Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, 43, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 #20

[Nads]

I know I will probably be grilled for this....But I just dont like the look of him....and if i dont like the look of him, i find it hard ot trust what he is saying.....I mean Come on....His sources was reliable.....but not impeccable. That says enough.....and is such a politician response.

Um.....Its was a good source......But maybe not the best :floorlaugh:

PS Thanks Nads for that link and also thank you for getting us back on track. xx

Lucky you can't see our faces then!

Can't see that any leaky source would be impeccable. Goes with the territory.

 

[Mothergoose]

Looks like someone has ruffled some feathers?? CMC: "No comment!" Why not? I suppose time will tell if P. Tully is right in what he has written or not.

When I read it It gave me the feeling that the AG was letting it be known that he was agreeable with the QPA approaching him (bring it on) with a deal.I don't think I can recall an Att. General addressing the media (to dispute a blog of all things) in such a way. It seemed very unusual to me. Just a gut feeling there was more to it. MOOOO

 

[louisepiglet]

After 30 mins no "Thanks" from fellow fence sitters...

Wow - 37 members following tonight and I seem to be the only "fence sitter" among us.

I've been struggling to keep up the last few days, perhaps I've missed some new facts implicating the suspect? If so please fill me in!!!

No new facts re GBC just no facts implicating anyone else.
If it looks like a duck............

 

[Snails]

And Paul Tully's latest blog

http://www.paulgtully.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/tonight-900pm-4bc-crime-at-9-brisbane.html?m=1
Tonight 9:00pm 4BC - CRIME AT 9
Tonight is the story of the the Brisbane father who killed his wife for another woman after an affair with her and whose plans to marry her were thwarted by the police investigation.
All the police had was circumstantial evidence against the killer but that was to prove enough to put this man behind bars for wilful murder before he was ultimately deported to his home country after serving 11 years - initially at the notorious Boggo Road Gaol in Brisbane and later at the Nnmbinbah Valley Prison Farm
It was a story which gripped all of Queensland - an otherwise respectable Brisbane father who meticulously plotted his wife's drowning and whose story was not believed by the jury, the Supreme Court or the full bench of the High Court of Australia.
This murder 51 years ago had all the essentials of one of Queensland's most-despicable crimes - a faithful wife, an apparently devoted but cheating violent husband and father, motives of greed and extra-marital love, declarations of fidelity and a belief he could not be convicted when the killer declared:
"I am not concerned about the inquest. They can say what they like. I am the only witness to the drowning and if I claim privilege and refuse to give evidence, that is the end of the inquest."
How wrong he was!

 

[willough]

After 30 mins no "Thanks" from fellow fence sitters...

Wow - 37 members following tonight and I seem to be the only "fence sitter" among us.

I've been struggling to keep up the last few days, perhaps I've missed some new facts implicating the suspect? If so please fill me in!!!

Sorry, I hope you dont think people were ignoring you...I did read your post...and im not 100% sure of who I think did it, but I am just about there.....So I am more on one side, than sitting on the fence.

 

[Nads]

When I read it It gave me the feeling that the AG was letting it be known that he was agreeable with the QPA approaching him (bring it on) with a deal.I don't think I can recall an AT addressing the media (to dispute a blog of all things) in such a way. It seemed very unusual to me. Just a gut feeling there was more to it. MOOOO

I agree. It even feels like they are advertising to the crooks that they'd be willing to cut a deal.

 

[KG1]

I assumed he meant either the offence of murder or the offence of manslaughter, in varying possibilities of numbers of course.

Sorry, I disagree. Homicide is homicide - murder. Manslaughter is manslaughter, not homicide.

 

[CaseClosed]

Have not checked in for a while, but after plowing through all the threads to get up to date, I am feeling totally overwhelmed by the emphasis on domestic violence that has appeared in so many of the posts.

I feel sorry for the many ladies on this forum that have experienced domestic violence. It is a terrible thing; I experienced it as a child growing up. But with all due respect I am still waiting for the existence of DV in ABC and GBC's relationship to be confirmed. In the absence of that confirmation I did not understand why so many posts have been about DV.

I personally am against the over-emphasis of DV in this case. Two reasons: 1) as stated I don't think there is enough confirmation and 2) I think the ongoing discussion about DV will give the defence an easy plea for manslaughter should GBC appear before the courts. If GBC is arrested and tried it can be guaranteed that his lawyers will be investigating all avenues to reduce the charges. It is very likely that they will pick up on the contents of this forum and get the idea that many people will accept the case as one of domestic violence that resulted in accidental death in the heat of the moment. This will more likely than not lead to a manslaughter charge. Please note that I am not arguing this is justified in any way, but the lawyers will and I suspect they will be successful.

If GBC is guilty then I would prefer to see him tried for murder and receive a life sentence, rather than the 6 to 12 years he may receive for manslaughter.

