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

[plentyofnous]

Most, majority failing to offer opinion, interesting

 

[plentyofnous]

Plenty I don't feel he will make bail. I don't have the brief of evidence in front of me and I am guessing that nor does anyone on this forum. I don't disagree with the point you made in respect of what we actually know. But if were possible to covnvict on the basis of what has been alluded to ...say no more.

Good Post, thank you

This is a most interesting case, with all due respect for ABC and Family/s , but the outcome of this bail hearing will have major ramifications in all future hearings for GBC and all who follow him, IMO

 

[Mothergoose]

Mothergoose I think you have misunderstood me. Regardless of what percentage of posts have been discussing GBC, and for the record I have read since thread one, The fact is the forum is about Allisons murder and if her murderer was someone else or alleged to be someone else other than GBC, then they would be the one being discussed. That was my point. It happens that GBC has been regarded as POI here and now arrested for the murder so yes he is being discussed. But the forum thread is still about the crime that is Allisons murder.

I understand what you are saying...thank you.

 

[Bayside]

Originally Posted by plentyofnous
IMO

Lets have some discussion

If he was on trial on what we know and even what has been alluded to, would any of us be able to convict him and imprison him for 25 years without his children having a dad

BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT

Would we, if it was up to us, give him bail to return home on what we know and even what has been alluded to here



Count me in. I'd convict him on the fact that 2months after his wife went missing, and subsequently found dead in a creek, that a court order had to be instituted to get a hair sample <modsnip>. This after he clearly said, the only time he said anything, was that he had given the police everything he could. ( Olivia riding shotgun for him at that time)

so yes. And I am a reasonable person.

Are you inside my head typing what I think lol.

 

[CaseClosed]

Good Post, thank you

This is a most interesting case, with all due respect for ABC and Family/s , but the outcome of this bail hearing will have major ramifications in all future hearings for GBC and all who follow him, IMO

Would you elaborate, please? Why is this case so interesting compared to others? Thanks.

 

[linette]

Its not up to the BC s to establish someone else has killed ABC, its the DPP s job to prove that GBC committed Murder

Yes, I was just wondering if the BC's really believed GBC was innocent, who they would have thought killed her... and how they came to see no holes in his story. I wasn't implying that they had to prove anything. It was just a reply to another post.

 

[plentyofnous]

Would you elaborate, please? Why is this case so interesting compared to others? Thanks.

Simply because of its profile, and the fact it will be a highly publicized decision that potentially could create new ground in bail applications

 

[CaseClosed]

People in general are not stupid. I am convinced the BC seniors know the truth and have known from the first few days. The same with OW. They may not have wanted to believe it, but they knew. IMO.

 

[Mothergoose]

we can disagree with tremendous affection, you know. hehe.

That should be the mantra for this forum :slap:
G' nite all.

 

[itsthevibe]

I believe RAGE played a part. If he indeed is guilty, I could easily see it as him having lost control totally. Although he may love his children, rage took over, and once that happens, people do not think about what they are doing, they just do it!

That is very true CaseClosed. But to take this a bit further, the thing is that good people get angry, maybe even outraged, but even when extremely angry they don't get in such a rage that they can't even think about their loved ones, and that they actually murder someone.

I'm not saying you are doing this, (your post has just sparked some other thoughts) but I do think sometimes people trivialise the whole matter of people getting really angry then physically attacking and ultimately murdering someone, almost as if it's understandable how it happened. Even if they dont think it is OK, it seems to me that a lot of people think it's somehow a lesser crime, or somehow something that could be done by anyone who got angry enough. But the thing is, most people don't ever get that angry. Because, most people don't commit murder.

Think of all the blaring rows that occur every day between couples arguing, There must be thousands going on every night of the week. But the majority dont result in murder. The difference between people who have arguments and who get very, very angry, and those who go into a rage beyond control and continue on to murder, is actually quite huge. IMO in most cases the murderers arent just like the ones who didnt murder, but just unlucky that their anger got a bit more out of control that day. The murderers are different.

