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

[Gemini Girl]

Hi everyone,

I have been following this case on and off since it started. One thing that I still don't really understand is what LR's defence actually is. Is he simply pleading guilty and suggesting some crazy attacker did it and he was framed, or does he have an alibi at the time?

Excellent question antomonic, to which I personally do not have the answer, (though I suggest he is pleading not guilty rather than guilty), but welcome anyway!

:welcome:

JMO MOO

 

[Gemini Girl]

Also could one possibility be the Claremont Serial Killer? Or is that stretching things too far. Seems to be in similar fashion to those in the mid 1990s.

I suspect LR is certainly trying to imply, without concretely making the suggestion, that the murder was carried out by either the Claremont killer or somebody of their ilk.



:twocents:

JMO MOO

 

[mouse detective]

One thing I forgot from today, I noticed that Corryn's nametag (apparently "possibly similar" to that of Lloyd's found at the scene), was found in the centre console of her car? Has there been any reporting on this that I've missed?

Hi Flossy - yes it was mentioned but it didn't make sense as Corryn wasn't at that dinner it may of course be a fairly popular card used for events in Perth. what I think is fortuitous is LR's place card could be traced to that one dinner where all the other lawyers were playing celebrity heads. Imagine if it didn't have "The Queen" written on the back - it could have been from simply anywhere.

 

[mouse detective]

I still can't get my head around the place card. Okay, lets say that the place card found in Kings Park, found it's way there via LR. If so, why on earth would he take it home in the first place?????? I wonder why the police think he took the card from the restaurant?

If he wanted to take the card home, he had to have kept track of what Elizabeth Needham did with the card after the game of Celebrity Head and then retrieve the card from the table and either put it one of his pockets or carry it in his hand out to the car (which it seems was his car and not Corryn's).

It just doesn't make much sense to me that LR would bother to go to the trouble of retrieving his own card. The guy and his wife went to Bali in Gina Rinehart's private jet for goodness sake. It's hard to imagine him getting excited about a place card from one of probably numerous Chambers events he had attended.

Unless he has a sense of humour and thought it might be funny to show the girls the card with his name on one side and the Queen's on the other. But he didn't pretend to be the Queen, Elizabeth Needham did. Wouldn't it have made more sense to keep the card with the name of the character that he had pretended to be?

It's doing my head in!

Solaris - you make some really valid points here. I imagine the following scenario. Elizabeth Needham was sitting next to LR she used the card and I suggest she placed it on the table between the two of them . She says it was face down but what did she mean by that - after the game "The Queen" was on the outside and LR was on the inside. which side was showing? Were LR's keys underneath - did it get turned over when he picked those up?

Personally I can see several reasons LR may have picked up the card - 1) to show his girls, 2) to take to work and tease Mrs Needham at work at some point in the future or 3) just as an automatic reaction - taking it off the table as he picked up his mobile phone and car keys and putting it into the pocket of his coat or maybe pants. Personally I favour scenario 3. I don't believe it ever made it to a console - that was just LR's explanation of how it might have been planted. I wonder if the police established what clothing he wore to that dinner - did they check for blood stains on his coat/pants?

 

[YoureNicked]

Hi guys, just catching up with all your great theories and thoughts.

Flossy, thanks for posting your news from the trial. I'm glad to hear the judge is not impressed with the defence's 'labouring' over the methods the police used to collect and log the forensic data. Yes, take a pen and notepad next time lol. It's amazing the little details the amateur journalist can pick up that the mainstream media doesn't report on!

Zorro - - I'm with you in that I think LR is very active in his organising his defence. I'm also with you in that I doubt he'll take the witness stand. His barrister seems to be doing a good job and I doubt LR would want to have to personally face questions about his alleged gambling, infidelity, bank statements and clients (especially since one of those clients is/was The Big One, Gina Rhinehart.)

Solaris - Awesome theory! I think you should phone the police with your thoughts on this! I think it's totally within the realms of possibility that LR might have decided to use the night of the dinner, whilst Corynn and the girls were away in Melbourne to scope out a burial site in advance of the murder.

As you suggest, the place card may have dropped out of the car or out of his jacket pocket, inadvertently as he snooped around in the bush.

