GBC Trial General Discussion Thread #3

[Deleted member 102539]

I questioned Kate Kyriacou (Courier mail reporter/best tweeter for the trial) about the hair last Wednesday evening. I explained why it crucially dated the time the blood dripped in the car.

She replied (surprisingly promptly, what a lovely lady!) saying she thinks perhaps the hair was not DNA-matched and she vaguely recalled Amanda Reeves (forensics expert) mentioning how difficult it was to get DNA from hair (although no tweets with #badenclay record such testimony from anyone). I replied with the link to her (with others) article stating that it was:
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...his-wife-allison/story-fnihsrf2-1226948779375

Attributed to Todd Fuller in his opening address:

"He said a hair attached to the blood stain was later confirmed with DNA as belonging to Ms Baden-Clay."

She said she would check if they have reported incorrectly. As of now the article still states the hair DNA did match and I never heard back - so no idea what happened there.

This article about hair DNA testing is very interesting:

http://www.forensicmag.com/articles...na-testing-and-forensic-analysis-hair-samples

Especially this bit:
"Peroxides, one of the main constituent chemicals in hair dyes, heavily contribute to the degradation of DNA in hair. Peroxides act by specifically breaking the phosphodiester bonds in DNA. Once the hair is exposed to water on washing, the DNA is easily washed out of the hair fibers. The higher the number of washes, the more DNA is lost from the hairs. This loss of DNA is not only due to the degradation and breaking down of the phosphodiester bonds in DNA but also to the damage caused to the hair by simply washing it."

So the one thing (bleaching) that could have dated the blood in the car (hence making the case a slam-dunk) also probably destroyed the DNA to prove it (if the CM article is wrong). Ironic and very devastating to the case.

Even so, IMHO the prosecution has not emphasised the hair (and the blood) enough. We would still have evidence of very very recent bleaching. The bleaching can be confirmed by microscope – it creates significant changes to the surface and thickness of the hair - and they would have other hair of Allison's to compare with - from her (I hate typing this) corpse. Prosecution could have brought in a forensics person to compare the hair with her known hair on parameters other than DNA (IDK, structure, appearance, colour shade shown to be the exact same with a colour spectrometer etc).

They've had 2 years to send a bit of the hair to America or wherever the extra clever science people are for super-dooper advanced DNA testing. They might have been able to make a mitochondrial DNA match and then exclude Allison's brother and sister by visuals. They might have been able to chemically match product (hairspray or serum) used by the hairdresser. They could have brought in a blood spatter expert (like Australia's answer to Dexter perhaps) to talk more about the blood pattern and what scenarios it did and did not indicate.

All 'what ifs' that we may find out if they really tried hard on this after the trial, or never. :banghead:

Have I got it wrong? Allison wasn't able to wash her hair after the hairdresser, therefore DNA not fully destroyed. Comparison with hair out of her hairbrush possible?

 

[Mumma Bear]

Have I got it wrong? Allison wasn't able to wash her hair after the hairdresser, therefore DNA not fully destroyed. Comparison with hair out of her hairbrush possible?

The hairdresser would have washed the hair after the bleaching, thus rinsing out the DNA (which may have already been depleted by the red and brown dye jobs in quick succession in the previous weeks).

 

[Mumma Bear]

To be devils advocate, even if you proved that hair was hers and had just been coloured, she could have shed it in the car on the way home from the hairdresser.

Then even if the blood came from her body in the boot, when the boot was shut a gust of air moved through the car and the hair shed on the way home blew there.

It may not have been shed at the same time as the bleeding is my point.

To be devils advocate again, when you arrange that extra row of seats in the back, is there anything you could possibly catch your finger on and rip the nail slightly leading to a little flow of blood down the side? Then shut the boot and the hair blows there and sticks.

Not saying this happened, just one reason I am concerned that not enough forensics tie back to GBC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But it still dates the blood being fresh that night (after the hairdressing), which is damming enough - doesn't have to be at exactly the same moment. With the bolded bit, this is why prosecution needed a blood spatter expert on the stand - all we have is that it's a transfer pattern.

 

[AAAA]

Even it it was flying around the car (e.g. from when Allison drove home from the hairdresser that night) and then stuck in the blood, it still dates the blood to that night as it would not stick into dry blood.

Yep, sounds good to me. I know everyone says, here and in the real world, that the crown is just letting him hang his own noose, but I still wish more info was given at trial. I was talking with locals last night and even though we would never have been accepted on the jury, we still would've expected more detail. Personally I still think he will get off though, dammit.

 

[Cattail]

Yep, sounds good to me. I know everyone says, here and in the real world, that the crown is just letting him hang his own noose, but I still wish more info was given at trial. I was talking with locals last night and even though we would never have been accepted on the jury, we still would've expected more detail. Personally I still think he will get off though, dammit.

Yes it could come down to the people on the jury and whether they are prepared to go with gut feel or they want forensic proof.

It's a heavy responsibility to be on a jury.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Inspector]

To be devils advocate, even if you proved that hair was hers and had just been coloured, she could have shed it in the car on the way home from the hairdresser.

