Australia Australia - Corryn Rayney, 44, Como, WA, 7 August 2007

[YoureNicked]

Hey guys, first time posting for me :newhere::blushing: (Although, I've been following all your posts for weeks!)

I'm a Perth girl, and planning on going down to sit in on the trial tomorrow. I've been following this case since the day Corryn was announced as a missing person. Will be my first time in a court room - shall be eye opening!

Nice to meet you all

Hi Flossy. Welcome to the group. Being in the courtroom is definitely interesting. I look forward to hearing what you find out

 

[Gemini Girl]

Hi Gemini Girl. Be encouraged...Shari Paradise (LR's Personal Assistant at one time) said he told her that he'd picked up the place card at the dinner and put it in one of the cars.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/fu.../murder-trial-told-of-rayneys-security-fears/

Thanks YN, so the tangled web is perhaps beginning to unravel.

A large part of the Judge's job will boil down to deciding who is or is not a credible witness, methinks.

I'm expert at stating the b*$&@*#g obvious aren't I, lol

:floorlaugh:

JMO MOO

 

[Zoro]

The following excerpt is from this mornings 'West'.........

Mr Bevilacqua said Mr Rayney offered himself and Ms Gausden a lift the night of the dinner after seeing them waiting for a taxi.

In a statement tendered to the court, he said the car was "something similar to a white Toyota Camry station wagon, about five to 10 years old". "Kasasha and I sat in the back of the car ... it was a bit messy with kids' stuff in the footwells and I recall thinking how this was definitely a family's car," he said. He told the court that he subsequently saw Mrs Rayney's car and it was not the car he had ridden in.

Ms Gausden described the car as "an old-style Toyota wagon, medium blue colour".

"I remember thinking 'what a crappy car for someone who was making so much money'," she said

 

[Gemini Girl]

The following excerpt is from this mornings 'West'.........

Mr Bevilacqua said Mr Rayney offered himself and Ms Gausden a lift the night of the dinner after seeing them waiting for a taxi.

In a statement tendered to the court, he said the car was "something similar to a white Toyota Camry station wagon, about five to 10 years old". "Kasasha and I sat in the back of the car ... it was a bit messy with kids' stuff in the footwells and I recall thinking how this was definitely a family's car," he said. He told the court that he subsequently saw Mrs Rayney's car and it was not the car he had ridden in.

Ms Gausden described the car as "an old-style Toyota wagon, medium blue colour".

"I remember thinking 'what a crappy car for someone who was making so much money'," she said

Very interesting Zoro, so I wonder do Police or anybody other than LR and his daughters, know precisely how many cars they owned at that time and what make they were etc? I guess that could be traced through registration records etc??

:waitasec:

JMO MOO

 

[mouse detective]

Hey guys, first time posting for me :newhere::blushing: (Although, I've been following all your posts for weeks!)

I'm a Perth girl, and planning on going down to sit in on the trial tomorrow. I've been following this case since the day Corryn was announced as a missing person. Will be my first time in a court room - shall be eye opening!

Nice to meet you all

Great that you have joined in the discussion Flossy. Keen to hear what's happening in the court room - it was great to get YN's feedback last week.

:welcome5:

 

[mouse detective]

The following excerpt is from this mornings 'West'.........

Mr Bevilacqua said Mr Rayney offered himself and Ms Gausden a lift the night of the dinner after seeing them waiting for a taxi.

In a statement tendered to the court, he said the car was "something similar to a white Toyota Camry station wagon, about five to 10 years old". "Kasasha and I sat in the back of the car ... it was a bit messy with kids' stuff in the footwells and I recall thinking how this was definitely a family's car," he said. He told the court that he subsequently saw Mrs Rayney's car and it was not the car he had ridden in.

Ms Gausden described the car as "an old-style Toyota wagon, medium blue colour".

"I remember thinking 'what a crappy car for someone who was making so much money'," she said

If he hadn't lost so much money gambling perhaps he could have had a nicer car!

