IMO bail application is the most important aspect/ event and success there will be very critical in the outcome of this case. I ll bet we will see his Senior Counsel earn his dough for sure.