The Computer Search 5 Years Later - So LR is claiming 'Professional Legal Privelige' in order to prevent the police from searching his computer again, huh? How convenient! Well, if I were the police I'd say to him, 'Your wife's been murdered and you are the one we think killed her, so I think your honest and law-abiding clients will understand that we need to look into your computer.'

Great reading the news and what you think, guys! Thanks for the posts and keeping Corryn front and centre. I didn't know her but I think I would have liked her if I had. She sounds like she was a friendly woman whose only problem was the 'little' man she married. My Opinion Only.

JMO
MOO

 

[mouse detective]

I suspect LR is certainly trying to imply, without concretely making the suggestion, that the murder was carried out by either the Claremont killer or somebody of their ilk.

:twocents:

JMO MOO

I doubt LR would try to suggest this was a random killing or the acts of the CSK. He is more likely to suggest that as a former prosecutor there are a number of people who might wish to put him in the frame for murder. He may of course have some gambling debts that we don't know about, which might have been a motive. Then of course he may wish to suggest that in her work Corryn may have ruffled some feathers. I keep coming back to why the Underworld character was questioned for 8 hours - I can only imagine LR said something to police to point them in that direction.

 

[mouse detective]

The Computer Search 5 Years Later - So LR is claiming 'Professional Legal Privelige' in order to prevent the police from searching his computer again, huh? How convenient! Well, if I were the police I'd say to him, 'Your wife's been murdered and you are the one we think killed her, so I think your honest and law-abiding clients will understand that we need to look into your computer.'


JMO
MOO

Great post YN - thank you.

There is a possibility that CR had discovered that LR was working on something highly illegal / unethical in relation to Hancock Prospecting's business dealings. When she threatened to ruin his career and potentially expose Australia's richest woman he knew he had to find a way to silence her permanently.

Whilst information in those files or on that computer, might help the prosecution, it could potentially open up a much bigger can of worms with much bigger compensation claims by LR and Gina R.

JMO

 

[Gemini Girl]

I doubt LR would try to suggest this was a random killing or the acts of the CSK. He is more likely to suggest that as a former prosecutor there are a number of people who might wish to put him in the frame for murder. He may of course have some gambling debts that we don't know about, which might have been a motive. Then of course he may wish to suggest that in her work Corryn may have ruffled some feathers. I keep coming back to why the Underworld character was questioned for 8 hours - I can only imagine LR said something to police to point them in that direction.

Good points mouse. I stand corrected.

As I have said before in this or another forum, Miss Marple I will never be!!

:floorlaugh:

JMO MOO

 

[Dark horse]

Hello fellow people who care about victims of crime,

Hoping to add a piece or two to this ugly puzzle, for whatever it's worth. And to ask us all to please keep in the forefront of your minds the victims, a real family just like yours whose lives have been destroyed by violent crime.

The papers refer to the accused as a former DPP prosecutor however it should be remembered that many of the criminal barristers work for the DPP before going into private practice. I think there are defense barristers out there whose ambition can override their moral and the justice system is a game they are out to win.
There can be no consideration for their client's victims and they can be desentitised to crime and its impact. Perhaps it's their 'coping mechanism so they can reconcile the fact that they are assisting criminals to escape culpability for their crimes.' JMHO as to why a criminal defense lawyer is not as unlikely a suspect as the papers make out.

The accused was permitted to work as a lawyer (for those unscrupulous enough to use someone facing murder charges). He was not allowed to represent clients in a trial by jury, but other than that he was permitted to work. Bail was granted in part so he could work in order to pay for his defense. His "bridge partner" for example is known to have referred work to him. There is a 2008 online article in the Australian called A Man in Limbo which I recommend. There are disparities in that article and the evidence given in court such as when a dinner occured (6 weeks in the winter or 6 months in the summer?) makes a big difference to a back injury! One of the lawyers interviewed said she had information about the deceased's recent movements. Very strange.

Someone made reference to the husband's body language when he was asked about his wife's relationship with the accused. It made me wonder who else's career or reputation was on the line when the deceased threatened to go public. This was a situation involving allegations of adultery, money concealing and gambling. Who else stood to profit from the silencing of the deceased? Was there an accomplice?