This is exactly the problem with our legal system. Just because someone kills another one in the heat of an argument, should NOT receive a lesser sentence. Killing is killing! Manslaughter sentences are way too linient IMO!

 

[Toowong(s)]

No new facts re GBC just no facts implicating anyone else.
If it looks like a duck............

I just wonder if GBC was a Doctor, or Pilot or Fireman - would people be so quick to form opinions?

 

[eskimovm]

"Although the police have a prime suspect for the murder and apparently have no doubt whatsoever about that person's guilt, they are apparently facing some serious evidentiary problems in proving their case beyond reasonable doubt before a judge and jury," Cr Tully wrote on his blog.

Wow! will be interested to see what new information we have at work tomorrow! (I work for News local)

 

[Nads]

Sorry, I disagree. Homicide is homicide - murder. Manslaughter is manslaughter, not homicide.

I don't agree.

 

[Nads]

<<Cr Tully also wrote that the Crime and Misconduct Commission may already be using its "star chamber" coercive powers to make people talk.

The public is never told about this and those appearing before these secret CMC interrogations must answer the questions put to them - on pain of major fines and jail sentences.* If the police have conscripted the CMC to do this - in order to get admissions and confessions from anyone connected with the case - then we are likely to never know.>>



So what do you make of this? I have no idea what they mean.

 

[louisepiglet]

I just wonder if GBC was a Doctor, or Pilot or Fireman - would people be so quick to form opinions?

As i have mentioned before I don't care who or what he is, IMO the "evidence"
can only point to one person. An innocent person would shout it from the rooftops and assist police all he could to catch the killer of the woman he loved.

 

[Trooper]

what will weigh heavily against Gerard is his failing to stop the search and his arrogance in assuming she was dead when she was dumped.. the law will take the position that she may have been alive and rescuable, but not after 11 days of searching, had he owned up to where she was. It will not take for granted that Gerard is capable of discerning death, authorised to pronounce death and capable of the fine judgement required. And will argue that his judgement on that was for his own convenience..

which of course, brings up a whole other horror..

 

[CaseClosed]

sorry i sent the last message too quick

The things that stuck out to me in the latest report were the following parts

"I'd just caution Cr Tully from spectacularly blogging about murder cases in Queensland and encourage him to get back to his constituents.

"He's not a journalist, he's a councillor."


Police said yesterday there was no basis for the speculation, and asked if Cr Tully could call them should he have "any information or inside gossip" in the future


Is there a possibility he could get in any trouble too over that???

Some people seem to forget that Cr Tully also has a Law Degree. IMO the man is not stupid. He knows exactly why he is writing what he is writing IMO.

 

[Fuskier]

The Paul Tully blog says they may ask to grant immunity not that they already had asked. In the article he says he hasn't yet been asked, but acknowledges he may be in future, so that doesn't prove Paul is wrong about this.

In addition, note there was no confirmation and no denial re the CMC involvement. This is also consistent with PT's blog.

 

[Blue Bottle]

Some people seem to forget that Cr Tully also has a Law Degree. IMO the man is not stupid. He knows exactly why he is writing what he is writing IMO.

Someone already posted this link earlier today. A Law degree means zilch if he isn't working in the field and if he was working in the field, he would keep his mouth shut.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-01-18/bligh-appalled-by-false-body-tweet/1910102

Queensland Premier Anna Bligh has launched a scathing attack on an Ipswich councillor for using social media to incorrectly report the deaths of two people in the Ipswich floods.

It is alleged Councillor Paul Tully wrote on his Twitter account that two bodies had been found in a house at Goodna during clean-up efforts on Sunday night.

Police say no-one from the family was reported missing and no bodies were found.

Ms Bligh says she has never heard of a politician acting so irresponsibly.

 

[willough]

Some people seem to forget that Cr Tully also has a Law Degree. IMO the man is not stupid. He knows exactly why he is writing what he is writing IMO.

I respect that and i respect people may like him.....But I have known men with varied degrees achieved in the late 70s-80s, who have drunk so many bourbons/beers/wines between then and today, that it wouldn't mean a darn thing that they have these credentials.

I dont understand why he is blogging on his own site about Allison's death. Law Enforcement is not his purpose. I can understand he would have an interest in the case, like anyone living in the area....It is just not his place to be putting information out to the public.....As the other dude said "He isnt a journalist"

 

[Toowong(s)]

As i have mentioned before I don't care who or what he is, IMO the "evidence"
can only point to one person. An innocent person would shout it from the rooftops and assist police all he could to catch the killer of the woman he loved.

Out of genuine interest, what do you consider the top 3 or 4 key pieces of "evidence"?

 

[KG1]

Some people seem to forget that Cr Tully also has a Law Degree. IMO the man is not stupid. He knows exactly why he is writing what he is writing IMO.

A Man Who Represents Himself Has a Fool for a Client - Abraham Lincoln