Then even if the blood came from her body in the boot, when the boot was shut a gust of air moved through the car and the hair shed on the way home blew there.

It may not have been shed at the same time as the bleeding is my point.

To be devils advocate again, when you arrange that extra row of seats in the back, is there anything you could possibly catch your finger on and rip the nail slightly leading to a little flow of blood down the side? Then shut the boot and the hair blows there and sticks.

Not saying this happened, just one reason I am concerned that not enough forensics tie back to GBC.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great logic Cattail. I'm just stuck on the likelihood of this scenario occurring on the eve someone goes missing, later found dead. Husband is scratched markedly on his face, alerts authorities STAT that his wife is late back from her walk, all the other guff about affairs/financial strain/conferences yada yada...then insurance claims accelerated before the body is formally identified, no plea to the public to find the animal that did this? In stark contrast, the case of Jill Meagher is so tragic and so upsetting, but Tom phoned everyone. He started a Facebook campaign to find Jill. Dear Tom was an open book. Dear Allison had 3 loving girls who depended upon her. My heart breaks to think she and they were robbed of cuddling and being sung to sleep. No amount of money or affair could ever justify this. I hope if GBC murdered their mother, that this is brought to justice this week. Nothing can bring Allison back, but I hope those 3 girls only ever feel loved and safe in their drastically changed world. It's really too much sadness to comprehend ::

 

[McCoy]

I was wondering the same thing - did he have a position with the local Show Society/Committee? If so he might have a key, especially as he lived so close by, just so someone could get in quickly in case of emergencies.

Sorry I am catching up and still behind in this thread. I'm hoping someone can clarify something for me, regarding GBC not sharing a bed with Allison. I think I read that they hadn't shared a bed for many years, but was this back in the past (you know, when he was doing everything around the house), or right up until Allison went missing? I am thinking it is something his defense stated during his long winded opening, and that he meant it was ongoing.
The reason I'm asking is that in the tape of his police interview, GBC says he got out of bed that morning (when Allison was missing) and pulled up his side of the doona, and noticed that Allison's side had already been made too. So is that another piece of conflicting info, or do I have the wrong end of the stick entirely?

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/gerard-badenclay-trial-live-coverage-day-10-week-3-20140625-3aqx5.html

Apologies if this has already been discussed repeatedly, or if I am just plain wrong!

No he was not on the committee and definitely didn't have a key

 

[AAAA]

To be devils advocate, even if you proved that hair was hers and had just been coloured, she could have shed it in the car on the way home from the hairdresser.

Then even if the blood came from her body in the boot, when the boot was shut a gust of air moved through the car and the hair shed on the way home blew there.

It may not have been shed at the same time as the bleeding is my point.

To be devils advocate again, when you arrange that extra row of seats in the back, is there anything you could possibly catch your finger on and rip the nail slightly leading to a little flow of blood down the side? Then shut the boot and the hair blows there and sticks.

Not saying this happened, just one reason I am concerned that not enough forensics tie back to GBC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree re the hair, but I've never had a ripped fingernail bleed enough to leave "rivulets" anywhere. Another thought, wouldn't the boxes of toys etc have slipped, slides, even moved ever so slightly in a car that has been driven? I know my grocery boxes do. Given the car was supposedly used to go to the hairdressers, they were very neatly placed. I love that your comments make me think out of the box. Keep them coming.

 

[Cattail]

Great logic Cattail. I'm just stuck on the likelihood of this scenario occurring on the eve someone goes missing, later found dead. Husband is scratched markedly on his face, alerts authorities STAT that his wife is late back from her walk, all the other guff about affairs/financial strain/conferences yada yada...then insurance claims accelerated before the body is formally identified, no plea to the public to find the animal that did this? In stark contrast, the case of Jill Meagher is so tragic and so upsetting, but Tom phoned everyone. He started a Facebook campaign to find Jill. Dear Tom was an open book. Dear Allison had 3 loving girls who depended upon her. My heart breaks to think she and they were robbed of cuddling and being sung to sleep. No amount of money or affair could ever justify this. I hope if GBC murdered their mother, that this is brought to justice this week. Nothing can bring Allison back, but I hope those 3 girls only ever feel loved and safe in their drastically changed world. It's really too much sadness to comprehend ::

It is extremely sad. And I feel that as bad as losing their mother is, it will be even harder as they mature to reach a more in depth understanding of the reasons why she was taken from them.