 

[mouse detective]

Hi Gemini Girl. Be encouraged...Shari Paradise (LR's Personal Assistant at one time) said he told her that he'd picked up the place card at the dinner and put it in one of the cars.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/fu.../murder-trial-told-of-rayneys-security-fears/

I agree YN. It was made very clear that Shari Paradise was a supporter of LR's - and says it like it is. She was even declared by the prosecution as being a "hostile witness". The fact she told the court that LR had told her that he had taken the card with him is very significant and in my view could be crucial to getting a conviction. IF LR had put the card in his pocket the people going with him would not have seen it.

Been thinking about the seed pods too. When they get damp they start to disintegrate - with the pressure of the body on top of them combined with dampness, it's possible that they weren't round - they may have been crushed and because they were the same colour as Corryn's hair may have been hard to detect with all the other debris that would have been in her hair.

In the wake of the Mallard case, there is no way the police would consider planting evidence after the fact to get their man, especially with someone like LR. Personally my view is that the Police might not have seen the pods as being critical at the time, but I firmly believe they were there. The defence is clutching at straws. JMO

 

[YoureNicked]

The following excerpt is from this mornings 'West'.........

Mr Bevilacqua said Mr Rayney offered himself and Ms Gausden a lift the night of the dinner after seeing them waiting for a taxi.

In a statement tendered to the court, he said the car was "something similar to a white Toyota Camry station wagon, about five to 10 years old". "Kasasha and I sat in the back of the car ... it was a bit messy with kids' stuff in the footwells and I recall thinking how this was definitely a family's car," he said. He told the court that he subsequently saw Mrs Rayney's car and it was not the car he had ridden in.

Ms Gausden described the car as "an old-style Toyota wagon, medium blue colour".

"I remember thinking 'what a crappy car for someone who was making so much money'," she said

Thanks Zoro.

It was interesting, on the day I attended court, that the Defence asked all the barristers who attended the dinner and sat at their table, whether they thought Mr Bevilacqua and Ms Gorsden seemed drunk. This was before either Bevilacqua or Gorsden had appeared in the court.

I remember Ms Elizabeth Needham said, with a kind of sarcastic amusement in her voice, that Ms Gorsden certainly did appear to be inebriated.

It was clear to me at the time that LR's team was trying to discredit any testimony that Gorsden and Bevilacqua would give, regarding which car LR had taken them home in.

It seems, however, that Gorsden has hit back at her critics, with her equally sarcastic (and observant) comment about the car.

Just something I thought was a bit funny, given the focus by the Defence on her state of intoxication.

BBM

MOO

 

[YoureNicked]

I agree YN. It was made very clear that Shari Paradise was a supporter of LR's - and says it like it is. She was even declared by the prosecution as being a "hostile witness". The fact she told the court that LR had told her that he had taken the card with him is very significant and in my view could be crucial to getting a conviction. IF LR had put the card in his pocket the people going with him would not have seen it.

Been thinking about the seed pods too. When they get damp they start to disintegrate - with the pressure of the body on top of them combined with dampness, it's possible that they weren't round - they may have been crushed and because they were the same colour as Corryn's hair may have been hard to detect with all the other debris that would have been in her hair.

In the wake of the Mallard case, there is no way the police would consider planting evidence after the fact to get their man, especially with someone like LR. Personally my view is that the Police might not have seen the pods as being critical at the time, but I firmly believe they were there. The defence is clutching at straws. JMO

Very good points, Mouse! (*thumbs up*)

Maybe you should tell your thoughts to the police. They sure seem to need a bit of help in defending the integrity of their evidence in this case!

Or perhaps you should consider entering the police force yourself? The WA police service certainly could use a few intelligent and conscientious people, also, by the looks of things! (*clapping*)

 

[Zoro]

I'm thinking the Defense wouldn't have been TOO HAPPY (oooouch!) about the lift home by the witnesses in the Camry Stationwagon ...... There goes there attempt at trying to say they'd had too many drinks! You'd have to be passed out not to remember if you were travelling in a NEW SEDAN versus an OLD STATIONWAGON full of kids stuff.

 

[mouse detective]

Very good points, Mouse! (*thumbs up*)

Maybe you should tell your thoughts to the police. They sure seem to need a bit of help in defending the integrity of their evidence in this case!