Also, something I've been meaning to say for a while, when DV or any physical attack occurs it doesnt always occur during what many of us might know as an 'argument' or 'couples fighting'. A sociopath for example, or a narcissist, can go into a rage over anything, just one little thing that is said during a discussion (not an argument) that suddenly triggers something. Someone like that can suddenly 'turn' on you, start shouting, then attack, even when you say something you had said before which they didn't get upset about the first time. Again many people assume normal scenarios of arguing, but I'm telling you these are not normal situations when it comes to disordered people. (I speak from experience on this, my ex-partner attacked me in a situation like this)

 

[Trooper]

Gerard gave a 'version of events'... this was how Det.Ainsworth described the one and only verbal meeting Gerard consented to, and that was with his lawyer present at the time. .

This 'version of events' is not a Statement. Its just Gerard muttering.

Obviously, since he has been arrested and charged with murder and interfering with a corpse his 'version' has been meticulously checked and found implausible. Hence his arrest.

Should he get bail? Hell no. If he gives another 'version of events"... ? or even a Statement ( which he has to rely on in court at a later stage) ? Hell no.

surely at least, if the live women of QLD are not at risk of Gerards sudden murdering tantrums, we can at the very least, keep the corpses of QLD safe from Gerards interference.

 

[itsthevibe]

he had murder on his mind for some time.. it merely required a trigger.. And that trigger could be anything.. Anything at all.

what i think may have been the trigger was.. Allison destroyed his fantasy about himself. Some look, something she said, whatever.... It really doesnt matter, in law and in common sense. That it mattered to him and what he did about it is now his big problem.

snap!

 

[linette]

In Australian family law Grandparents do not have an automatic right to spend time with their Grandchildren. This situation can arise due to divorce or separation of their own children. However, Grandparents may bring an application before the Court by reason of being a person concerned with the care, welfare or develop of the child.

From my experience, this is also how I understand it to be. It is not an automatic right, but only the right to apply... where as once they couldn't even do that. So, in a way I guess it was a bit of a win for them.

 

[summer_breeze]

For your sake: (You "own" your words)

Please remember that Mr. Baden-Clay has been arrested and charged. Not tried or convicted.

As such, temper your words/posts to reflect this set of facts. (Think about these words as illustrative of my point: "murderer", "murdering", "criminal")

Take a lesson from the media. They use words like "ALLEGEDLY" for very good reason!

Also as a reminder, no name calling allowed. No matter how innocuous the "name" may seemingly be, it just isn't allowed on this board.

This applies for the accused just as well as for your fellow posters.

 

[heloise]

I believe some people - enraged - could kill someone, without truly meaning to do so. I look back - in horror - at what my ex-husband did to me and our children. Any one of us could have been killed in one of his rages, very nearly were. By the grace of God, we are all still here. I can't imagine anyone knowingly killing someone. :moo:

That is very true CaseClosed. But to take this a bit further, the thing is that good people get angry, maybe even outraged, but even when extremely angry they don't get in such a rage that they can't even think about their loved ones, and that they actually murder someone.

I'm not saying you are doing this, (your post has just sparked some other thoughts) but I do think sometimes people trivialise the whole matter of people getting really angry then physically attacking and ultimately murdering someone, almost as if it's understandable how it happened. Even if they dont think it is OK, it seems to me that a lot of people think it's somehow a lesser crime, or somehow something that could be done by anyone who got angry enough. But the thing is, most people don't ever get that angry. Because, most people don't commit murder.

Think of all the blaring rows that occur every day between couples arguing, There must be thousands going on every night of the week. But the majority dont result in murder. The difference between people who have arguments and who get very, very angry, and those who go into a rage beyond control and continue on to murder, is actually quite huge. IMO in most cases the murderers arent just like the ones who didnt murder, but just unlucky that their anger got a bit more out of control that day. The murderers are different.

