Cause of Death and Time of Death, Thread #2 (Warning: Contains Graphic Content!)

[WhyaDuck?]

Also, this one:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=119169"]Who will get Zahra's remains if AB goes to jail? - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[tlcya]

Oh I certainly hope so! But I think that will be a while off yet, as that would require AB being given back his passport for travel, and this would mean the case is sorted and AB exonerated of any wrong-doing. Unless Zahra's remains return with her grandmother that is. I realise Zahra was "living" in the States, but I really feel Australia was her "home". It would make no sense for her to be buried in the US, especially if: a) AB was jailed; or 2) AB returned to Australia in the future.

You should stop by and check out the remains threads WhyaDuck linked. It is generally hoped that she will be returned to her native land to be buried by her biological mum.

 

[Flakes]

I still think there's likely to be a battle over Zahra's remains. I personally believe she will be turned over to ED as AB had allegedly taken her illegally from Aus.

I would really need more information on the Australian-based Family Court's orders regarding Zahra, and the issuing of her Australian passport and VISA to the US before I would have any opinion on either of those points.

ED had, we are told in the media, surrendered "custody" of Zahra to AB when she was a baby, and while ED was suffering post-natal depression. Do we know if this was officially heard in the Family Court? Or were there private arrangements made through lawyers, or other arrangements made? I am not certain if this was done through legal means or not. The Family Court in Australia is the body with ultimate jurisdiction in this regard. I would welcome any confirmation of details on this.

I had a number of experiences in the Family Court around the late 1990s in the state of Victoria. From state-to-state I understand there are no differences in Family Law in Australia. At that time there was no such thing as "custody", instead they had a term "responsibility for day-to-day parenting". This did not give one parent complete power over the decision-making issues relating to the child, simply those relating to day-to-day care. Big issues such as "which school?" etc, had to be agreed upon by both parents. It is quite different to law in the USA, so you need to understand the word "custody" has no legal meaning in this case.

In Australia during that period, and until this day, there is little interest in the rights of the parents - the concern is for the children. The laws are driven by the view that a child has the right to know each of their parents. Parents have no rights to see their children ... it is the other way around! Irrespective of the circumstances, such as a parent being in jail, being an unsound parent, an abusive parent, etc, provision is still made for the child to know that parent - arrangements are made for such situations to have chaperones to accompany the children and ensure their safety at all times. This also occurs for interstate/overseas visits to parents.

If a person wishes to request access to their children, then all that's required is a visit to the Family Court. Legal Aid is available for those who do not have the money to pay for a private lawyer (it is means tested). Since the law upholds the right of the child to know their parents, such a case would support ED gaining access to her daughter. This is unless there was a previous order where she gave away all rights. Even in that case the court may reverse it if: 1) a psychologist's review with the child indicated that they want to know that other parent; or 2) on the basis of interest by the parent (which would be seen to benefit the child as it would get to know that parent).

Do we know if ED went to the Family Court of Australia requesting access to Zahra? If she failed to do so, then she did not take the logical, legal, appropriate and readily accessible action to rekindle the relationship. There are no obstacles if going through the Family Court. Australia's Freedom of Information Act ensures that people have access to information, so ED should have been able to locate Zahra at any time (unless there were Family Court Orders that prevented this!). The only other scenario is if the child is over 12 and refuses to continue the relationship with the parent, the Family Court will support this request ... but this is clearly irrelevant in the case of Zahra and ED.

With regards to the passport and VISA. You cannot leave Australia and gain entry to the USA without the correct and valid passport and VISA. These need to be arranged prior to leaving Australia. The passport can take months from application, to approval, and finally the supply (even if you pay the surcharge to gain priority passport release it can take weeks).

If a parent does not have the signature of the second biological parent/legal guardian on the application form for the child's passport, then it is necessary to fill in a second comprehensive form to explain the legal reason for the single parent's application. All signatures and witness signatures are investigated by the Passport office (witnesses are phoned to verify that they witnessed the second parent signing the form). It is REALLY strict.

I doubt Zahra would have already had a passport prior to her trip to the USA. Also children's passports are quite deliberately short duration. Is anyone aware if Zahra had any previous overseas holidays?

So, hopefully that explains: 1) why I'm not sure that ED would have any rights to Zahra's remains ... it's highly likely she would be returned to her grandmother's care for burial as this is the person who cared for her in Australia; and 2) I have serious doubts about there being anything illegal regarding her being taken from Australia to the USA.

