ARREST!!! Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 -#24

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
7e4a1__303743-gerard-


I hope I've done this right. Another (IMO) picture of the scratch near the hairline.


Obviously not, lol, I'll have another go

Obsessor, I got a broken link then when I tried to look at some of the other links on today heads a virus notification came up.
 
I obviously cant do image links yet, sorry, but if you do a google image search of gbc there is another photo of him with the same washing basket but he is facing the camera more directly. You can see the same scratch near the hairline again in that.

I assume any others must be under the quickly grown stubble.
 
to Marlywings, new article on CM have a look at the pic at the bottom of GBC and you can see 2 white lines running down his face closer to his mouth... hope this helps.....

Amandaton, can you post the link please so we can see? Cheers
 
Amandaton, can you post the link please so we can see? Cheers

On the Courier Mail link I just posted...down lower on the report there's a photo of GBC...right click on it & click zoom in.

I see the white lines but...hmmm..not sure they're scratches.
 
its only a view, lyndy.

7.30 am . He rings the police. Allison is missing..


She is missing, either from a walk late at night, or early in the morning.

He has to ring the Dickies. Was this before or after the call to the police? I am theorizing before .

But the timing is out as I see it, because that timing was out of his control. He had to do it then. Not before, and not after that time. It had to be done, but the time wasnt suitable, not that any time would be, but it couldnt be left up to anyone else to claim she was missing. It had to be him, because he lives there, and that is the chosen place she is missing from, and he is the prime person who would know if she was missing. And it has to be at a time that he would , in the normal scope of events , notice she was missing. The wandering missing wife is going to be missed very shortly by others.

But 7.30 am is a bit of a bugger, really, as its not enough time to be missing IF she went for a morning walk,. and TOO LONG if she went for a walk in the late night hours previously to midnight.

But there is no choice.

IMO, if the alleged killer did it, on the Thursday night, he could have said all the parts of the story that he did, but then say he got up at say 6.45am, assumed A had gone for a (or another) walk, then he took 20 mins to get dressed, and then he left before A got back from her walk. So nobody would have noticed her missing til the evening, and he wouldn't have had to report her missing.

Not sure why he didn't do that.
 
I have this nagging feeling he will get bail, under strict conditions. If a group of very young children had at least one parent to care for them, I think the other parent may be denied bail, but because these girls are currently without parents, I think he will be granted bail tomorrow. Just my opinion.
 
It could be to help the police in their identification process too..I just found this:

Maybe they have CCTV footage from the roundabout that they have blown up and the driver looks like GBC but not so much if he has a beard ?

but truly how dumb - 'I know I'll grow a beard' that will work - not :floorlaugh:
:moo:

JMO

You have a good point. Also, what if the two family cars weren't used? What if another car was used to drive to the bridge and his face has been photographed in another car that night at the roundabout?
 
On the Courier Mail link I just posted...down lower on the report there's a photo of GBC...right click on it & click zoom in.

I see the white lines but...hmmm..not sure they're scratches.

I have put photo after photo into photoshop, enlarged them, inverted them, played with contrast ad nauseum and I really can't see anything that I could definitively call a scratch. Is it just me?
 
in regards to interfering with a corpse the lastest local info from a witness who has been interviewed by police is that both hands had been dismembered. horrible thought if true.
 
:rocker: I totally agree with you .
IMO , I think the accused may have been forced to make a missing person call by 7 .30 am because ...

IMO, I think , the girls may not have got their usual " good night , sweet dreams" phone call from Mummy on that sad Thu night. :please:

IMO , The bedtime routine at Grandma's might have been , " when this TV show finishes its off to bed girls . ( police looking for all tv shows that night)

IMO, maybe , On the way to bed ,Girls are quite upset that Mummy hadnt called as promised. :please: to say good night. :please: so they ring to say goodnight.

IMO, most probably the accused sounds strange all huffing and puffing.
Accused may have said " Mummy went to bed early :what:
and
I can't talk right now because the football is on :what:
and
Mummy will call you first thing in the morning. :banghead:
It might have been said that the girls would be back early to kiss Mummy goodbye.