Or perhaps you should consider entering the police force yourself? The WA police service certainly could use a few intelligent and conscientious people, also, by the looks of things! (*clapping*)

:blush::blush::blush:

Thanks YN

The one thing I do know is that people's recall of events is often different. Paul Bevilacqua remembers the car as being white and Kasasha remembers it being light blue. What I read and recall from the media reports is going to be different to what others note and remember. There is always going to be a conflict of remembered facts - especially after 5 years. OF course there will also be some people conveniently remembering and forgetting certain facts, in order to protect their friends and families.

The issue with a judge only trial is that he will not have 11 other panel members to confer with, to help him recall the more salient points. As you will affirm YN - there is so much information to take in each day and the judge is having to sit through this day in and day out for several weeks. It's easy to fade in and out of focus - let's just hope that he doesn't miss anything really crucial.

 

[mouse detective]

I'm thinking the Defense wouldn't have been TOO HAPPY (oooouch!) about the lift home by the witnesses in the Camry Stationwagon ...... There goes there attempt at trying to say they'd had too many drinks! You'd have to be passed out not to remember if you were travelling in a NEW SEDAN versus an OLD STATIONWAGON full of kids stuff.

I think it's fair to say that LR lied to the police about which car he drove in to that dinner.

This is a question for everyone - do you think that LR will take the witness stand and provide a testimony?

Personally I don't believe he will. JMO

 

[Gemini Girl]

I think it's fair to say that LR lied to the police about which car he drove in to that dinner.

This is a question for everyone - do you think that LR will take the witness stand and provide a testimony?

Personally I don't believe he will. JMO

I agree mouse, I don't think he will take the stand either, unless there is some way he can be forced to, and even then I think he would say over and over "no comment". GRRR

:banghead:

JMO MOO

 

[Gemini Girl]

:blush::blush::blush:

Thanks YN

The one thing I do know is that people's recall of events is often different. Paul Bevilacqua remembers the car as being white and Kasasha remembers it being light blue. What I read and recall from the media reports is going to be different to what others note and remember. There is always going to be a conflict of remembered facts - especially after 5 years. OF course there will also be some people conveniently remembering and forgetting certain facts, in order to protect their friends and families.

respectfully snipped


So true mouse, I know of a brother and sister who were both witnesses in a court case (in Perth as it happens) some years ago. They were not given any opportunity to discuss their recollections beforehand, and after separately giving evidence, were amazed at how differently they had remembered the events in question. Neither had any personal motivation to "misremember" either.

:twocents:

JMO MOO BBM

 

[Zoro]

I think it's fair to say that LR lied to the police about which car he drove in to that dinner.

This is a question for everyone - do you think that LR will take the witness stand and provide a testimony?

Personally I don't believe he will. JMO

I am sure I heard somewhere on the grapevine, that he WASN'T going to take the stand.
Personally IMO it would be too risky - I'm sure the prosecution would have a 'feild day' with him!

:what:what:lease:

 

[Gemini Girl]

:

I am sure I heard somewhere on the grapevine, that he WASN'T going to take the stand.
Personally IMO it would be too risky - I'm sure the prosecution would have a 'feild day' with him!

:what:what:lease:

And perhaps one of the reasons LR wants a Judge only trial is so nobody can assist him (the Judge) with recalling all evidence?

:maddening:

JMO MOO

 

[Flossy_]

Hi guys, back from the trial - after arriving late (thanks to a truck explosion on one of the streets near the court room) and leaving early (for school pick up).

Welp, definitely a new experience. It was mighty strange seeing Lloyd Rayney in the flesh after all these years. Even more smarmy in real life - and as YN mentioned, way smaller than I had imagined.. He made eye contact with me at one of the breaks - and held it. It was extremely unnerving..

He does have a remarkable poker face though (apart from the thumb twiddling from time to time).

There seemed to be a few mix ups with evidence and witnesses today. Lost photographs, bringing in the wrong witnesses etc, so a lot of time was taken up sorting these things out. Sergeant Ian Moore continued on from yesterday, denying the police ignored evidence that didn't "fit their theory".