 

[Flakes]

Oh ooops, WhyaDuck, my post was being written while you all posted those other comments with links. If you feel my post is better in the other thread, please feel free to move it. I think it is important for people to gain some understanding of Family Court and passport/visa regulations and procedures in Australia. I trust your judgement on where my post sits best!

 

[tlcya]

did you post your thoughts on this over on the remains thread(s) as well Flakes? you make a very well reasoned argument although I am sure it will find much disagreement as your stance is not the popular one in these parts.

I have but two question in response to your post but will take it over to one of the remains threads to post so I do not drag this thread off topic of COD/TOD

 

[Flakes]

did you post your thoughts on this over on the remains thread(s) as well Flakes? you make a very well reasoned argument although I am sure it will find much disagreement as your stance is not the popular one in these parts.

I have but one question in response to your post but will take it over to one of the remains threads to post so I do not drag this thread off topic of COD/TOD

mmm good idea tlcox. I will repost tomorrow (Thursday) as I'm about to head out to an Australia Day party I have only read the first link, will get to the second link tomorrow (and hinkymeter thread too). Thank you WhyaDuck for posting those! BTW, tlcox I'd not say my post should be taken as my opinions, it was not my intent ... more about conveying how Australian law and procedures are set up. My opinion is: I don't have enough facts. An informed opinion relies on knowledge of the Family Court orders and passport/visa applications. As I stated, I'm open to any further information on these. If AB broke laws taking Zahra out of the country then he'll face those on his return to Australia.

>Happy Australia Day Zahra :woohoo:<

Please note I will not post any further OT in this thread. Sorry to have posted on the legal tangent in the wrong thread.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Cause of death listed as "pending" on death certificate. Time of death, "unknown".

http://www2.hickoryrecord.com/news/...ath-certificate-offers-few-answers-ar-725128/

(I'm literally pulling my hair out!)

 

[WhyaDuck?]

Oh ooops, WhyaDuck, my post was being written while you all posted those other comments with links. If you feel my post is better in the other thread, please feel free to move it. I think it is important for people to gain some understanding of Family Court and passport/visa regulations and procedures in Australia. I trust your judgement on where my post sits best!

I copied it over to the "who will get Zahra's remains" thread, since that one hadn't been bumped, and I felt your post fit better with the title. It's pretty hard to figure out where to put someone else's post, really, so I hope I chose okay.

If people could keep on topic from now on, I'd appreciate it. :cheerful:

 

[dar107]

Just saw something interesting over on Jennifer Moxley's FB page. She said she talked to a man who said he sold EB and AB a dog on Sept. 25th, this appears credible to her, and that she personally believes the furniture store employees were mistaken about the day they saw Zahra.

I do not recall anything about them buying a dog in Sept., but IIRC they had 2 dogs and one was a puppy?

Comment about 10 hrs ago:

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000838103427

 

[Flakes]

Strange, I think maybe Jennifer has already removed that comment. I also am told that they had the Pitbull dog, Sabbath, and a second Pitbull which was a puppy.

 

[tlcya]

I don't see pitbulls as COD. I do see EB as the type of person to collect things that momentarily fascinate her and then throw them by the wayside and find them burdensome later on down the road. MOO!

 

[dar107]

Strange, I think maybe Jennifer has already removed that comment. I also am told that they had the Pitbull dog, Sabbath, and a second Pitbull which was a puppy.

Weird, I still see it on her page. Maybe you need to be on her friends list? someone asked her about an earlier comment regarding the furniture store sighting and that was her response.

I don't see pitbulls as COD. I do see EB as the type of person to collect things that momentarily fascinate her and then throw them by the wayside and find them burdensome later on down the road. MOO!

I don't either. I was just thinking this could relate to time of death if it is true they bought a dog that day then maybe that was not the day EB was at the store.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Just saw something interesting over on Jennifer Moxley's FB page. She said she talked to a man who said he sold EB and AB a dog on Sept. 25th, this appears credible to her, and that she personally believes the furniture store employees were mistaken about the day they saw Zahra.

I do not recall anything about them buying a dog in Sept., but IIRC they had 2 dogs and one was a puppy?

Comment about 10 hrs ago:

http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000838103427

BBM

I don't see how one event precludes the other. It's entirely possible EB and AB bought a dog on the 25th and EB/ZB visited the furniture store on the same day.

