Australia - Warriena Wright, 26, dies in balcony fall, Surfers Paradise, Aug 2014 #6

[Strangeworld]

(My bolds.) If he is acquitted, he is, and any social media site which has defamed him will be the target. The MSM have been appropriately guarded, as you'd expect. Social media are not exempt from the defamation Laws even sites which are 'victim friendly.'



So.....who can sue him civilly, for what, and on what basis? (Pssst......there is no-one who can.)

Your font size keeps changing at the end of some of your posts - you can click on the 'capital A' in the reply tab - should fix it a treat

 

[shultz]

can[/B] sue him civilly, for what, and on what basis? (Pssst......there is no-one who can.)

Actually a friend of mine said that the mother or other relatives might have a nervous shock case. It's complex.

 

[Elde Fruit]

Ask OJ

I assume you mean Simpson. Sorry, this is Queensland, not America.

 

[JCB]

And there it is. "The Defence will get an opportunity to give or call evidence." That is the normal situation. Given the context of the Jury being sent away because the Judge wanted to discuss matters with the Lawyers, it is indicative (to those who know the procedure) that I was wrong (over-read the position) as was the other Poster who seems very well versed in this.

I personally don't believe you can read anything into that report, it's basically a standard script. I don't think it foreshadows what may or may not have happened after the jury was sent home. It potentially could have even taken place in closed court, I don't know anyone that was present so can't say for certain. It's not standard practice but not unheard of when there is significant media interest.

One thing is certain, the Crown's case for murder completely collapsed when the examining pathologist ruled out choking or strangulation as being likely. The Crown has not adduced any evidence outside of the choking allegation that can satisfy the element of intent to cause GBH or death so (in my opinion) it's implausible to suggest that Justice Byrne will permit the murder allegation to continue any further.

 

[sosocurious]

Again, he took reasonable steps to effectively make a defense. it doesn't matter where he locked her (could have been a cupboard, could have been outside or anywhere) and it doesn't matter if she didn't like it (she clearly didn't).

All the jury needs to really ask is 'is locking someone outside a reasonable defence against stone throwing?

Takes you back to childhood when you'd just go inside when the bullies were throwing things at you.

Well I if was feeling so bullied and needed defence. I wish he would have locked in himself in the darn cupboard, outside or anywhere and phone the police. Then Rrie would still be alive.
Now, if he had any mistrust of the police. He could maybe have rung his solicitor or his even his father. Hey Dad, I have a bit of a situation I am being bullied by this tiny young woman and I have locked myself in a cupboard because she is throwing stones at me. ouch.
I don't know what to do. Can you come and get me.

Ms Collyer testified that prior to the fall, she could hear what sounded like a man and woman fighting in the apartment above.
She could hear Ms Wright’s voice as she pleaded with Tostee but could only hear his muffled replies.
It was the Crown’s contention that he had threatened and intimidated the 26-year-old to the point that she felt she had no other choice but to escape his apartment by climbing over the balcony to another floor.
http://www.news.com.au/national/que...rial/news-story/ac467348a93748afcff819ac5c645

All the jury needs to ask is just how intimidated and threatened would some need to feel to go to such measures to escape a self described *advertiser censored* star.
JMO

 

[nowvoyager]

I would not have read too much into the Judge's wish to talk to counsel after dismissing the jury today. That was a mighty short judicial day, and the second one really as yesterday the jury was also dismissed early due to unavailability of (presumably) the one prosecution witness who testified shortly today. He may well have been saying WTF with the witnesses/process? There is a lot of money and resources tied up in a case like this, not to mention the time of jury and other the distress for interested parties.

 

[Elde Fruit]

I personally don't believe you can read anything into that report, it's basically a standard script. I don't think it foreshadows what may or may not have happened after the jury was sent home. It potentially could have even taken place in closed court, I don't know anyone that was present so can't say for certain. It's not standard practice but not unheard of when there is significant media interest.

One thing is certain, the Crown's case for murder completely collapsed when the examining pathologist ruled out choking or strangulation as being likely. The Crown has not adduced any evidence outside of the choking allegation that can satisfy the element of intent to cause GBH or death so (in my opinion) it's implausible to suggest that Justice Byrne will permit the murder allegation to continue any further.

