Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, 43, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 - #6

[CJ60]

I am still of the belief that a lawyer/barrister will only do this to assist with a lessor charge for their client...not try to 'get them off' surely not.

In some cases the persons who commit such horrid acts are victims of horrendous abuses from birth, & so on....in some cases some criminal lawyers are trying to help the accused - maybe trying to give them a fair go as the ONLY PERSON in their lives who eva tried to give them a fair go....

those lawyers that take up criminal law usually see it from this perspective...and you know...Im fine with that....it doesnt make our system 100% foolproof, but its better than what we used in ancient times gone by...

now...if you were a criminal lawyer....why would you be arguing for GBC...(the guy has always been a wonderful church going citizen/helped out the community and in a moment of madness does this) IDK...interesting....

I do hope you are right. That they wouldn't essentially allow a murderer walk free unpunished.
I know some people are victims of abuse - I understand what you are saying - but I find it so difficult that some innocent person has to suffer at their hands because of this. I couldn't ever in a million years become a criminal lawyer ( well, I wouldn't live that long, for one! just a figure of speech)

And if someone strangles someone; someone that has led a perfect life up until that point - pillar of society, loving father.....suddenly snaps and looks into his victims face while he takes 3 -4 minutes to drain their last breath out of them - no, I just couldn't do it!

Think I would have to be on the side prosecuting! Lock him up, throw away the key! or ship him out to somewhere where they still give the lethal jab!

Thanks, Brizzychick!

 

[BrizzychickinUSA]

Ha!

I LOL'd so loud i woke the cat.

yeah...Im enjoying the way the journo's are all together on this....using his name straight after such statements....

or 'meanwhile' is also one of their fav terms...

Luv it!

 

[Neuromancer]

Thats amazing I so appreciate this....

My next question is....With this in mind...How wuld they determine if one did a criminal act but was labelled insane (or trying to get off by using this as their defence) at the time...? I think I would rather be incareted at wolston park hospital next to the golf course than wacol? Ummm any locals know if GBC played Golf?

Um.. from a psychologist/psychiatrist analysis perspective - and in-respect of a situation similar to this? What avenues could they use?

Personality disorders don't count as insanity. The majority of murderers are psychopaths (Antisocial Personality Disorder)

You'd have to demonstrate something of the level of acute psychosis (ie loss of touch with reality - eg the delusions, hallucinations, hearing voices typical of Paranoid Schizophrenia) to use the nutso defence.

LOL++ @ golf

 

[maevelorg]

No, I don't think police are bluffing regarding what info they got from Thursday night's road block.

Someone said in a previous thread that he wouldn't have to provide a statement unless he is charged??? Does anybody know how this works?

I find it astounding that he has not given a statement; surely if you were confident of your innocence that would be the first thing you would do!

However, in all likelihood he has been advised not to talk to police by his counsel and he is entirely within his rights to do so.

I hope this extensive explanation below answers any questions regarding Baden-Clay's potential legal obligations:


http://australiancriminallawyers.com.au/web/page/qld_do_i_have_to_talk_to_the_police

 

[Confuddled]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s-hunt-continues/story-e6freoof-1226353620719

After reading about the police visiting GBC earlier paired with the mention a few posts back about him not yet giving an official statement I'm wondering if today's visit was something like this:

"ok buddy, we have allowed you to organise and attend the funeral now it's time for you to come in for a chat. You have X hours to come and see us before we will come and collect you ourselves"

 

[CJ60]

I find it astounding that he has not given a statement; surely if you were confident of your innocence that would be the first thing you would do!

However, in all likelihood he has been advised not to talk to police by his counsel and he is entirely within his rights to do so.

I hope this extensive explanation below answers any questions regarding Baden-Clay's potential legal obligations:


http://australiancriminallawyers.com.au/web/page/qld_do_i_have_to_talk_to_the_police

How on earth can anyone not give a statement after 3 weeks plus! I would be there on day one telling the police everything I could to help find my wife/ wife's killer! He may well have been advised to keep quiet, and be within his rights, but if he is innocent, why the delay? What has he got to fear? I do not understand?