IMO, Accused probably knows he has to tell the girls in the morning, face to face, why Mummy didn't ring them in the morning and where Mummy is. :what:

IMO Accused probably knows to include , in the story, the football, going to bed early and something happening to Her between 6 am (waking time) and 7 am (children home ) and may know police will have to be involved. :banghead:

IMO, At the house on fri morning, everyone is there, and the children might have heard what the accused has told police.

IMO , They might have tried to help and correct Accused by saying " No , that's not what you told us last night, remember , you said Mummy went to bed early and you were watching the footy and told us Mummy would ring us in the morning"

IMO , the accused might have said " oh it was late , you must have been tired and confused.
IMO , They might have said, no it wasn't late, we were watching tv and phoned you remember, it wasn't that late. ( reason police want tv schedules that night)

Accused has scratches on face and things are not adding up.

IMO , The accused probably , will stick to the story that he told children ( similar anyway) and probably doesn't care what anyone else thinks.
IMO , The accused probably will never admit anything else, and it will probably be the police who will be left to piece together what really happened to Allison.

OMG, Too many IMOs , :blushing: I am trying to be very very careful. :truce:
I dont want my ideas to get in the way of Justice
And I want the best outcome for Allison.

Excellent post aunty.

Another possibility I might add is that one of the girls heard the phone ring late at night (GBC calling NBC) and could recall what her grandparents were watching on the tele at the time the phone rang and grandad went out? Moo, pure speculation only, only a thought.

I also believe that something forced the 7:30am call to the police. I've heard jungle drums to the effect that a school mum popped in early to see Allison about something (I alluded to this in an earlier post) and was hurried off by GBC. Only rumour, not fact and MOO.
 
I wonder if behind the scenes 'politics' plays a part in the selection of a Prosecutor? Influences pro/against the accused may support one particular prosecutor? or is the selection of a prosecutor based on the case experience of that prosecutor? I recall a poster with much legal knowledge suggested there would be 'matching' of skills of the Crown Prosecutor with the skills of the Private Prosecutor. Just asking questions of course.Someone with legal knowledge of this area may be able to contribute some discussion. MOO.
 
It would be way too obvious to try and grow a beard to hide a scratch/es.

If the alleged had to be in direct contact withthe Police after the intiial phone call, there is no way you could grow a beard quick enough to hide anything. It would take, at a minmum, 3-4 days to hide anything. Even that is a stretchh. A
 
I wonder if behind the scenes 'politics' plays a part in the selection of a Prosecutor?
Influences pro/against the accused may support one particular prosecutor? or is the selection of a prosecutor based on experience of that prosecutor? Just asking questions of course.Someone with legal knowledge of this area may be able to contribute some discussion. MOO.

Certainly would be interesting if he was the same prosecutor for the pollen case mentioned yesterday
 
I have this nagging feeling he will get bail, under strict conditions. If a group of very young children had at least one parent to care for them, I think the other parent may be denied bail, but because these girls are currently without parents, I think he will be granted bail tomorrow. Just my opinion.

Hmm..I think it may really depend what the police case against him is. I highly doubt he will and will be surprised if he does. MOO
 
It would be way too obvious to try and grow a beard to hide a scratch/es.

If the alleged had to be in direct contact withthe Police after the intiial phone call, there is no way you could grow a beard quick enough to hide anything. It would take, at a minmum, 3-4 days to hide anything. Even that is a stretchh. A

Yes the sctratches have been note by Police in the beginning.. they said he had given 'a version of events' as to how he got them. Not sure why he would then grow a beard to cover them(if so)..because they have already been noted and by now they should be healed..(unless they were pretty deep gouges)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
84
Guests online
2,058
Total visitors
2,142

Forum statistics

Threads
602,094
Messages
18,134,613
Members
231,231
Latest member
timbo1966
Back
Top