I agree, but I have taken the Reporter's comments absolutely at face value assuming they know what they are reporting as having observed this afternoon in the absence of the Jury, and what it means to those who understand usual practice as you clearly do..

 

[Freya1977]

I assume you mean Simpson. Sorry, this is Queensland, not America.

This is a crime forum. Of course I mean Simpson. And I am Australian, thank you.

 

[ninij9]

From about the 4:46 .... not a word from Rrie just labored, muffled breathing.
You don't understand do ya. You don't understand. You don't understand do ya......................................................
Then at 6;42 no,no,no,no,no,no

This is all on recording you know. It's all being recorded.

No I don't understand. I do hope GT explains all this on the stand.
imo

Hi, posting on this thread for first time. This is a horrifying case. Can I give my fresh HOO, on what I hear? I haven't been bogged down with all of the back and forth. And adding a disclaimer I know naught about Australian court law.

It sounds as though he is clearly choking, smothering, or otherwise restraining her in those approx 2 minutes before she begins to scream. I don't care what he is SAYING, his tone of voice suggests great control, no struggling with a psycho female. He is speaking for the benefit of his tape. When he complains about being hurt she meanwhile sounds as though she's struggling for breath. Many years ago I had a sick boyfriend that tried to choke me , all the while he was doing it he was softly speaking things like, "your crazy, why did you do that, what? Are you trying to say something" etc etc.

Also, at the end we cannot see what he is threatening her with to scare her so badly that all she can do is repeat "no" over and over. I close my eyes and see he scaring get with an object, fake gun, pipe, knife? To get her back up against balcony. All jmo.

Why are some taking his "words" on recording as Bible? He KNOWS he's being recorded. He reminds me of when my kids would fight. I'd hear my girl shouting "owe" from the other room, just to arrive and see SHE was bashing Him.!!!

Sorry to go on. Jmo, moo, ::cow::

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Freya1977]

Hi, posting on this thread for first time. This is a horrifying case. Can I give my fresh HOO, on what I hear? I haven't been bogged down with all of the back and forth. And adding a disclaimer I know naught about Australian court law.

It sounds as though he is clearly choking, smothering, or otherwise restraining her in those approx 2 minutes before she begins to scream. I don't care what he is SAYING, his tone of voice suggests great control, no struggling with a psycho female. He is speaking for the benefit of his tape. When he complains about being hurt she meanwhile sounds as though she's struggling for breath. Many years ago I had a sick boyfriend that tried to choke me , all the while he was doing it he was softly speaking things like, "your crazy, why did you do that, what? Are you trying to say something" etc etc.

Also, at the end we cannot see what he is threatening her with to scare her so badly that all she can do is repeat "no" over and over. I close my eyes and see he scaring get with an object, fake gun, pipe, knife? To get her back up against balcony. All jmo.

Why are some taking his "words" on recording as Bible? He KNOWS he's being recorded. He reminds me of when my kids would fight. I'd hear my girl shouting "owe" from the other room, just to arrive and see SHE was bashing Him.!!!

Sorry to go on. Jmo, moo, ::cow::

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

I couldn't agree with your post more!

 

[ninij9]

Well, I am here because I was invited to be here. I was unaware at the time that a site named 'Web Sleuths' was not really about criminology, criminal law, evidence and Trials. I hope to last long enough here to see out the end of this Trial, and then, maybe I'll take my leave graciously.

Cheers.

Honest question, does the criminal law off Australia allow the character assassination of the victim of the crime? I suppose if she had a prior history of climbing balconies, refusing to leave a dates home, and beating men they might? I haven't read that she had done anything other than make a badly fatal choice in a date that night, got herself too inebriated (I believe purposefully by him), and died a horrific death.

But I am from America, so again forgive my lack of knowledge of Australian court system. These are sincere questions. No snark intended or directed.
TIA

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[sweetcaro]

Reasonable is not forcing WW onto the balcony as he did, especially when you recall his words in the preceding minutes.

YOU'RE LUCKY I HAVEN'T TOSSED YOU OFF THE BALCONY.

She threw small rocks that could not possibly have caused serious harm. His reaction to her action was inappropriate ans IMO unreasonable. A more reasonable option would have been to ask her/assist her to leave his apartment. If she refused he could lock himself away and call the police. He could have left his apartment to seek assistance.

