Australia - Khandalyce Pearce (Wynarka) and Karlie Pearce-Stevenson (Belanglo) #10

[JaneSA]

Says they are waiting for postmortem results

 

[purpleandgreen]

Wow! Sounds like they have LOTS of evidence. That's a good thing.

Just came across this Tweet from approx. 1 hour ago from Ava Benny Morrison, Crime Reporter at the Sydney Morning Herald (see https://twitter.com/avabmorrison). "Eight volumes of the brief served in the Daniel Holdom case. But that's only 30% of the entire brief of evidence. Adjourned to March". Grrrr. Was hoping they were going to nail him today

 

[JaneSA]

I think this is all very odd. The prosecution has 8 volumes of material yet the defence team has not yet been given everything.
It may be tempting to think this is just extreme incompetence, but I think not.
The bodies are buried. Any post mortem information is done.
There is some reason both sides are content to delay as long as they can and they must know Holdom is going to plead not guilty.

 

[JaneSA]

Wow! Sounds like they have LOTS of evidence. That's a good thing.

But clearly nothing compelling enough to convict him.

 

[sleepinoz]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-28/daniel-holdom-appears-in-court-via-video-link/7119774

Prosecutors told a Sydney court on Thursday that in addition to Khandalyce's post-mortem examination, a number of witness statements and forensic analysis of computer items, were still yet to be handed to the defence.

Wonder who the computer items belong to?

 

[sleepinoz]

But clearly nothing compelling enough to convict him.

If there was nothing to convict him they wouldn't be in court.

 

[Amee]

I think this is all very odd. The prosecution has 8 volumes of material yet the defence team has not yet been given everything.
It may be tempting to think this is just extreme incompetence, but I think not.
The bodies are buried. Any post mortem information is done.
There is some reason both sides are content to delay as long as they can and they must know Holdom is going to plead not guilty.

This is no different to a lot of other cases. Things take time and there is a long way to go yet.... :moo:
Have look at some other threads on here same ,same....

 

[purpleandgreen]

Perhaps they do. I certainly hope so, but the defence is blocking at this stage. Perhaps they are looking for other scapegoats, or the old 'diminished responsibility'.

But clearly nothing compelling enough to convict him.

 

[JaneSA]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-28/daniel-holdom-appears-in-court-via-video-link/7119774

Prosecutors told a Sydney court on Thursday that in addition to Khandalyce's post-mortem examination, a number of witness statements and forensic analysis of computer items, were still yet to be handed to the defence.

Wonder who the computer items belong to?

I think it is the various social media accounts they are interested in, not a specific computer.
I imagine they are looking at who was accessing Karlie's accounts, when and where, maintaining the impression she was still alive.
Also, the "missing" pages that were set up indicate who knew she was dead and who genuinely believed she was still alive.

 

[JaneSA]

Perhaps they do. I certainly hope so, but the defence is blocking at this stage. Perhaps they are looking for other scapegoats, or the old 'diminished responsibility'.

Not sure, but I don't think the defence are blocking. I believe they actually cannot proceed if they have not had all the evidence disclosed, and that is the prosecution's responsibility.
If the prosecution had all they needed to make a water-tight case, they would have presented it.

 

[JaneSA]

This is no different to a lot of other cases. Things take time and there is a long way to go yet.... :moo:
Have look at some other threads on here same ,same....

Of course. Especially when they know the defendent is going to plead not guilty.
Nothing unusual about it, but it shows us what is happening.
This was never going to be a simple case.

 

[Makara]

The hearing today was simply a mention. There will eventually be a committal hearing where all evidence will be presented and it will then be determined whether that evidence is enough to send the case to trial. IMO there is overwhelming evidence that this case will go to trial and DH will be convicted as charged.

 

[JaneSA]

If there was nothing to convict him they wouldn't be in court.

Hmm, I am not at a.l sure about that. Plenty of cases go to court and the accussed walks free after a trial and found not guilty.
The point is, if there was just one irrefutable piece of evidence that would convict him, they would have presented that to the defence by now.
They volumes of evidence and statements actually indicates a weak case, not a strong one.

 

[sleepinoz]

Hmm, I am not at a.l sure about that. Plenty of cases go to court and the accussed walks free after a trial and found not guilty.
The point is, if there was just one irrefutable piece of evidence that would convict him, they would have presented that to the defence by now.
They volumes of evidence and statements actually indicates a weak case, not a strong one.

It will probably be close to 12 months before they go to trial, there will be several Mentions for each charge and then there will be the committal and then if they go ahead there will be a trial or 2 trials depending if they separate the charges.

I wouldn't start making any judgements about what evidence they do have or do not have just yet, it's a long road.

 

[JaneSA]

"At the mention you can plead guilty, not guilty or ask for an adjournment to seek legal advice."
http://nswcourts.com.au/articles/what-are-the-different-stages-of-an-average-court-case/

 

[Amee]

Holdom was not required to appear in Sydney's Central Local Court on Thursday when his case was mentioned briefly.


His lawyers have only been served with about a third of the brief of evidence so far, the court heard, and a number of witness statements and Khandalyce's post-mortem report are still outstanding.
There are also a number of computer items that are expected to be forensically examined, the court heard.

Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/national/20...ter-murder-case-adjourned#tgMZ70HPeHWmUPh8.99

 

[Makara]

http://nswcourts.com.au/articles/what-are-the-different-stages-of-an-average-court-case/

If your case is very serious, it may need to be ‘committed’ (sent) to a higher court such as the District Court for sentencing.

If you plead not guilty at your mention, your case will normally be adjourned for another mention in 6 weeks to enable police to serve all of their statements and other evidence against you.
Once the materials are served, the case will proceed to a ‘Defended Local Court Hearing’.

If you plead ‘not guilty’ to a serious charge, it will ultimately reach a ‘committal hearing’.

 

[sleepinoz]

"At the mention you can plead guilty, not guilty or ask for an adjournment to seek legal advice."
http://nswcourts.com.au/articles/what-are-the-different-stages-of-an-average-court-case/

The heading for that article:

[h=1]What are the different stages of an average court case?[/h]
This is not your 'Average' court case.

Pleads at mentions do happen if you are being charged with a more minor crime, but not Murder.

I doubt you will find him pleading until his lawyers have all the information that they need, and with a case like this it will take a while.

 

[JaneSA]

Yep, thanks Sleep. I realise that.
Perhaps I didn't make that clear, sorry.

The critical point I am making is this - if Holdom was going to plead guilty, he would have.
He is not going to plead guilty.

He may or may not actually be guilty; I have a completely open mind about that.
But if he definitely IS guilty then his legal representative would have advised him to plead guilty by this point.

Anyway, we won't hear any more now for a very long time.

 

[purpleandgreen]

I agree that he won't plead guilty either, but I think he is guilty, or at least involved in some way, possibly with others. However, I doubt that he'd plead guilty even if his solicitor advised him to. Just my opinion, but what would he have to gain from pleading guilty, unless it was getting his sentence reduced.

The critical point I am making is this - if Holdom was going to plead guilty, he would have.
He is not going to plead guilty.

He may or may not actually be guilty; I have a completely open mind about that.
But if he definitely IS guilty then his legal representative would have advised him to plead guilty by this point.

Anyway, we won't hear any more now for a very long time.