Australia - Warriena Wright, 26, dies in balcony fall, Surfers Paradise, Aug 2014 #9

[Mystique75]

The Jury deserve the long answer.

Maybe it's the reporting, but I'm yet to see the long version of any answer, to any of their questions.

 

[Makara]

The jury asked if 'language' is to be considered as force. So Tostee dropped a few F-bombs during his very threats to Warriena and called her a few unsavoury names. Remove that from his dialogue and you are still left with his verbal threats of throwing her off the balcony. He then tells her to get up and physically drags or carries her to the balcony. He used verbal threats of violence and carried through physically with those threats.

 

[Safeguard]

<modsnip> He was certainly obsessed with the idea of a fall from his balcony. I am tempted to believe that he's thought about that particular scenario a lot. I have no idea how that played out, but there is no doubt in my mind, this guy was a "Nightmare waiting to happen" for someone.

Now that I think about it, he reminds me of the lead character in the movie "American Psycho". Even his apartment looks like the one in that movie, Like a "prop" where he could stage his twisted (recorded!) fantasies.

Even if he didn't physically put her over that railing, ( and my gut hunch is he did.), He still locked a highly intoxicated person, in an area that any normal person would have known could result in a life threatening fall. Not buying, for one moment, that he was unable to call 911, or pick this tiny girl up and put her out the front door thus "neutralizing" this threat. Nope Ol Tostee wanted more drama...He wasn't done playing with his prey just yet.. jmo of course...

I really want to know what the mystery object was, that he smuggled out of that apartment, when he slithered out the back way, like the coward that he most definitely is.

 

[Elde Fruit]

But why can't Warriena have her belongings? I don't understand why it's okay for him to keep her things. If I had a belligerent guest in my home, I wouldn't even pretend to keep their property. It's just control and escalating an already volatile situation.

AFAIK, he didn't report the lady for theft, he used social media to condemn her. Tostee was furious someone stole from him, but it's okay for him to do it?

I guess I'll never know what I'd do in that situation. I have never had to confront it personally, but if I wanted someone out of my Home in a developing situation like as happened in his Unit that night, I might have just shown them the door and worried about property later. As it turned out, she calmed down, (did she say, 'It's all good' at that time?) and he did not do what he indicated. She stayed in the Unit, ultimately starts trashing it and him with rocks, and then when he restrains her to stop that, she unlawfully assaults him with that metal object. So, to the very adjacent balcony he removed her......how, using what force, we do not know. We know she did not want to be removed there, hence the repetitive 'No's," but....in truth, her conduct was bad immediately prior, and he took reasonable action to bring it to an end by neutralising her there. I think it is clear that the Jury have concluded it was reasonable he would have concluded she would then do what she did. If they had come to that conclusion, the Trial would have ended with a conviction yesterday or even earlier.

I'm looking forward to hearing the details of the current question.

 

[possumheart]

The jury asked if 'language' is to be considered as force. So Tostee dropped a few F-bombs during his very threats to Warriena and called her a few unsavoury names. Remove that from his dialogue and you are still left with his verbal threats of throwing her off the balcony. He then tells her to get up and physically drags or carries her to the balcony. He used verbal threats of violence and carried through physically with those threats.

They didn't say 'foul language', they might just have meant words and intonation.

 

[Makara]

Kate KyriacouVerified account &#8207;@KateKyriacou [video=twitter;788621033192484866]https://twitter.com/KateKyriacou/status/788621033192484866[/video]
This was Justice Byrne's longer answer to the jury's question: #tostee

 

[sosocurious]

The Jury deserve the long answer.

Fear and Intent

Criminal threats are made with the intention to place someone in fear of injury or death. However, it isn't necessary for a victim to actually experience fear or terror. Rather, it's the intention of the person making the threat that matters. The intent of a person who makes threats is usually determined by the circumstances surrounding the case.

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Criminal-Threats.htm#

I am so confused. What is the long answer?

 

[zedz]

Sharnie Kim &#8207;@sharniekim [video=twitter;788617429027057664]https://twitter.com/sharniekim/status/788617429027057664[/video]
Judge has told jury it should only concern itself with "physical force" #Tostee used in assessing reasonableness of response

If the jury believe WW had assaulted GT, then he used reasonable force in restraining her and locking her on the balcony, the nearest door to him at the time. His safety takes priority over hers.

