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

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is 7 minutes after we last see him. He has rolled his sleeves up now too.

Oh man I'm half asleep, I only just realised the real-time at the bottom right. Too busy staring at gt.

So in the dark area there's around 30 seconds of footage missing. 20 odd minutes missing from the time he left the carpark of the apartment building to when he's crossing ferny.
Cavill Ave was actually before Circle on Cavill. Orchid was after those. There's two minutes of him eating missing. Which is odd considering they kept the part in where he was standing in line for pizza for a million years.
 
TOSTEE BARRISTER A SAUL-ID PERFORMER

ACCUSED Gold Coast balcony killer Gable Tostee’s barrister Saul Holt QC is as impressive a legal eagle as your Glitter Strip Bare correspondents have seen in many years covering courts.


Gable Tostee's lawyer QC Saul Holt at the Brisbane Supreme Court. Picture: Jodie Richter
Even those in the court of public opinion who want to see Tostee behind bars could not help but admire his eloquent and quick-witted closing address in Tostee’s murder trial in Brisbane Supreme Court last week.

Tostee is the latest high-profile client for the New Zealand-born, former Victorian Legal Aid chief counsel who joined the Queensland Bar in 2014.

Now based in Brisbane, he has also acted for the likes of conman Peter Foster, former Gold Coast Titan Beau Falloon, accused terror financier Omar Succarieh and the Hells Angels bikie at the centre of the Jarryd Hayne Snapchat video controversy, Chris Bloomfield.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...e/news-story/e3f315b478fddfae8f79e80f4ee7e124

If Tostee is found not guilty, I will give all the credit to his Defence Barrister.
 
Much appreciated BasTyra, thank you.

I've been watching one of the videos of his wanderings...
These timestamps aren't awesome, you have to go frame by frame.
http://www.news.com.au/national/que...h/news-story/53101462c25da0922d6c62ca29eda7e8

0.05 – elevator doors open. Doesn't appear to be holding anything, but is fiddling with his pants uncomfortably.
0:10 – looks around shifty like. peers around corner to check if the coast is clear.
0:15 – begins removing something from pants.
0:20 – walks into dark area, turns around and comes back the way he came (what was he doing here, also what is this area? the lobby?)
0:26 – you can see the object in his left hand here as he leaves the dark area.
0:28 – you can see the object again as he rounds the corner back the way he came.
0:30 – again the object still in his left hand.
0:31 – gets keycard or whatever it is out of front shirt pocket and uses elevator.
0:47 – elevator on right stops on 1st floor and is going down. He moves to it. You can see the object again.
0:57 – steps out of elevator on ground floor, looks around. Object Is now in right hand.
0:58 – looks around again as he nears the bin. Object in right hand. As he rounds the corner he moves the object to his left hand.
1:03 – you can see the object in his left hand as he walks to the glass door exit in the carpark of the building.
1:07 – brings hand up to face and looks around. Object can be seen in left hand. Seems to ponder which way to go. Object can be seen as he exits.
1:13 – as he crosses ferny ave, he looks to be walking oddly. Odd crease in the back of shirt/pants as he walks.
1:24 – circle on cavill, fidgeting with back of pants a lot
1:30 – fidgeting with two hands (adjusting something?)
1:35 – cavill avenue, walking like someone who needs to poo. Still has right hand behind back. Right hand appears to be holding something in place as he crosses the road. Not walking “normally”
1:47 - still has hand on right butt cheek. Fidgets more right as he starts to go behind the tree.
1:50 - as he comes out from behind the tree he's really fidgeting like whatever is down there is annoying him. Swings hips slightly a couple of times as if adjusting whatever is down there, then exits camera shot still holding himself.
1:57 - orchid avenue seems to be walking more comfortably. Not fidgeting.
2:04 – fidgeting with front again. This could just be regular male adjusting. I feel like he's still walking a little strangely in the next shot.
2:46 – back on cavill and he's taken his wallet out and is ordering pizza.
3:22 – sits down on bench to eat his pizza. I wanted to watch this bit for fiddling but it skips.
3:27 – gets up, adjusts pants, walks to bin and throws something in. I assume his rubbish but I do wonder if the bins were checked along his route.
4:02 – seems to be walking in a much more relaxed fashion here. Adjusts his pants.

What is that dark area he went into and did he just go in there then leave straight away or was there missing footage? I wonder if this is all the CCTV footage.
Was the walk around the street just a way to dispose of the object? Maybe that's why he got pizza, he wanted a reason to throw something in the bin because of cc tv? But, then, if he was aware of cameras on the street he'd be aware of cameras throughout the apartment complex and wouldn't have removed it from his pants. Unless he was going to dispose of it in the dark area then realised he would be better off taking it away from the complex?

