Australia - Warriena Wright, 26, dies in balcony fall, Surfers Paradise, Aug 2014 #8

[Freya1977]

Shortly after 4pm, however, court reconvened with four questions from jurors.
The jury has sought clarification on Tostee’s age when Warriena Wright, 26, plunged to her death from his 14th storey Gold Coast apartment balcony, and also an answer as to what the long metal object was that Tostee was carrying when he exited his apartment lift in the wake of Ms Wright’s death.
Most tellingly, however, the jury also sought clarification as to whether Ms Wright’s state of mind at the time she fell was important, and if her intoxication was something they had to consider as to whether her decision to climb over the balcony balustrade was unreasonable and irrational.
Their final question was to seek clarification of the terms “causation”, “unlawfulness” and “intent”.

http://www.news.com.au/national/que...SF&utm_source=News.com.au&utm_medium=Facebook

That object! They're paying attention

 

[SouthAussie]

That object! They're paying attention

Yes, they are. It is a very good sign that they are doing their job properly. :happydance:

 

[Strangeworld]

Brilliant SW and thank you for posting this to Warriena's thread with your thoughtful and insightful interpretations.I read GT's open letter online before posting over the weekend and today regarding his moral responsibility for Warriena's death and the trauma it caused so many others. As for his feelings of empathy for anyone else's suffering, I call bull**** or, to put it more politely, meh.

Awwww thanks Bohemian! It's fascinating when you really pull apart his words. So many things that just don't convey a true awareness and empathy for Warriena and other people impacted by her death. He is very self-centred - but attempts to 'act' like someone who is not.

 

[Emmbles]

I let out a 'yes' when I saw they asked that question! Why didn't the Crown mention it?

Another question, if he gets off can he sue for damages from the state/crown whoever?

 

[Elde Fruit]

To be perfectly honest I don't know if the footage was admitted into evidence, but if it wasn't then I'd say the likely source is probably this very forum.

If that CCTV was not part of the evidence at the Trial, and if one of the four questions the Jury asked was....'What was in his hand in the CCTV,' then the Judge has a serious dilemma. If it was not part of the evidence, then he immediately knows the Jury has been investigating outside the Trial. He has no option but to discharge them and declare a mis-Trial. But, it is far more likely that the CCTV, which included that part where he had something in his hand, was shown to the Jury as part of the Trial, and left completely unexplained by the Crown.

 

[Ausgirl]

Most tellingly, however, the jury also sought clarification as to whether Ms Wright’s state of mind at the time she fell was important, and if her intoxication was something they had to consider as to whether her decision to climb over the balcony balustrade was unreasonable and irrational.
Their final question was to seek clarification of the terms “causation”, “unlawfulness” and “intent”.

http://www.news.com.au/national/que...SF&utm_source=News.com.au&utm_medium=Facebook

Dunno what's 'most telling' there? Considering they could hear him encouraging her to drink, several times ?

 

[Makara]

Shortly after 4pm, however, court reconvened with four questions from jurors.
The jury has sought clarification on Tostee’s age when Warriena Wright, 26, plunged to her death from his 14th storey Gold Coast apartment balcony, and also an answer as to what the long metal object was that Tostee was carrying when he exited his apartment lift in the wake of Ms Wright’s death.
Most tellingly, however, the jury also sought clarification as to whether Ms Wright’s state of mind at the time she fell was important, and if her intoxication was something they had to consider as to whether her decision to climb over the balcony balustrade was unreasonable and irrational.
Their final question was to seek clarification of the terms “causation”, “unlawfulness” and “intent”.

http://www.news.com.au/national/que...SF&utm_source=News.com.au&utm_medium=Facebook

Thanks Amee.

To summarise the jury's questions;

The jury has sought clarification on Tostee’s age at the time of Warriena's death.

What the long metal object was that Tostee was carrying when he exited his apartment lift.

Sought clarification as to whether Ms. Wright’s state of mind at the time she fell was important.

If her intoxication was something they had to consider as to whether her decision to climb over the balcony balustrade was unreasonable and irrational.

Their final question was to seek clarification of the terms “causation”, “unlawfulness” and “intent”.

---

I'm getting a feeling as to which way the jury is leaning.

 

[JCB]

BBM: Are you serious? When the judge had already instructed the jury to ignore MSM and SM. So do you think there are jury members reading here? :floorlaugh:

Well they've already disregarded Justice's Byrne's directions at least once...

Well, I hope the judge gives them some latitude. All they are trying to do is work out if Tostee could have had a weapon, that he then took with him and disposed of.
Seems to me that they have the right to ask that. Because the defence raised it. It will be in the court transcript.

Generally courts are mindful of the fact that the jury is inexperienced in matters of law so latitude is granted but I can assure you that they will get a dressing down tomorrow and told in no uncertain terms not to make the same mistake twice!

 

[JCB]

I let out a 'yes' when I saw they asked that question! Why didn't the Crown mention it?

Another question, if he gets off can he sue for damages from the state/crown whoever?

In theory, but it's unlikely. He would have to prove that he was the victim of what they call a "malicious prosecution".

 

[Fluffykins]

Agree 100%, I'm on record as saying although I don't think the indictment should have proceeded in the first place, it was an average performance at best from the Crown. Their most important witness (Dr Little) may as well have been a witness for the defence. It makes you wonder the reason for the delay in getting Dr Little to the stand in the first place.