Back to the car, found near the bridge partner's vacant residence. Kershaw is not the first street off Hetesbury. A spade and star picket were found on Hetesbury. The murderer drove down Hetesbury past Townsend Rd (north and south). There was backtracking to Kershaw (from the gravesite, it's is in the opposite direction to the home of the accused.) Why Kershaw? Was this part of the original plan to dump the vehicle or was that an afterthought once the car was damaged? Was the idea to wash up in a vacant house? There would have been a lot of soil on whoever dug that grave.

Now going very far off base here. Perhaps an accomplice gave the murderer a ride home? Could the murder have occurred on Kershaw after someone arranged to meet the deceased there, perhaps with evidence of her husband's womanising? Was ayone's else's DNA on the hanky? Perhaps the accused wore the coat home after the murder? It would have been freezing if walking, and, as mentioned, the coat could have been needed to hide the dirt.I wonder if there are liquidamber trees near the car? So many questions that I hope the prosecution has answers to. There was talk in the news of a half-drunk cup of coffee on the kitchen counter. Was there coffee in her system? If she was drugged, would this have shown up in her autopsy? It wasn't until after her autopsy and funeral that the accused was declared a suspect. Time to destroy evidence.

None of this necessarily explains the scraped boots, the soil matching the seed pods to the residence, the name card, and the lies told to the hostile witnesses (I presume neither wanting a conviciton) about the car used. If the plan was to dispose of the boots in the river or similar this may have become difficult once the car broke down.
The theory is that either the accused or the deceased (she was in Melbourne but obviously was invited if there was a card for her too) took both placecards home. They may have landed up in her car for any number of reasons. For example, if they were in his suit jacket or pants pocket and handed to her when she got them from drycleaners.
Or if he used her car and found them in his pocket, then dumped them in the console. Perhaps whoever took them had some sentimental reason for doing so, like to show the deceased which celebrity head she had been allocated. Maybe the accused enjoyed that fact that he was "the queen" and she was someone inferior? Maybe he brought them home to show her what she had missed. Very hard to speculate what may go through the mind of a murderer. Remember, this was just over a week before the murder. The card may have blown out of the car at some point. Extremely odd that the deceased's card was found in her boot (was this her bootscooting boot or the boot of her car?). Her sister is on record saying she had loads of these boots. Perhaps the placecards were in that david jones bag in the boot of the car, the one they said could have been used to cover the body, and hers fell into her boot?

The deceased hated hankies. But was clearly willing to by them for her husband. Maybe the hankie was put there as a mark of derision? Is it a catholic practice to fold the arms of the deceased? Certain elements of this smack of non-randomness.

Gotta wonder what's on the computer the prosecution is trying to access. Maybe proof of the hidden money or the affair? This legal prof priveledge thing is dodgy. It's a delay tactic to block the police from accessing to evidence. The way I see it, if there's nothing to hide, why claim it? It's horrible to think of all the evidence that has been suppressed or excluded for technical reasons. It's bad enough to know evidence may have been destroyed, but knowing evidence has been excluded is worse IMO.

If there is an acquittal, my understanding is he gets to sue the government for defamaition and the proceeds of his entire career which he claims is irreparably damaged. So the government (tax payers) will not only have wasted millions in prosecuting him but more again in compensating him.

The trial judges have a better chance of getting it right than a jury IMHO which is why perps usually choose a jury, however the accused would have only chosen a judge because he would have struggled to find a jury without preconceived ideas about him.
His smugness has worked against him and IMO the public's perception of his guilt comes from this more than from the police naming his as a suspect. The accused said at the funeral, "to know her was to love her." Can you imagine sitting with that smug look on your face as the prosecution shows autopsy photos and pictures of the grave of the mother of your children who you claim to love?

IMO the biggest victims are the girls who were robbed of their mother, their childhood and (if the accused is guilty) may be about to learn that their own father perpetrated all this grief for them. It must be very hard for them to be called as prosecution witnesse (if that is indeed the intention).