 

[CJ60]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s-hunt-continues/story-e6freoof-1226353620719

After reading about the police visiting GBC earlier paired with the mention a few posts back about him not yet giving an official statement I'm wondering if today's visit was something like this:

"ok buddy, we have allowed you to organise and attend the funeral now it's time for you to come in for a chat. You have X hours to come and see us before we will come and collect you ourselves"

I sincerely hope so!

 

[Neuromancer]

I find it astounding that he has not given a statement; surely if you were confident of your innocence that would be the first thing you would do!

Yes you'd think a loving husband would be keen to give a statement to help find his wife.

Oh wait...

Funny, I've heard that procrastination just adds to stress...

 

[BrizzychickinUSA]

I do hope you are right. That they wouldn't essentially allow a murderer walk free unpunished.
I know some people are victims of abuse - I understand what you are saying - but I find it so difficult that some innocent person has to suffer at their hands because of this. I couldn't ever in a million years become a criminal lawyer ( well, I wouldn't live that long, for one! just a figure of speech)

And if someone strangles someone; someone that has led a perfect life up until that point - pillar of society, loving father.....suddenly snaps and looks into his victims face while he takes 3 -4 minutes to drain their last breath out of them - no, I just couldn't do it!

Think I would have to be on the side prosecuting! Lock him up, throw away the key! or ship him out to somewhere where they still give the lethal jab!

Thanks, Brizzychick!

Remember that guy that is doing time for the pommie couple....she hid in the NT bush - he drove a ute...hang on..ill get the name....FALCONIO..2001- well apparently the mother of the accused killer...now doing time...is an absolutely wonderful mother and none of the usual 'brought up wrong' pertains to Bradley murdoch, the accused.... in fact, I was told that both parents were so loving and incredibly normal...such lovely lovely people. This is where it must be hard to prosecute .... (going back to my fascination of the secret life....when it takes over from the normal public persona....surely their must be some typical personality trait that surfaces....something that could warn the rest of us normal mainstream public) but, I guess not....

And...the link between little kids who if cruel to animals when they are younger, then turning out in later years being capable of homicide...

Wonder if GBC had bouts of cruelty to animals in his childhood past?

 

[BrizzychickinUSA]

Personality disorders don't count as insanity. The majority of murderers are psychopaths (Antisocial Personality Disorder)

You'd have to demonstrate something of the level of acute psychosis (ie loss of touch with reality - eg the delusions, hallucinations, hearing voices typical of Paranoid Schizophrenia) to use the nutso defence.

LOL++ @ golf

Oh excellant....

loss of reality? sounds like my ex

 

[CJ60]

Remember that guy that is doing time for the pommie couple....she hid in the NT bush - he drove a ute...hang on..ill get the name....FALCONIO..2001- well apparently the mother of the accused killer...now doing time...is an absolutely wonderful mother and none of the usual 'brought up wrong' pertains to Bradley murdoch, the accused.... in fact, I was told that both parents were so loving and incredibly normal...such lovely lovely people. This is where it must be hard to prosecute .... (going back to my fascination of the secret life....when it takes over from the normal public persona....surely their must be some typical personality trait that surfaces....something that could warn the rest of us normal mainstream public) but, I guess not....

And...the link between little kids who if cruel to animals when they are younger, then turning out in later years being capable of homicide...

Wonder if GBC had bouts of cruelty to animals in his childhood past?

I stood on an ant, once! I was devo!

Well, a lot of people are seeing many strange behaviours surface now!

 

[BrizzychickinUSA]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s-hunt-continues/story-e6freoof-1226353620719

After reading about the police visiting GBC earlier paired with the mention a few posts back about him not yet giving an official statement I'm wondering if today's visit was something like this:

"ok buddy, we have allowed you to organise and attend the funeral now it's time for you to come in for a chat. You have X hours to come and see us before we will come and collect you ourselves"

Yeah...I think you may be right...I sort of suggest it may be even more further like...'mate its getting worse, the general public are turning against you even more as time goes on....organise with your defence team a time when your ready to give a statement then lets get on with it-we you the media cant go on with things like this much more....the quicker we go to court, the quicker it is all over" QPS are such beautiful people I can see they be like this....they would remain tru gentlemen to the end... (excluding them ones that sit on the side of the road trying to catch us all going an incy bit over the speed limit)

 

[CaseClosed]

How on earth can anyone not give a statement after 3 weeks plus! I would be there on day one telling the police everything I could to help find my wife/ wife's killer! He may well have been advised to keep quiet, and be within his rights, but if he is innocent, why the delay? What has he got to fear? I do not understand?