He didn't just take her hand gently and lead her to the balcony, sit her down and then lock her out there. He did so in a manner that was utterly terrifying to her, after he had just done something to restrict her breathing. Her screams and pleas tell us he used unreasonable force at this time.

Not reasonable.

Reasonable if leaving her on the balcony would have been to ask her to sit out there and chill for a few.

If you cannot listen to WW on that recording and understand how poor his response was, well, I just don't know...

For some of this case I have actually considered that he could be innocent. Maybe he overreacted, they were both drunk and he couldn't foresee her death.

All it's taken to convince me otherwise is poor Warienna's final minutes. Those few minutes say it all.

Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk

 

[JCB]

I would not have read too much into the Judge's wish to talk to counsel after dismissing the jury today. That was a mighty short judicial day, and the second one really as yesterday the jury was also dismissed early due to unavailability of (presumably) the one prosecution witness who testified shortly today. He may well have been saying WTF with the witnesses/process? There is a lot of money and resources tied up in a case like this, not to mention the time of jury and other the distress for interested parties.

I'm sure the prosecution team got a "please explain" from Justice Byrne but it's highly unusual for a jury to be sent home so early in proceedings (for that day) and before either the Crown or defence expressed a desire to approach the bench. Only my opinion again, but if Justice Byrne wanted to address the reasons for the delay it would have either happened at the close of proceedings yesterday or during a short adjournment today. To send a jury home with well over half the day remaining (and much of the previous day lost) before a request for approach was even made indicates to me that a matter of some complexity and importance was to be discussed.

 

[Fluffykins]

Never mind, please delete.

 

[Elde Fruit]

Reasonable if leaving her on the balcony would have been to ask her to sit out there and chill for a few.

I have a perfectly good and sufficient answer to that, but the convention here.............'victim friendly'................precludes me from providing it. Sorry.

 

[JCB]

Honest question, does the criminal law off Australia allow the character assassination of the victim of the crime? I suppose if she had a prior history of climbing balconies, refusing to leave a dates home, and beating men they might? I haven't read that she had done anything other than make a badly fatal choice in a date that night, got herself too inebriated (I believe purposefully by him), and died a horrific death.

But I am from America, so again forgive my lack of knowledge of Australian court system. These are sincere questions. No snark intended or directed.
TIA

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

In terms of civil litigation, a defamation suit cannot be brought against someone by the deceased (obviously) or anyone acting on their behalf. Essentially, it's not possible to defame the dead (although no doubt tasteless).

In criminal proceedings, any allegation raised in court must have a basis in fact. Neither party can make unfounded accusations and if they do, they are reprimanded and the jury is instructed to disregard the contentious evidence.

 

[Elde Fruit]

I'm sure the prosecution team got a "please explain" from Justice Byrne but it's highly unusual for a jury to be sent home so early in proceedings (for that day) and before either the Crown or defence expressed a desire to approach the bench. Only my opinion again, but if Justice Byrne wanted to address the reasons for the delay it would have either happened at the close of proceedings yesterday or during a short adjournment today. To send a jury home with well over half the day remaining (and much of the previous day lost) before a request for approach was even made indicates to me that a matter of some complexity and importance was to be discussed.

Sounds like someone who works professionally in the USA, but still, right on the point. Here, we do not 'approach the bench' to make a formal submission.

 

[JCB]

Sounds like someone who works professionally in the USA, but still, right on the point. Here, we do not 'approach the bench' to make a formal submission.

Not physically, no, but the term is used in an informal sense both by lawyers and laypeople here. It's just easier to type than "the defence made a request of His Honour for a brief adjournment to be called so that a point of law could be addressed".

Correct again. But, the accused is able to sue those who have defamed him, even on places like this.

Spot on.

 

[ninij9]

Has the audio portion of his conversation with his Dad been released? It struck me as super odd how many times he felt he had to tell Dad he didn't push or throw her.

Here we have this treasure trove recording and it seems like the prosecution is ignoring so much of it. He actually threatened to toss her over the balcony and then she actually winds up over the balcony.

Sorry to be stressing what is very old news to you all. I have been following so many stateside cases. I never knew there was a recording in this case.

I'm fascinated and horrified equally. He makes my skin crawl something awful.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[SouthAussie]

Correct again. But, the accused is able to sue those who have defamed him, even on places like this.

Which is one reason why the use of MSM links is so important. They are the source of the information. Other than the defendant's own words in other public places.