I hope I am worrying needlessly about a weak prosecution case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[possumheart]

Dear Tom was an open book. Dear Allison had 3 loving girls who depended upon her. My heart breaks to think she and they were robbed of cuddling and being sung to sleep. No amount of money or affair could ever justify this. I hope if GBC murdered their mother, that this is brought to justice this week. Nothing can bring Allison back, but I hope those 3 girls only ever feel loved and safe in their drastically changed world. It's really too much sadness to comprehend ::

Oh, you are a lovely sensitive soul.
:heartbeat:​

 

[AAAA]

Great logic Cattail. I'm just stuck on the likelihood of this scenario occurring on the eve someone goes missing, later found dead. Husband is scratched markedly on his face, alerts authorities STAT that his wife is late back from her walk, all the other guff about affairs/financial strain/conferences yada yada...then insurance claims accelerated before the body is formally identified, no plea to the public to find the animal that did this? In stark contrast, the case of Jill Meagher is so tragic and so upsetting, but Tom phoned everyone. He started a Facebook campaign to find Jill. Dear Tom was an open book. Dear Allison had 3 loving girls who depended upon her. My heart breaks to think she and they were robbed of cuddling and being sung to sleep. No amount of money or affair could ever justify this. I hope if GBC murdered their mother, that this is brought to justice this week. Nothing can bring Allison back, but I hope those 3 girls only ever feel loved and safe in their drastically changed world. It's really too much sadness to comprehend ::

And I hope that the girls never ever read testimony. I think it's deplorable whether innocent or guilty to put on record that Allison really wanted a boy. How would the youngest feel if she ever reads that, regardless of the result. A shameful defence tactic on the part of a father in my opinion.

 

[AAAA]

No he was not on the committee and definitely didn't have a key

Correct. Chamber of Commerce but not Brookfoeld Showgrounds as far as I know.

 

[Inspector]

Oh, you are a lovely sensitive soul.
:heartbeat:​

Thank you so much! That means a lot to me coming from you!

 

[Inspector]

And I hope that the girls never ever read testimony. I think it's deplorable whether innocent or guilty to put on record that Allison really wanted a boy. How would the youngest feel if she ever reads that, regardless of the result. A shameful defence tactic on the part of a father in my opinion.

Yes that part of it all has struck a raw nerve with me. Once you are a parent, the gender of your much loved children becomes largely irrelevant to most people. The character assassination of ABC is so deplorable :facepalm: Her daughters will see through this once they are old enough. Why their mother's life was taken so senselessly, then every detail examined in great detail by the media/public will never sit right with me as a parent, unless their father confesses/identifies the "real" killer and spends some time in :jail:

 

[Smegal]

Not when you are trying to give him enough rope.........

Very true! Perhaps the defence were praying for objections to shush him

 

[DrWatson]

With all the tweets flying through at warp speed, did the prosecution actually bring up, at any stage , - opening address, witness, whatever - that GBC contacted the insurance company and tried to lodge the claim before Allison's body was identified? And what about the about-to-expire life insurance itself - was that even mentioned? Especially if the prosecution are using the money as part of the motive?

If not - why the hell not?

If it was, and I missed it - apologies for being a modsnip

 

[AAAA]

Yes that part of it all has struck a raw nerve with me. Once you are a parent, the gender of your much loved children becomes largely irrelevant to most people. The character assassination of ABC is so deplorable :facepalm: Her daughters will see through this once they are old enough. Why their mother's life was taken so senselessly, then every detail examined in great detail by the media/public will never sit right with me as a parent, unless their father confesses/identifies the "real" killer and spends some time in :jail:

The bad side of the internet world I guess. On one hand prior to Internet a lot would be unknown by relatives, on the other hand with the internet, everything is available to relatives. I guess both scenarios have a plus side....

 

[AAAA]

With all the tweets flying through at warp speed, did the prosecution actually bring up, at any stage , - opening address, witness, whatever - that GBC contacted the insurance company and tried to lodge the claim before Allison's body was identified? And what about the about-to-expire life insurance itself - was that even mentioned? Especially if the prosecution are using the money as part of the motive?

If not - why the hell not?

If it was, and I missed it - apologies for being a modsnip

Not that I read Doc. Why not? Is there that fine of a time schedule for everything to be done and accounted for given the three to four weeks? Personally, I think that for the jury to get a good grasp on everything, for both sides, that they could've run another week. I know we've been here for two years, but some very pertinent arguments have not come up.

 

[McCoy]

With all the tweets flying through at warp speed, did the prosecution actually bring up, at any stage , - opening address, witness, whatever - that GBC contacted the insurance company and tried to lodge the claim before Allison's body was identified? And what about the about-to-expire life insurance itself - was that even mentioned? Especially if the prosecution are using the money as part of the motive?

If not - why the hell not?

If it was, and I missed it - apologies for being a modsnip

It hasn't been mentioned as far as I know, I can't understand why not. They would have either recorded that call ( "your call is being recorded for quality purposes") or the person working at the insurance co would have been able to give evidence. After receiving a lot of calls for car damage and minor burglaries, I am sure a claim like this ie a death claim would make the person sit up, start going into counselling mode. They would especially remember it if the person was asking for the money before the person was identified

 

[Cattail]

With all the tweets flying through at warp speed, did the prosecution actually bring up, at any stage , - opening address, witness, whatever - that GBC contacted the insurance company and tried to lodge the claim before Allison's body was identified? And what about the about-to-expire life insurance itself - was that even mentioned? Especially if the prosecution are using the money as part of the motive?

If not - why the hell not?

If it was, and I missed it - apologies for being a modsnip

If you missed it so did I.

There did seem to be a lot of different witnesses saying it was not a razor that scratched his face.