Yes, I recall you saying it should never have proceeded and I agree. Where were all the experts? Why were the jury left trying to make sense of an audio tape with all sorts of unexplained sounds, and very little other evidence to go on?

Warriena and her family deserve better than that. The Australian law system should deliver better than that.

 

[Makara]

Kate Kyriacou ‏@KateKyriacou Oct 11

He is the basement now. An outside camera captures him leaving and heading into Lionel Perry Park, adjacent. It's 2.31am. #tostee
0 replies 1 retweet 2 likes
Kate Kyriacou ‏@KateKyriacou Oct 11

He seems to be pacing around downstairs. Heads back to the lift. Looking around, pressing the button again and again. #Tostee's
0 replies 1 retweet 2 likes
Kate Kyriacou ‏@KateKyriacou Oct 11

The lift opens and #tostee emerges. He peers around the corner. Wearing a long sleeved shirt now.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Kate Kyriacou ‏@KateKyriacou Oct 11

Now we will skip ahead to 2.23am. This is after Warriena has fallen from Tostee's 14th floor balcony.

Seems it was.

Thanks Soso. I remember the tweets about CCTV showing Tostee leaving the lift but they didn't include anything about him having something in his hand. It wasn't clear as to what footage the court was shown.

 

[SouthAussie]

Well they've already disregarded Justice's Byrne's directions at least once...



Generally courts are mindful of the fact that the jury is inexperienced in matters of law so latitude is granted but I can assure you that they will get a dressing down tomorrow and told in no uncertain terms not to make the same mistake twice!

So, you are saying that they sat through that entire trial ... they listened to the recording ... they studied all the CCTV that was presented ... and they cannot consider any of that because the judge said they can't? Well, why did the judge just not tell the Crown and defence that all they could talk about was the crucial 6 minutes prior to Warriena's fall then, and they had to leave everything else out?

Why can't the jury consider ALL the evidence put before them?

If Tostee was walking around with a mammoth blood stain all over the front of his shirt in the CCTV, and the Crown did not follow it up, they would not be able to ask about that?

BTW: These are serious questions. I don't get it.

 

[possumheart]

Think of Warriena as someone's daughter, someone's sister, someone's cousin, and someone's future aunt—and pray in your own way that the jurors have not dehumanised her the same way that the Justice System has. I have faith in the jurors tonight.

 

[Makara]

Well they've already disregarded Justice's Byrne's directions at least once...

How so?

 

[Elde Fruit]

I wasn't aware of that. How do you know this? Justice Byrne has instructed the jury that anything Tostee did after Warriena's death is not relevant, so why show that particular CCTV footage in the first place?

I know it because if the Jury was not shown that video as part of the evidence at the Trial, there is only one other conclusion, which is not likely as you have already commented in an indirect way. They must have seen it as part of the evidence which the Judge has directed them they must be ignore as proof of anything other than...what is visible in the video. It takes us/the Jury nowhere in other words. It is an unexplained mystery and something they may not speculate about.

 

[sosocurious]

Well they've already disregarded Justice's Byrne's directions at least once...



Generally courts are mindful of the fact that the jury is inexperienced in matters of law so latitude is granted but I can assure you that they will get a dressing down tomorrow and told in no uncertain terms not to make the same mistake twice!

But didn't Judge only direct that Gabe's actions not be considered.
The cctv is evidence the prosecution submitted isn't it?

 

[matey]

Shortly after 4pm, however, court reconvened with four questions from jurors.The jury has sought clarification on Tostee’s age when Warriena Wright, 26, plunged to her death from his 14th storey Gold Coast apartment balcony, and also an answer as to what the long metal object was that Tostee was carrying when he exited his apartment lift in the wake of Ms Wright’s death.Most tellingly, however, the jury also sought clarification as to whether Ms Wright’s state of mind at the time she fell was important, and if her intoxication was something they had to consider as to whether her decision to climb over the balcony balustrade was unreasonable and irrational.Their final question was to seek clarification of the terms “causation”, “unlawfulness” and “intent”.http://www.news.com.au/national/que...SF&utm_source=News.com.au&utm_medium=Facebook

So cctv footage of GT leaving the building with the object in his hand was shown to the jury last week, as stated in this link.

 

[JCB]

So, you are saying that they sat through that entire trial ... they listened to the recording ... they studied all the CCTV that was presented ... and they cannot consider any of that because the judge said they can't? Well, why did the judge just not tell the Crown and defence that all they could talk about was the crucial 6 minutes prior to Warriena's fall then, and they had to leave everything else out?

Why can't the jury consider ALL the evidence put before them?

It's difficult to answer that without knowing the context of the legal argument this morning but for whatever reason, Justice Byrne saw it fit to exclude Gable's conduct after Warriena fell as being relevant. I can't give you the reason for that decision (or even if it was the subject of this morning discussions) but it's quite common for a jury to be told that evidence that they have previously seen or heard must not be considered. Prior evidence can be tainted by subsequent evidence etc.

 

[JCB]

How so?

By asking a question in relation to evidence that they were specifically told to exclude.

 

[Elde Fruit]

It wasn't clear as to what footage the court was shown.

'Sleuthing'.....and because I am aware of criminal justice procedures, the Jury was shown that CCTV footage with him carrying that object. If they were not......it is 'Good Night, mis-trial, Jury disharged,' and Tostee walks. It will then be for the Crown to decide if they want a re trial.