Another thing to be aware of. The defense is always handed the prosecution case on a silver platter, months before a trial. Every thing a prosecution witness may say and every piece of evidence tendered by the prosecution was disclosed to the accused as part of the rights of the accused. On the other side, the prosecution has NO IDEA what the defense may have to say and may struggle to pre-empt this. And, while the prosecution has to prove everything they say (the onus of proof being on the accuser to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt), The defense can say whatever they like to cast doubt and are not required to prove it, the prosecutions can't even question the veracity of the defense without hard evidence to the contrary.

Food for thought. May justice be served, tho it will never bring back the life that was taken.

 

[Gemini Girl]

Hello fellow people who care about victims of crime,

Hoping to add a piece or two to this ugly puzzle, for whatever it's worth. And to ask us all to please keep in the forefront of your minds the victims, a real family just like yours whose lives have been destroyed by violent crime.


Another thing to be aware of. The defense is always handed the prosecution case on a silver platter, months before a trial. Every thing a prosecution witness may say and every piece of evidence tendered by the prosecution was disclosed to the accused as part of the rights of the accused. On the other side, the prosecution has NO IDEA what the defense may have to say and may struggle to pre-empt this. And, while the prosecution has to prove everything they say (the onus of proof being on the accuser to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt), The defense can say whatever they like to cast doubt and are not required to prove it, the prosecutions can't even question the veracity of the defense without hard evidence to the contrary.

Food for thought. May justice be served, tho it will never bring back the life that was taken.

Respectfully snipped

Thanks dark horse and welcome to the group

:welcome4:

There is much to chew over and digest in your post, and your thoughts are much appreciated.

Please know for sure dark horse, that while from time to time members of this group (myself in particular probably) may appear to have a twisted sense of humour, for example about the names of some witnesses, or used in mocking ourselves (as in my comment re myself not being Miss Marple) we all thoroughly appreciate that the victim (s) are people whose lives have been destroyed by violent crime.

As I said in a very early post of mine "there is nothing remotely humorous about the murder of Corryn Rayney".

:candle: :maddening:

JMO MOO

 

[mouse detective]

Dark Horse - you have made some very interesting comments that will certainly ignite some discussion - so thank you for that. I will read through again in a little while as there are several things you mention which I found interesting. Right now however I have to nip out.

 

[Gemini Girl]

It concerns me that the trial Judge does not appear to think LR delaying opening his door to police, possibly for the purpose of hiding a recording device, is a serious issue?

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/pol...ney-evidence-cop/story-e6frg12c-1226440408689

If LR's recordings of Corryn's telephone conversations may have (at least in part) motivated him to commit her murder, how can recording devices and their possible secretion/removal be insignificant?

:waitasec: :dunno:

JMO MOO

 

[mouse detective]

Hello fellow people who care about victims of crime,

Hoping to add a piece or two to this ugly puzzle, for whatever it's worth. And to ask us all to please keep in the forefront of your minds the victims, a real family just like yours whose lives have been destroyed by violent crime.

Dark horse - I should have also said

:welcome:

So now you given everyone a challenge to work through your magnificent first post. Excuse those who snip into smaller quotes as that is sometimes preferable to reposting the whole post.

I must say your comments come across as someone who knows the legal processes quite well - have you worked in this arena in the past.

 

[Rational]

Hello fellow people who care about victims of crime,

Hoping to add a piece or two to this ugly puzzle, for whatever it's worth. And to ask us all to please keep in the forefront of your minds the victims, a real family just like yours whose lives have been destroyed by violent crime.

The papers refer to the accused as a former DPP prosecutor however it should be remembered that many of the criminal barristers work for the DPP before going into private practice. I think there are defense barristers out there whose ambition can override their moral and the justice system is a game they are out to win.
There can be no consideration for their client's victims and they can be desentitised to crime and its impact. Perhaps it's their 'coping mechanism so they can reconcile the fact that they are assisting criminals to escape culpability for their crimes.' JMHO as to why a criminal defense lawyer is not as unlikely a suspect as the papers make out.