 

[CleverKnot]

The Queensland Criminal Code explains is in greater detail:



BBM
IBM
UBM
[/INDENT]

"He said they must not judge Tostee’s actions on that fatal night if he had the benefit of safety and time to make decisions.

The court has heard the jury can only find Tostee guilty of murder if they are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt he had the intention to cause her grievous bodily harm, which the prosecution alleges happened when he choked her for up to 45 seconds.

A guilty verdict of manslaughter is also available to the jury if they find he unlawfully killed Wright but did not have the intention to cause her GBH."

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sour...ggwMAc&usg=AFQjCNGt0AlPsHokEDT3T9zYAhHIIlN5pQ

It doesn't appear assault was part of the charges.

Likely, because he didn't physically force her over the edge, they are in disagreement whether words are enough to be considered force. For them to be considering if it is even a legal possibility, it's a bit of a sign that someone is dug in, and has raised the point it's not even something they can consider, or someone is dug in and insisting words are force.

If they are down to analyzing the words, and trying to read her mind, the judge's instructions to this question will likely be what any verdict and appeal will be based on.

 

[alicat]

I guess I'll never know what I'd do in that situation. I have never had to confront it personally, but if I wanted someone out of my Home in a developing situation like as happened in his Unit that night, I might have just shown them the door and worried about property later. As it turned out, she calmed down, (did she say, 'It's all good' at that time?) and he did not do what he indicated. She stayed in the Unit, ultimately starts trashing it .

trash
tra&#643;/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: trashing
1.
NORTH AMERICANinformal
damage or destroy.
"my apartment's been totally trashed"
synonyms: wreck, ruin, damage, destroy; More
2.
NORTH AMERICANinformal
criticize severely.
"trade associations trashed the legislation as deficient"
synonyms: criticize, lambaste, censure, attack, insult, abuse, give a bad press to, condemn, flay, savage; More

No. There was no trashing!!

 

[possumheart]

Kate KyriacouVerified account &#8207;@KateKyriacou [video=twitter;788621033192484866]https://twitter.com/KateKyriacou/status/788621033192484866[/video]
This was Justice Byrne's longer answer to the jury's question: #tostee

That was pretty flowery! A 71 word sentence, yikes!

 

[SouthAussie]

The jury asked if 'language' is to be considered as force. So Tostee dropped a few F-bombs during his very threats to Warriena and called her a few unsavoury names. Remove that from his dialogue and you are still left with his verbal threats of throwing her off the balcony. He then tells her to get up and physically drags or carries her to the balcony. He used verbal threats of violence and carried through physically with those threats.

Yep. Warriena had absolutely no reason to believe she was safe out there ... not with the threats and the choking. I think the jurors realise how HUGE it was for her to decide to try and flee from a 14th floor balcony.

They probably need to just go back to the choking. Listen to it again. Listen to how long it goes on for. Listen to those terrified screams again. Those desperate pleas. And then think, if that was their daughter or sister or friend (or any guy they know ), would they have thought it was reasonable force then? Because Warriena was all of that to others.

 

[Mrs Bennett]

Physical force? Throwing decorative "rocks" is NOT physical force. Holding her down is.

 

[BasTyra]

I guess I'll never know what I'd do in that situation. I have never had to confront it personally, but if I wanted someone out of my Home in a developing situation like as happened in his Unit that night, I might have just shown them the door and worried about property later. As it turned out, she calmed down, (did she say, 'It's all good' at that time?) and he did not do what he indicated. She stayed in the Unit, ultimately starts trashing it and him with rocks, and then when he restrains her to stop that, she unlawfully assaults him with that metal object. So, to the very adjacent balcony he removed her......how, using what force, we do not know. We know she did not want to be removed there, hence the repetitive 'No's," but....in truth, her conduct was bad immediately prior, and he took reasonable action to bring it to an end by neutralising her there. I think it is clear that the Jury have concluded it was reasonable he would have concluded she would then do what she did. If they had come to that conclusion, the Trial would have ended with a conviction yesterday or even earlier.