Apparently, a witness reported they saw Corryn's car at 5.30am (the morning after her murder), but police performed the "reenactment" at 11.30pm (on a night with the same moon phase as the night of the murder!).. So the defence was questioning whether it was just the police trying to make the reenactment "fit" with "their theory". Am I making any sense?

I was not as wise as YN and did not take a notepad and pen with me! I hope to attend every Wednesday, so will remember next time!

The judge snapped at the defence more than once today as well! Once to remind them that "this is not a trial in front of a jury, the media, or the public. This is a judge only trial" In other words, stop being theatrical.

 

[mouse detective]

Hi guys, back from the trial - after arriving late (thanks to a truck explosion on one of the streets near the court room) and leaving early (for school pick up).

Welp, definitely a new experience. It was mighty strange seeing Lloyd Rayney in the flesh after all these years. Even more smarmy in real life - and as YN mentioned, way smaller than I had imagined.. He made eye contact with me at one of the breaks - and held it. It was extremely unnerving..

He does have a remarkable poker face though (apart from the thumb twiddling from time to time).

There seemed to be a few mix ups with evidence and witnesses today. Lost photographs, bringing in the wrong witnesses etc, so a lot of time was taken up sorting these things out. Sergeant Ian Moore continued on from yesterday, denying the police ignored evidence that didn't "fit their theory".

Apparently, a witness reported they saw Corryn's car at 5.30am (the morning after her murder), but police performed the "reenactment" at 11.30pm (on a night with the same moon phase as the night of the murder!).. So the defence was questioning whether it was just the police trying to make the reenactment "fit" with "their theory". Am I making any sense?

I was not as wise as YN and did not take a notepad and pen with me! I hope to attend every Wednesday, so will remember next time!

The judge snapped at the defence more than once today as well! Once to remind them that "this is not a trial in front of a jury, the media, or the public. This is a judge only trial" In other words, stop being theatrical.

Thanks Flossy for your first hand account of your morning in the courtroom. How busy was it?

Being stared at like that would be very unnerving.

Did you feel the defence was trying over-state their points. I guess the defence would always try to convince the jury that the police had been unusually slack in terms of their processes. I am sure the Judge would be sick and tired of hearing these attempts to undermine the police and forensic processes every time a case is brought before them.

I know this is a bit off topic but when I last went to court it was to hear the guy being sentenced after pleading guilty to inflicting life-threatening injuries on my brother. I watched a string of offenders come through and plead their guilty pleas and then watched as their lawyers pleaded clemency for their clients one after the other. In almost every case, the lawyers claimed their clients had been abused as a child or been drug addicted and how remorseful they have been in relation to their actions - without having to present any evidence to support their claims.

As I was sitting there that day I realised that the judges hear the same claims day in and day out. I wonder if those claims simply lose their impact after a while.

 

[Nads]

Thanks Flossy for your first hand account of your morning in the courtroom. How busy was it?

Being stared at like that would be very unnerving.

Did you feel the defence was trying over-state their points. I guess the defence would always try to convince the jury that the police had been unusually slack in terms of their processes. I am sure the Judge would be sick and tired of hearing these attempts to undermine the police and forensic processes every time a case is brought before them.

I know this is a bit off topic but when I last went to court it was to hear the guy being sentenced after pleading guilty to inflicting life-threatening injuries on my brother. I watched a string of offenders come through and plead their guilty pleas and then watched as their lawyers pleaded clemency for their clients one after the other. In almost every case, the lawyers claimed their clients had been abused as a child or been drug addicted and how remorseful they have been in relation to their actions - without having to present any evidence to support their claims.

As I was sitting there that day I realised that the judges hear the same claims day in and day out. I wonder if those claims simply lose their impact after a while.

Might still work on juries, but yeah judges would tire of certain things I reckon too.

 

[mouse detective]

That's me done for the day - haven't managed to get anything done for days!! I feel like I am addicted to this case. I can imagine there are many others just like me gripped to this case and when GBC trial starts I am sure it will have a similar impact.

I find this case particularly intriguing because all the players are involved in the justice system. The integrity of the Wa legal system is being tested to it's limits. I am sure it has polarised the legal fraternity. Does anyone know if there has ever been a case like it?