I really want to know what that object is and why he felt the need to hide it in his pants and leave with it.
 
In this news article, nothing is stated that her feet were pointing outwards and she turned around.

http://www.smh.com.au/queensland/ga...llers-balcony-20161010-grz159?deviceType=text

'Her legs were there first ... it wasn't a lowering or a gentle, cautious ... she wasn't hanging on, she wasn't facing that way ... she wasn't facing that way to hold on.'

The police then repositioned the female officer re-enacting Ms Wright's fall, so that her 'feet were pointing away from the building, her back was towards the building ... and she was a little bit lower'.

Ms Ellis agreed that the female officer was in the right position and said Ms Wright had been 'flush against the building'.

'I couldn't see her upper body at all and she was out like that and um her legs had reached that point. I couldn't see her upper body and that's why I turned and said "I don't know what she's doing" because I was trying to work out is she trying to lower herself that way?'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ss-saw-feet-dangling-above.html#ixzz4NMZErcEW
 
'Her legs were there first ... it wasn't a lowering or a gentle, cautious ... she wasn't hanging on, she wasn't facing that way ... she wasn't facing that way to hold on.'

The police then repositioned the female officer re-enacting Ms Wright's fall, so that her 'feet were pointing away from the building, her back was towards the building ... and she was a little bit lower'.

Ms Ellis agreed that the female officer was in the right position and said Ms Wright had been 'flush against the building'.

'I couldn't see her upper body at all and she was out like that and um her legs had reached that point. I couldn't see her upper body and that's why I turned and said "I don't know what she's doing" because I was trying to work out is she trying to lower herself that way?'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ss-saw-feet-dangling-above.html#ixzz4NMZErcEW
Why couldn't she just say, I saw her body, from the waist down, facing _____
Period. All her wordiness confuses the issue.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
Why couldn't she just say, I saw her body, from the waist down, facing _____
Period. All her wordiness confuses the issue.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

I agree with you. She was not concise so it was confusing..
 
Just a quick point, when they were arguing/end of tape I ASSUME they were facing each other....that would make it harder for her feet to be facing outwards.
 
Just a quick point, when they were arguing/end of tape I ASSUME they were facing each other....that would make it harder for her feet to be facing outwards.

I have always thought that Tostee would have been behind her when he choked her with his arm so if they were on the balcony, all Tostee had to do was lift her up from behind.
 
I have always thought that Tostee would have been behind her when he choked her with his arm so if they were on the balcony, all Tostee had to do was lift her up from behind.
Right. I can envision her one hand gripping his arm where he's got her in a hold, and her other free hand holding onto the balcony for dear life. It's just one scenario in my head. Jmo.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
The more I think about this case.....the more I am believing he hung her over the side......closed the door and she lost her grip.....
 
Unanimous jury verdicts have been a part of the common law
since the 14th century. Many jurisdictions have, however,
introduced majority verdicts to overcome problems with “rogue”
jurors, bribery and intimidation. Queensland continues to
require unanimous verdicts in criminal cases.

https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/d...ublications/ResearchBriefs/2006/RBR200604.pdf

Hi everybody. I've been following this trial since day one and also the whole sad affair since it began. So far I've read every post made to date on these threads. Some great discussion here and interesting points of view.

I just wanted to respond to the above comment that in 2008 the QLD govt brought in majority verdicts to account for rogue jurors as per the link below:

http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/Id/60247

Majority verdicts don't apply, however, in cases that attract a mandatory life sentence so I'm not sure if that applies to this case.
 
'Her legs were there first ... it wasn't a lowering or a gentle, cautious ... she wasn't hanging on, she wasn't facing that way ... she wasn't facing that way to hold on.'

The police then repositioned the female officer re-enacting Ms Wright's fall, so that her 'feet were pointing away from the building, her back was towards the building ... and she was a little bit lower'.

Ms Ellis agreed that the female officer was in the right position and said Ms Wright had been 'flush against the building'.

'I couldn't see her upper body at all and she was out like that and um her legs had reached that point. I couldn't see her upper body and that's why I turned and said "I don't know what she's doing" because I was trying to work out is she trying to lower herself that way?'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ss-saw-feet-dangling-above.html#ixzz4NMZErcEW
I wouldn't know what to make of this eye witnesses account if I was on the Jury. I think I'd have to ignore her testimony as it's too confusing, it's like she's not really sure what see saw that night. The other eye witness who testified to seeing Warriena's feet secured on the concrete ledge doesn't sound unsure of himself, his testimony was pretty straight forward, in my opinion.