As for EB's statement that Zahra died on the 24th? I think that's a crock of you know what.

JMO

 

[dar107]

BBM

I don't see how one event precludes the other. It's entirely possible EB and AB bought a dog on the 25th and EB/ZB visited the furniture store on the same day.

As for EB's statement that Zahra died on the 24th? I think that's a crock of you know what.

JMO

IDK either. Just relaying the comment from her page. Not sure why she thinks it is impossible for EB to have been to both places, but I do know she has done some good reporting and investigating on Zahra's story, so I trust that she did indeed talk to the man about the dog purchase and has good reason to believe him.


BBM When do you think Zahra passed? Just curious as I am stuck on or before the 24th, due to the pings, and more.

 

[Reannan]

I actually do believe EB's statement about Zahra having died on Sept. 24, 2010. I think she sprinkles little bits of truth into the lies she tells. I have nothing to base that one except my gut feeling.

 

[dar107]

Jen Moxley commented again regarding the dog seller. She spoke with him, and based on where they bought the dog, who was there and how long they were there, it would be impossible for EB to have been at both places that day.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/profile.php?id=100000838103427

 

[Mountain_Kat]

IDK either. Just relaying the comment from her page. Not sure why she thinks it is impossible for EB to have been to both places, but I do know she has done some good reporting and investigating on Zahra's story, so I trust that she did indeed talk to the man about the dog purchase and has good reason to believe him.


BBM When do you think Zahra passed? Just curious as I am stuck on or before the 24th, due to the pings, and more.

I honestly don't know. My gut instinct is that Zahra died on the 25th or very shortly thereafter. And since I'm not at all convinced that she wasn't murdered, the cell phone pings tracking to disposal sites prior to there being a body, doesn't pose a problem for me.

JMO

 

[tlcya]

I am still completely undecided on TOD. I am confused by EB's putting forth to LE that it happened on the 24th. I am puzzled as to why she would name that as the day of death/disposal on a day when only her phone was pinging in those very disposal areas and yet her insistence that AB did the dismemberment and disposal.

I do not ascribe much intelligence to EB but do feel that she is "clever" in her own way. Her manipulations of men, the court systems, DCF systems, tells me she isn't an idiot. She does have some "street" smarts. Her assigning the 24th to TOD doesn't make sense when viewed from this light.

So. Either she really is that dumb as to claim AB was running around disposing of body parts when she knew full well only her phone would be evidenced as present. I know if I had participated in wrongdoings and was trying to shift all blame to my husband, that would not be information I would volunteer as the phone pings would tend to discredit me. I realize that AB is NOT his cel phone. However, from EB's perspective, if I were attempting to pursuade LE that things happened the way I say and by who I say, I would not tell them information that then leads them to believe I was the actual perpetrator while providing no linkable evidence that the person I am pointing to was indeed there.

or. Things happened in a way and on a day other than as described by EB.

I am still completely undecided as to which of these has ocurred here.

 

[Flakes]

The thing that sits in my mind is &#8211; if the puppy was purchased by both AB and EB on the 25th then SURELY AB would have spent time with Zahra that day with the new puppy. New pups are a HUGE joy for a family and a time to celebrate. No teen angst or hormonal broodiness would have stopped a high-spirited child like Zahra from participating in the fun. If the puppy purchase date is correct then I'm suspicious about the TOD being 24th. Unless EB had spun some great story to AB about Zahra spending time at a friend's house or something to take away the suspicion (would not be surprising).

I suspect the LE have a far clearer timeline and evidence than we have to go on, in this regard. For instance, a new puppy &#8211; wouldn't you take photos? Is Zahra in any of these? LE would know this as they confiscated a camera and film, etc.

I have some thoughts on the continuing speculation about AB's phone pings and GPS locations. LE hasn't told us what AB's phone indicated, nor have we been told what days he worked or if he was in town or out of town for business. But I suspect they know. It's really just guesswork on our behalf. I honestly think if his pings and lack of confirmed whereabouts from third party witnesses provided him with a window of opportunity to be anywhere near to the sites for the alleged disposal of body parts, then I think he would have been arrested by now. I'm just trying to view this logically, and with a firm faith in the LEs strategy.

It's a frustrating waiting game!

 

[Capri]

Still hoping here for a definite COD in the final report. Possibly Chapel Hill is working hard toward that, and thus no additional report filed yet. I hope so anyway.