The accused was permitted to work as a lawyer (for those unscrupulous enough to use someone facing murder charges). He was not allowed to represent clients in a trial by jury, but other than that he was permitted to work. Bail was granted in part so he could work in order to pay for his defense. His "bridge partner" for example is known to have referred work to him. There is a 2008 online article in the Australian called A Man in Limbo which I recommend. There are disparities in that article and the evidence given in court such as when a dinner occured (6 weeks in the winter or 6 months in the summer?) makes a big difference to a back injury! One of the lawyers interviewed said she had information about the deceased's recent movements. Very strange.

Someone made reference to the husband's body language when he was asked about his wife's relationship with the accused. It made me wonder who else's career or reputation was on the line when the deceased threatened to go public. This was a situation involving allegations of adultery, money concealing and gambling. Who else stood to profit from the silencing of the deceased? Was there an accomplice?

Back to the car, found near the bridge partner's vacant residence. Kershaw is not the first street off Hetesbury. A spade and star picket were found on Hetesbury. The murderer drove down Hetesbury past Townsend Rd (north and south). There was backtracking to Kershaw (from the gravesite, it's is in the opposite direction to the home of the accused.) Why Kershaw? Was this part of the original plan to dump the vehicle or was that an afterthought once the car was damaged? Was the idea to wash up in a vacant house? There would have been a lot of soil on whoever dug that grave.

Now going very far off base here. Perhaps an accomplice gave the murderer a ride home? Could the murder have occurred on Kershaw after someone arranged to meet the deceased there, perhaps with evidence of her husband's womanising? Was ayone's else's DNA on the hanky? Perhaps the accused wore the coat home after the murder? It would have been freezing if walking, and, as mentioned, the coat could have been needed to hide the dirt.I wonder if there are liquidamber trees near the car? So many questions that I hope the prosecution has answers to. There was talk in the news of a half-drunk cup of coffee on the kitchen counter. Was there coffee in her system? If she was drugged, would this have shown up in her autopsy? It wasn't until after her autopsy and funeral that the accused was declared a suspect. Time to destroy evidence.

None of this necessarily explains the scraped boots, the soil matching the seed pods to the residence, the name card, and the lies told to the hostile witnesses (I presume neither wanting a conviciton) about the car used. If the plan was to dispose of the boots in the river or similar this may have become difficult once the car broke down.
The theory is that either the accused or the deceased (she was in Melbourne but obviously was invited if there was a card for her too) took both placecards home. They may have landed up in her car for any number of reasons. For example, if they were in his suit jacket or pants pocket and handed to her when she got them from drycleaners.
Or if he used her car and found them in his pocket, then dumped them in the console. Perhaps whoever took them had some sentimental reason for doing so, like to show the deceased which celebrity head she had been allocated. Maybe the accused enjoyed that fact that he was "the queen" and she was someone inferior? Maybe he brought them home to show her what she had missed. Very hard to speculate what may go through the mind of a murderer. Remember, this was just over a week before the murder. The card may have blown out of the car at some point. Extremely odd that the deceased's card was found in her boot (was this her bootscooting boot or the boot of her car?). Her sister is on record saying she had loads of these boots. Perhaps the placecards were in that david jones bag in the boot of the car, the one they said could have been used to cover the body, and hers fell into her boot?

The deceased hated hankies. But was clearly willing to by them for her husband. Maybe the hankie was put there as a mark of derision? Is it a catholic practice to fold the arms of the deceased? Certain elements of this smack of non-randomness.

Gotta wonder what's on the computer the prosecution is trying to access. Maybe proof of the hidden money or the affair? This legal prof priveledge thing is dodgy. It's a delay tactic to block the police from accessing to evidence. The way I see it, if there's nothing to hide, why claim it? It's horrible to think of all the evidence that has been suppressed or excluded for technical reasons. It's bad enough to know evidence may have been destroyed, but knowing evidence has been excluded is worse IMO.

If there is an acquittal, my understanding is he gets to sue the government for defamaition and the proceeds of his entire career which he claims is irreparably damaged. So the government (tax payers) will not only have wasted millions in prosecuting him but more again in compensating him.