That he will be charged with murder.

 

[CJ60]

Personality disorders don't count as insanity. The majority of murderers are psychopaths (Antisocial Personality Disorder)

You'd have to demonstrate something of the level of acute psychosis (ie loss of touch with reality - eg the delusions, hallucinations, hearing voices typical of Paranoid Schizophrenia) to use the nutso defence.

LOL++ @ golf

Ok - so hearing voices.... I can do little voices in the ear; I'll say 'no, no - not the pillar; lets go down the bottom of the road - see the tracks - lie down and do it properly'

 

[CJ60]

That he will be charged with murder.

Well thats the one!

 

[tessawa]

No, I don't think police are bluffing regarding what info they got from Thursday night's road block.

Someone said in a previous thread that he wouldn't have to provide a statement unless he is charged??? Does anybody know how this works?

Since the police can charge/arrest a person before they submit a statement, I guess he wouldn't have to submit one until he is legally obligated to respond/plea to a charge.

 

[BrizzychickinUSA]

Ok - so hearing voices.... I can do little voices in the ear; I'll say 'no, no - not the pillar; lets go down the bottom of the road - see the tracks - lie down and do it properly'

hmmmm.....yeah there yah go....He plays golf!

In fact Wolston park isnt a bad course....:woohoo:

 

[CaseClosed]

After reading the document about police interviews, etc., I am now wondering how come the ex-colleague female friend agreed to have been interviewed 3 times before engaging a lawyer! Hmmm ... can't make sense of this!

 

[Lu-Lu]

In Qld to be convicted of murder the Crown must show that the accused intended to inflict GBH or death to some person at the time of the killing. In the past many people have only been charged with manslaughter on the grounds that a single punch would not be likely to seriously injure or kill. Sometimes a person is shoved and they fall and suffer sub cranial injuries, without the accused having intended serious injury. Unless you have very precise evidence about how death occurred and about who did what to whom and when, it is very difficult to establish the requisite intention. Proving beyond reasonable doubt what a person's intention was at a given time requires very specific evidence. The defense of accident can also be available, as can diminished responsibility. Police need to be mindful of all these factors when investigating and interviewing.

There is also the defence of provocation. I was a juror almost 20 years ago, on a rape/murder trial where the ex defacto broke into his ex partners home, took his shoes off at the door, and snuck into her bedroom where he strangled her with her own tracktop. Leaving her naked for her two young children to find the next morning. :sad: During the trial we watched hour upon hours of video footage of him being questioned by police, where he denied any involvement in her killing. And then he eventually caved and fessed up, going into the details of what happened that night. His defence counsel, tried to use "provocation" as his defence. And with that defence if we wouldn't find him guility of Murder, beyond a reasonable doubt we would have to find him guilty of Manslaughter. We were given direction by Justice De Jersey about "ordinary person test" to help us with our deliberations.

 

[Neuromancer]

There is also the defence of provocation. I was a juror almost 20 years ago, on a rape/murder trial where the ex defacto broke into his ex partners home, took his shoes off at the door, and snuck into her bedroom where he strangled her with her own tracktop. Leaving her naked for her two young children to find the next morning. :sad: During the trial we watched hour upon hours of video footage of him being questioned by police, where he denied any involvement in her killing. And then he eventually caved and fessed up, going into the details of what happened that night. His defence counsel, tried to use "provocation" as his defence. And with that defence if we wouldn't find him guility of Murder, beyond a reasonable doubt we would have to find him guilty of Manslaughter. We were given direction by Justice De Jersey about "ordinary person test" to help us with our deliberations.

Again - how do some of these defenders sleep at night?

I couldn't do it - I'd have to be a prosecutor.