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

[CaseClosed]

Thank you Sheldor..."thankyaverymuchindeed "....I dont know anything about this aspect. I wonder if the defense team, get the knowledge of what the evidence pieces are before trial.....or whether this is completely kept under wraps by the prosecutor. Then the defense team must on the spot find answers....Hmmmmmm My hubby is good with all this stuff.....and I wouldnt know my bum from my head....lol

I don't think so. My understanding is there is a period of discovery when the defence and prosecution exchange info. The defence need a certain amount of time to prepare their case. Sometimes judges grant extensions also.

 

[Cccclllaareb]

I was thinking about the Sica trial...there was loads of info reported long before that case got anywhere near the trial.

There was definitely quite a lot of info reported but as someone with a bit of inside knowledge about it i know there's a hellllll of a lot of things that haven't been reported. Very one sided reporting too.

 

[Karo]

There was definitely quite a lot of info reported but as someone with a bit of inside knowledge about it i know there's a hellllll of a lot of things that haven't been reported. Very one sided reporting too.

so, supporting the accused's innocence or guilt?

 

[sheldor]

Thank you Sheldor..."thankyaverymuchindeed "....I dont know anything about this aspect. I wonder if the defense team, get the knowledge of what the evidence pieces are before trial.....or whether this is completely kept under wraps by the prosecutor. Then the defense team must on the spot find answers....Hmmmmmm My hubby is good with all this stuff.....and I wouldnt know my bum from my head....lol

Thanks Willough

This is actually an interesting question. I don't actually know what the law is on this matter in Queensland i.e. whether the prosecution have a duty to disclose their case to the defence. I think they should do, as a matter of fairness, but it really depends upon whether there is a legal duty. It may just come down to the goodwill of the prosecutor! Someone with knowledge of Queensland law might be able to answer this question.

 

[Humdinger]

I've missed out on all of thread 22 and have to go back and read it, this is moving so so fast!!!

I think that there will be more arrests and soon!! I think that the info coming out now is more of the drip feeding the media and putting pressure on suspected accomplices. IMO

 

[Cccclllaareb]

so, supporting the accused's innocence or guilt?

Not appropriate for me to say. Just think its important to keep in mind that when it comes to media reports you can never think of it as being truly informative in the sense that it doesn't offer a complete perspective.

 

[marlywings]

There was definitely quite a lot of info reported but as someone with a bit of inside knowledge about it i know there's a hellllll of a lot of things that haven't been reported. Very one sided reporting too.

Well that case is almost at the end & maybe by next week a verdict.

It's taken sooo long...NINE years...heck if it takes that long with GBC's case the threads on here will be in the 100000000s...poor Kimster...welcome to Australian Justice system....lol.

 

[CaseClosed]

Thanks Willough

This is actually an interesting question. I don't actually know what the law is on this matter in Queensland i.e. whether the prosecution have a duty to disclose their case to the defence. I think they should do, as a matter of fairness, but it really depends upon whether there is a legal duty. It may just come down to the goodwill of the prosecutor! Someone with knowledge of Queensland law might be able to answer this question.

I believe if the prosecution does not reveal all they have to the defence, they do get in trouble for it. The system is supposed to be fair. Hawkins would probably know.

 

[Karo]

Not appropriate for me to say. Just think its important to keep in mind that when it comes to media reports you can never think of it as being truly informative in the sense that it doesn't offer a complete perspective.

Sorry I asked, didn't mean to put you on the spot like that. I meant are the media reporting it like he is guilty. or might not be? Please ignore me...I can't find the right words, lol.

 

[Cccclllaareb]

Well that case is almost at the end & maybe by next week a verdict.

It's taken sooo long...NINE years...heck if it takes that long with GBC's case the threads on here will be in the 100000000s...poor Kimster...welcome to Australian Justice system....lol.

I will be SO interested to find out the verdict re Sica.

Haha yep we are going to be in for a long wait indeed :-s crap the way things are so slow!

 

[Karo]

I just had a quick read up of that Sica case, to me it says there will be a guilty verdict but when I read more, it makes me hesitate to agree, a few things do not point to him.

 

[Lazard]

I just had a quick read up of that Sica case, to me it says there will be a guilty verdict but when I read more, it makes me hesitate to agree, a few things do not point to him.

A bit off this topic, but I tend to agree that he did it IMO, his defence team's closing argument was that his DNA was nowhere to be found, but I guess any DNA would be hard to find once you clean it all up with bleach....

 

[Flinders]

I got it wrong. Soz Willough.