The trial judges have a better chance of getting it right than a jury IMHO which is why perps usually choose a jury, however the accused would have only chosen a judge because he would have struggled to find a jury without preconceived ideas about him.
His smugness has worked against him and IMO the public's perception of his guilt comes from this more than from the police naming his as a suspect. The accused said at the funeral, "to know her was to love her." Can you imagine sitting with that smug look on your face as the prosecution shows autopsy photos and pictures of the grave of the mother of your children who you claim to love?

IMO the biggest victims are the girls who were robbed of their mother, their childhood and (if the accused is guilty) may be about to learn that their own father perpetrated all this grief for them. It must be very hard for them to be called as prosecution witnesse (if that is indeed the intention).

Another thing to be aware of. The defense is always handed the prosecution case on a silver platter, months before a trial. Every thing a prosecution witness may say and every piece of evidence tendered by the prosecution was disclosed to the accused as part of the rights of the accused. On the other side, the prosecution has NO IDEA what the defense may have to say and may struggle to pre-empt this. And, while the prosecution has to prove everything they say (the onus of proof being on the accuser to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt), The defense can say whatever they like to cast doubt and are not required to prove it, the prosecutions can't even question the veracity of the defense without hard evidence to the contrary.

Food for thought. May justice be served, tho it will never bring back the life that was taken.

Great post and very worthwhile insights! Thank you and welcome.

 

[Gemini Girl]

Dark horse - I should have also said

:welcome:

So now you given everyone a challenge to work through your magnificent first post. Excuse those who snip into smaller quotes as that is sometimes preferable to reposting the whole post.

I must say your comments come across as someone who knows the legal processes quite well - have you worked in this arena in the past.

Which is why I said "respectfully snipped" - and I have the same question as mouse.

Have you worked in the legal arena Dark horse? Or perhaps you still do? Not trying to sleuth you.

:fence:

JMO MOO BBM

 

[mouse detective]

1] One of the lawyers interviewed said she had information about the deceased's recent movements. Very strange.

2]Back to the car, found near the bridge partner's vacant residence. Kershaw is not the first street off Hetesbury. A spade and star picket were found on Hetesbury.

3] There was talk in the news of a half-drunk cup of coffee on the kitchen counter. Was there coffee in her system?

4]The theory is that either the accused or the deceased (she was in Melbourne but obviously was invited if there was a card for her too) took both placecards home. They may have landed up in her car for any number of reasons. For example, if they were in his suit jacket or pants pocket and handed to her when she got them from drycleaners.

5] Extremely odd that the deceased's card was found in her boot (was this her bootscooting boot or the boot of her car?).

6] Gotta wonder what's on the computer the prosecution is trying to access. Maybe proof of the hidden money or the affair? This legal prof priveledge thing is dodgy. It's a delay tactic to block the police from accessing to evidence.

7] Another thing to be aware of. The defense is always handed the prosecution case on a silver platter, months before a trial. Every thing a prosecution witness may say and every piece of evidence tendered by the prosecution was disclosed to the accused as part of the rights of the accused. On the other side, the prosecution has NO IDEA what the defense may have to say and may struggle to pre-empt this. And, while the prosecution has to prove everything they say (the onus of proof being on the accuser to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt), The defense can say whatever they like to cast doubt and are not required to prove it, the prosecutions can't even question the veracity of the defense without hard evidence to the contrary.

Respectfully edited and segmented for ease of answering

1] I agree Darkhorse wonder what recent movements she is suggesting - CR's involvement with another man perhaps. Linda Black is yet to testify I think when she does, more information will be revealed.

2]It is the 2nd St but Townsend is a main thoroughfare rather than a side st - if trying to hide a car Kershaw would easier. Not seen any MSM reports of a spade being found in Heytesbury - do you have any links. Tonight I drove down Kershaw to check on the trees - I did not see any liquidambar trees on that street.

3] Excellent point about the coffee and if any was found in her stomach.:cheer:

4] Another possible explanation is that he put cards into his jacket and later they fell out of his pocket into the boot of her car. If which case he should not have lied to the police about which car he drove in to the dinner that night!!

5] Yes I am trying to understand why Corryn had a card if she wasn't at the dinner. According to the MSM it was in the car boot not her footwear.