I'm looking forward to hearing the details of the current question.

I actually took the "it's all good" comments from Warriena to be her trying to calm GT down.
She says it when they first start arguing after she says she needs to poo. She's obviously already being restrained at that point because she can't get to a toilet.
He tells her she's not his kind of girl and has to leave and she goes "ok, it's all good" twice as he repeats she has to leave. She's struggling to breathe. I got the vibe her words were more to stop him escalating because he was making it hard for her to breathe at this point.
She didn't stay and start trashing the apartment after that point, he was already restraining her. He's restraining her throughout this entire section. It's only after he totally cracks it that he tells her to get up and that's when she grabs whatever it is and swings it at him. Then he loses it and throws her on the balcony and refuses to let her go home cos she's been a bad girl.

 

[Elde Fruit]

CleverKnot posted:

If they are down to analyzing the words, and trying to read her mind, the judge's instructions to this question will likely be what any verdict and appeal will be based on.

I agree. The more out of left field questions they ask suggests, if there is a conviction, this is a Jury acting perversely, acting contrary to instructions, and on a fishing expedition of their own.

 

[zedz]

Physical force? Throwing decorative "rocks" is NOT physical force. Holding her down is.

You understand just because a woman is throwing the rocks doesn't mean he can't be injured. See my earlier post. Have 7 separate scars on my body from "harmless" women hitting and throwing things at me whilst working as a bouncer and event security. If she threw rocks at me or hit me or attacked me with a telescope without provocation I would put her down on the ground hard and take her to the nearest exit whether that's the front door or a balcony door. Forget her possessions and forget her well-being that comes a poor second. Then I would call the police, GT's biggest error.

 

[Strangeworld]

"He said they must not judge Tostee&#8217;s actions on that fatal night if he had the benefit of safety and time to make decisions.

The court has heard the jury can only find Tostee guilty of murder if they are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt he had the intention to cause her grievous bodily harm, which the prosecution alleges happened when he choked her for up to 45 seconds.

A guilty verdict of manslaughter is also available to the jury if they find he unlawfully killed Wright but did not have the intention to cause her GBH."

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sour...ggwMAc&usg=AFQjCNGt0AlPsHokEDT3T9zYAhHIIlN5pQ

It doesn't appear assault was part of the charges.

Likely, because he didn't physically force her over the edge, they are in disagreement whether words are enough to be considered force. For them to be considering if it is even a legal possibility, it's a bit of a sign that someone is dug in, and has raised the point it's not even something they can consider, or someone is dug in and insisting words are force.

If they are down to analyzing the words, and trying to read her mind, the judge's instructions to this question will likely be what any verdict and appeal will be based on.

 

[sosocurious]

"He said they must not judge Tostee&#8217;s actions on that fatal night if he had the benefit of safety and time to make decisions.

The court has heard the jury can only find Tostee guilty of murder if they are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt he had the intention to cause her grievous bodily harm, which the prosecution alleges happened when he choked her for up to 45 seconds.

A guilty verdict of manslaughter is also available to the jury if they find he unlawfully killed Wright but did not have the intention to cause her GBH."

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sour...ggwMAc&usg=AFQjCNGt0AlPsHokEDT3T9zYAhHIIlN5pQ

It doesn't appear assault was part of the charges.

Likely, because he didn't physically force her over the edge, they are in disagreement whether words are enough to be considered force. For them to be considering if it is even a legal possibility, it's a bit of a sign that someone is dug in, and has raised the point it's not even something they can consider, or someone is dug in and insisting words are force.

If they are down to analyzing the words, and trying to read her mind, the judge's instructions to this question will likely be what any verdict and appeal will be based on.

Grievous bodily harm is a very serious form of assault:
https://www.qld.gov.au/law/crime-and-police/types-of-crime/assault-sexual-assault-and-stalking/

 

[SouthAussie]

If the jury believe WW had assaulted GT, then he used reasonable force in restraining her and locking her on the balcony, the nearest door to him at the time. His safety takes priority over hers.

BBM: Of course it does. :no:

 

[insidecircle]

Strange direction that the Jury is taking this