I cannot for the life of me, find any evidence presented in the trial in regards to "a SINGLE hand print" (belonging to Warriena) on the balcony rail. Can someone please direct me to wherever it is? TIA
 
Hi everybody. I've been following this trial since day one and also the whole sad affair since it began. So far I've read every post made to date on these threads. Some great discussion here and interesting points of view.

I just wanted to respond to the above comment that in 2008 the QLD govt brought in majority verdicts to account for rogue jurors as per the link below:

http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/Id/60247

Thanks for telling us this. I just noticed my link was in 2006 so it was changed in 2008 and i did not know that .

Majority verdicts don't apply, however, in cases that attract a mandatory life sentence so I'm not sure if that applies to this case.

Mr Shine said the introduction of majority jury verdicts also brings Queensland into line with the majority of other Australian jurisdictions and may help reduce the number of hung juries in Queensland.

“A Judge will only be able to consider a majority verdict if a jury cannot reach a unanimous decision after a long deliberation - where one juror dissents after a deliberation of more than eight hours,” he said.

“If at that time, after the judge considers the deliberations of the jury to be genuinely locked, a majority verdict can be accepted by the court as long no more than one juror is in dissent.

“In the case of trials for the most serious criminal offences - which carry a mandatory life sentence - unanimous verdicts have been retained.
 
Had flashbacks of GBC trial reading through it.

https://www.google.com.au/url?q=htt...CBIwAw&usg=AFQjCNGbLT8Htm35GNB7m_IXdDowKr7rBw

Some good points - the choke-hold, suffocation by pressure on the chest or abdomen, smothering by obstruction of the mouth and nose (use of a pillow or even a large hand?).


This is very interesting particularly the part in bold -

Cerebral hypoxia and hypoperfusion — Several elements of strangulation
activity may result in cerebral hypoxia. These include breath holding, external
limitation of chest wall expansion, and compression of the carotid arteries.*
Compression of the carotid sinuses further reduces cerebral oxygenation through
reflex bradycardia and vasodilation.*
Acute severe hypoxia can cause loss of consciousness in 10 to 20 seconds,
permanent brain damage in three minutes, and death in four to five minutes.**

Hypoxia that is less severe can cause impaired judgment, drowsiness, dulled pain
sensation, excitement, disorientation, and headache.

My friends and I used to play a stupid, and upon adult reflection, extremely dangerous game when we were in primary school. We would intentionally hyperventilate for ten seconds and another friend would then constrict our breathing by squeezing our chests in a 'bear hug'. The aim was to make each other 'faint'.

I can't remember why that particular 'game' was in our schoolyard repetoire (along with much safer pursuits such as 'elastics') but as an adult, I can make sense of the physiological responses. They were akin to the symptoms outlined above and, no, the 'bear hug' didn't leave any physical 'marks'.
 
My friends and I used to play a stupid, and upon adult reflection, extremely dangerous game when we were in primary school. We would intentionally hyperventilate for ten seconds and another friend would constrict our breathing by squeezing our chests in a 'bear hug'. I can't remember why that particular 'game' was in our schoolyard repetoire (along with much safer pursuits such as 'elastics') but as an adult, I can make sense of the physiological response. They were akin to the symptoms outlined above and, no, the 'bear hug' didn't leave any physical mark.
We must have gone to the same school! Seriously, we did that too!
 
At some point, this information was deemed as very important to gather....and then, nothing? :thinking:

"The US administrators of Tinder are being pushed by Australian authorities to aid their search for more than 50 women from Australia and overseas who were allegedly contacted by Mr Tostee via the app.

Bail documents indicate that investigators are pursuing statements from the women and have requested data from both Mr Tostee and Ms Wright's Tinder accounts, reported The Australian.

Gold Coast Police Prosecutions legal division sergeant Michael Campbell labelled Mr Tostee's contact with 'persons over the dating site' as 'substantial'.

In an email to Mr Tostee's lawyers tendered as part of the bail proceedings, Sergeant Campbell said that 'Police conducted extensive inquiries in relation to the defendant's' actions on Tinder.

Sergeant Campbell noted that while the majority of witness statements for the case had already been collected, police were still chasing 50 outstanding statements from witnesses interstate and overseas."


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tier-started-binge-drinking-Schoolies-17.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
151
Guests online
1,659
Total visitors
1,810

Forum statistics

Threads
606,560
Messages
18,205,981
Members
233,886
Latest member
Askmetomorrow2
Back
Top