6] Yes I am wondering if there maybe juicy private emails they were hoping to get their mitts on - surely by now they would have been deleted.

7] I agree - the Prosecution have to reveal all their cards and the defence can keep theirs hidden. You just hope someone with key information comes forward at the last minute.

 

[Dark horse]

First things first, thanks for your warm welcome

I know everyone here is respectful but I just wanted to mention the victims again because it's easy to get caught up in the sensationalised details and view the crime as entertainment...so much of TV viewing these days is crime fiction shows. I do know what it's like to have a crime committed against your family turned into a public spectacle so I'm sensitive about that. That should answer your questions about how I have come to know the workings of the criminal legal system. I hesitate to call it a justice system because of the way it is so heavily weighted in favour of the accused owing to the dictum about letting ten guilty men walk free rather than incarcerating one innocent one.

Deleting an email is no help to an accused. When the police search through computers I believe they can retrieve everything that has been deleted unless the whole computer has been totally scrambled by a professsional, so much so that one may as well drive over it with a steamroller. I assume the computer in question has not been steamrollered/scrambelled because if it had been there would be no point in the accused hanging onto it. The accused would be saying he doesn't want the police seeing his communications with his lawyers from that time because they are priveleged and so are his communications with his clients. The DPP could be saying they agree to exclude the legal emails from the search. But the accused can still say no and doesn't have to justify why. Frankly it's one of those areas of law that needs amending.

The article about the spade and star picket was in perthnow on 16 Jan 2010 and in the book Badlands.

Thanks for clarifying which boot. Let's imagine he picked them up from the airport in her car, and had brought the cards along to show the girls or teach them the game or whatever (it is a fun game). They wound up in the boot with the luggage and got left behind. Or wound up in that David Jones bag. His card blew out when he took her out of the boot (my recall may be faulty here but I thought he put her body in the boot) or took the shovel out of the boot at the burial site. OR if he scoped the site in advance and stashed the spade and picket there, he could have used her car to do that (she was away, remember) so as not to leave his own tyre tracks in the area. Perhaps the spade and picket were put in a bag and the cards were in there too but were overlooked. Or perhaps the spade or picket lifted one card out of the boot and the accused didn't see it in the dark. And one card fell into/stayed in the boot and the second landed on the ground where the car was parked or even under the car. I guess there are lots of plausible scenarios which could explain how the cards got to where they did but I personally can't think of one that does not indicate guilt, can you?

I guess my biggest question for everyone here is, can the public speculating like this help the case at all?

 

[Rational]

guess my question for everyone here is can the public speculating like this help the case at all?[/QUOTE]


I think that is a great question, and maybe by being on here you have partly answered it yourself. From my experience on this site it helps to find answers and invariably more questions, but what it does so well it allows us to share and discuss things that we may not able to discuss elsewhere with family, friends or acquaintances.

It gives us more knowledge of the processes and issues involved, and it s above all a victim friendly site. So in short it IMO it may not help the victim, but it allows us to probe deeper and understand more, and maybe in some small way prevent it from happening within our own circle, or at least become more aware of the danger signs of this type of violence, particularly against women. I think the legacy of women like Allison Baden-Clay and Corryn Rainey will be that a hell of a lot more people understand the insidious nature of violence against women, and ipso facto against their children and broader families and friends. Justice goes beyond the court room JIMO!

 

[Solaris]

...Solaris - Awesome theory! I think you should phone the police with your thoughts on this! I think it's totally within the realms of possibility that LR might have decided to use the night of the dinner, whilst Corynn and the girls were away in Melbourne to scope out a burial site in advance of the murder.

As you suggest, the place card may have dropped out of the car or out of his jacket pocket, inadvertently as he snooped around in the bush.

...

JMO
MOO

Hi YoureNicked

Thanks for the vote of confidence! :tyou:

I think, and I truly hope, that after working on this case for 5 years, the police have already generated and either supported or disproved this possibility about the place card.

 

[Solaris]

...There is a 2008 online article in the Australian called A Man in Limbo which I recommend. ...

Here is a link to the article mentioned by Dark horse.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/a-man-in-limbo/story-e6frg8h6-1111117843557