 

[Hawkins]

I believe if the prosecution does not reveal all they have to the defence, they do get in trouble for it. The system is supposed to be fair. Hawkins would probably know.

The DPP and defence team should and usually do communicate well. The matter first goes to the mags court for a committal. Here the Crown presents most of their evidence in terms of forensics, expert evidence and reports and witness statements. Sometimes the defence will get to do some basic x-examination. The magistrate has to decide whether there is sufficient admissible evidence such that a jury, properly instructed, could convict the accused. If there is then they are off to trial. There's no benefit to anyone at all by trying to hide or withold evidence. The defence gets the lot. How quickly and efficiently that occurs can sometimes vary. The DPP are staffed by top people these days but are still overworked and under resourced in my view only.

At trial the evidence is given and tested in much greater depth, this time for the benefit of a jury. A murder trial is a wonder to watch if you have never seen one live. This wil be an open court so good opportunity to see one. Great seeing the forensic and advocacy skills of the top barristers who work them and the Supreme Court judges too. Can be a bit sad seeing the relatives etc there each day (especially when you have some suporting each side) and a bit surreal if you bump into them in the lifts and coffee shops etc. Same for witnesses. So if you do go, try to be as respectful and conscious of privacy as you can. All IMO MOO.

 

[CaseClosed]

The DPP and defence team should and usually do communicate well. The matter first goes to the mags court for a committal. Here the Crown presents most of their evidence in terms of forensics, expert evidence and reports and witness statements. Sometimes the defence will get to do some basic x-examination. The magistrate has to decide whether there is sufficient admissible evidence such that a jury, properly instructed, could convict the accused. If there is then they are off to trial. There's no benefit to anyone at all by trying to hide or withold evidence. The defence gets the lot. How quickly and efficiently that occurs can sometimes vary. The DPP are staffed by top people these days but are still overworked and under resourced in my view only.

At trial the evidence is given and tested in much greater depth, this time for the benefit of a jury. A murder trial is a wonder to watch if you have never seen one live. This wil be an open court so good opportunity to see one. Great seeing the forensic and advocacy skills of the top barristers who work them and the Supreme Court judges too. Can be a bit sad seeing the relatives etc there each day 9especially when you have some suporting each side) and a bit surreal if you bump into them in the lifts and coffee shops etc. Same for witnesses. So if you do go, try to be as respectful and conscious of privacy as you can. All IMO MOO.

Thank you! Again, great post!

 

[willough]

I got it wrong. Soz Willough.

Not a problem chickadee I sat here wondering what your post was about. I have deleted my response back as well xx

I can imagine the financial strain it can create though when one lives away from family

 

[Mothergoose]

I got it wrong. Soz Willough.

Whether you misunderstood or not your compassion shone through and was very refreshing. :scale:

 

[Hawkins]

Insanity. I doubt it will play a part in this trial, but that's only a guess since I know very little about the circumstances or the accused. In Qld a person can assert that they were suffering from a mental illness at the time of the offence which deprived them of one of three capacities. The capaity to know what they were doing (e.g. I didn't realise that my hands were squeezing that other guy's throat). Or, the capacity to control what they were doing (e.g. I knew I was squeezing his throat but I just couldn't physically control my hands). Or the capacity to understand what they were doing was wrong (e.g. I knew I was squeezing his throat and I could control my hands, but I didn't understand that it was wrong to do that). There are mental illnesses which certainly can rob a person of any or all of these capacities. The Mental Health Court makes the call based on the opinion of a panel of psychiatrists who advise a separate judge to the trial judge. This is not a process where some crafty lawyer can just get an accused person off by pretending they were all stressed and nutty at the time of the offence. Also, faking that level of illness with no recorded medical history is not an easy thing to do.

If there is a successful insanity process then the offender is not set free. They are held in a secure mental health facility, usually for a number of years while being treated and periodically assessed. Being institutionalised in one of those places is no holiday. All IMO MOO.

 

[Detect]

I think the media will be told bits here and there as things progress, in particular between now and his June 9 court appearance. After that, who knows.

Also, with your earlier question about law enforcement posting on forums like this. Police have been known to set all sorts of traps to make someone come forward or reveal details, but I don't think they would be posting on forums. But, you never know!

Absolutely agree. I think they will continue to search for any info that might be considered relevant, and will releasing snippets of information, in order to sus out other witnesses. Might even scare an accomplice, if there is one (in my opinion of course).

:jail:

 

[Nads]

So does the public get to know any of the evidence shown at the committal hearing?