Also, something I've been meaning to say for a while, when DV or any physical attack occurs it doesnt always occur during what many of us might know as an 'argument' or 'couples fighting'. A sociopath for example, or a narcissist, can go into a rage over anything, just one little thing that is said during a discussion (not an argument) that suddenly triggers something. Someone like that can suddenly 'turn' on you, start shouting, then attack, even when you say something you had said before which they didn't get upset about the first time. Again many people assume normal scenarios of arguing, but I'm telling you these are not normal situations when it comes to disordered people. (I speak from experience on this, my ex-partner attacked me in a situation like this)

 

[Lurker on Websleuths]

People in general are not stupid. I am convinced the BC seniors know the truth and have known from the first few days. The same with OW. They may not have wanted to believe it, but they knew. IMO.

Agree with you on that Case Closed. I can tell you that if my mother,( who in her later working life worked at a police station), were to think that I had any involvement in the disapearance of a spouse ,she would disown me and urge me to hand myself in. Now I don't know what EBC felt towards GBC , but there is no way she would even let me be under the same roof as her.

 

[linette]

Most, majority failing to offer opinion, interesting

Hmmmm. Guess I'd have to think a bit harder on what my answer would be. I do believe he is guilty... and in my opinion the police have alot of evidence... if I had to choose right now I'd say guilty.

 

[Bayside]

He had murder on his mind for some time.. it merely required a trigger.. and that trigger could be anything.. anything at all.

What I think may have been the trigger was.. Allison destroyed his fantasy about himself. Some look, something she said, whatever.... It really doesnt matter, in law and in common sense. That it mattered to him and what he did about it is now his big problem.

Very well said.

 

[CaseClosed]

That is very true CaseClosed. But to take this a bit further, the thing is that good people get angry, maybe even outraged, but even when extremely angry they don't get in such a rage that they can't even think about their loved ones, and that they actually murder someone.

I'm not saying you are doing this, (your post has just sparked some other thoughts) but I do think sometimes people trivialise the whole matter of people getting really angry then physically attacking and ultimately murdering someone, almost as if it's understandable how it happened. Even if they dont think it is OK, it seems to me that a lot of people think it's somehow a lesser crime, or somehow something that could be done by anyone who got angry enough. But the thing is, most people don't ever get that angry. Because, most people don't commit murder.

Think of all the blaring rows that occur every day between couples arguing, There must be thousands going on every night of the week. But the majority dont result in murder. The difference between people who have arguments and who get very, very angry, and those who go into a rage beyond control and continue on to murder, is actually quite huge. IMO in most cases the murderers arent just like the ones who didnt murder, but just unlucky that their anger got a bit more out of control that day. The murderers are different.

Also, something I've been meaning to say for a while, when DV or any physical attack occurs it doesnt always occur during what many of us might know as an 'argument' or 'couples fighting'. A sociopath for example, or a narcissist, can go into a rage over anything, just one little thing that is said during a discussion (not an argument) that suddenly triggers something. Someone like that can suddenly 'turn' on you, start shouting, then attack, even when you say something you had said before which they didn't get upset about the first time. Again many people assume normal scenarios of arguing, but I'm telling you these are not normal situations when it comes to disordered people. (I speak from experience on this, my ex-partner attacked me in a situation like this)

I feel for you! (hugs) ... and I understand what you are saying. I agree that people who murder are different. People who get angry, normally exercise self-control and don't progress to killing the other person. I can see though, how in this case, for whatever reasons (narcissist, sociopath, chemical imbalance, etc.) this person's rage would be unstoppable. I have never been the victim of DV, however have learned much about it from reading/watching/listening to other's circumstances. I consider RAGE different to ANGER. Normal people get angry, abnormal people suffer rage episodes. IMO.

 

[stormbird]

Some information from the link provided earlier by Watsonian Institute - Prisoners in Australia 2011, Australian Bureau of Statistics http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4517.0

- Unsentenced prisoners (those on remand) accounted for 23% of the total prisoner population in Australian prisons at 30 June 2011.
- Unsentenced (remand) prisoners include:
* unconvicted prisoners waiting for a court hearing or trial;
* convicted prisoners waiting for sentencing;
* people waiting to be deported under the administration of adult corrective services. [Bolded by me.]
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6627A96DA080E829CA25795F000DB33E?opendocument

I'm shocked there are so many people on remand: almost one quarter of all prisoners.