GBC Trial General Discussion Thread #4

[marlywings]

Can anyone please give me the address of the court I'm going to?

Supreme Court

415 George St, Brisbane

 

[JCB]

Yes to no 4. I have not been able to understand why there was no attempt to clean this blood yet it is assumed GBC knew there was a need to hide something so he put the toys in the boot. If he knew there was something to hide? Obvious response, wipe the blood away.

Again, if I was on the jury this blood alone would not let me convict in all good conscience.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes it's something that has been at the forefront of my mind from the start. If we assume that the toys etc. were scattered in an attempt to divert attention from the blood, GBC obviously knew that the blood was there. Why was there no attempt to remove it? He called police, he must have known that they were going to attend, surely you would tidy up "loose ends" before making the call in case they did respond quicker than anticipated.

 

[Snails]

Can anyone please give me the address of the court I'm going to?

Street address - 415 George St and the overflow courts are apparently level 6.

 

[JCB]

I reject the implication that I owe Baden-Clay the free pass to consider him not guilty until proven innocent .. the quote itself is abbreviated to portray a point of view.. innocent until proven guilty, in a court of law.. that's the full exhortation

I'm sorry if that's the way I came across, it was not my intention at all You are of course free to come to whatever conclusions you with, my "lynch mob" comment (which was not directed at you FWIW) was more in line with those who felt the need to belittle those who had contrarian views to their own.

At the risk of sounding corny, we all want the same thing here I don't want a murderer (whether that be GBC or anyone else) walking the streets any more than you do.

 

[BJsleuth]

Is the chipped tooth necessarily relevant? I think the autopsy said that they didn't know how recent it was.

It may have been caused as you suggest here.

But I don't think it HAS to be explained if that makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, you're right. The autopsy couldn't say when the chip occurred.

 

[Cattail]

Yes it's something that has been at the forefront of my mind from the start. If we assume that the toys etc. were scattered in an attempt to divert attention from the blood, GBC obviously knew that the blood was there. Why was there no attempt to remove it? He called police, he must have known that they were going to attend, surely you would tidy up "loose ends" before making the call in case they did respond quicker than anticipated.

Exactly. GBC was in control of when police would be called. Judging by the posts on here, most people believe he called before there was a need to.

So why the early call. Why not get all your ducks in a row first?

Perplexing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kiwijayne]

Exactly. GBC was in control of when police would be called. Judging by the posts on here, most people believe he called before there was a need to.

So why the early call. Why not get all your ducks in a row first?

Perplexing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Poor judgement on his behalf? Plan not thought through correctly and disorganised like other parts of his life?

 

[Trooper]

Exactly. GBC was in control of when police would be called. Judging by the posts on here, most people believe he called before there was a need to.

So why the early call. Why not get all your ducks in a row first?

Perplexing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ducks in a row would be an enormous departure from the norm for Gerard..

 

[Cattail]

Poor judgement on his behalf? Plan not thought through correctly and disorganised like other parts of his life?

Yes most likely. Though IMO that puts paid to the theories of the family being involved - surely amongst them all there would have been someone wise enough to clean up before calling police in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[they'll get you]

Alioop, I look forward to hearing from you tomorrow.

I want to say thank you for all your patient help over these last few years. OMG you've been absolutely wonderful to us. Thank you!

:fireworks:

.

.:fireworks2:

 

[catswhiskers]

Obviously i am not JCB . But I thought about the blood a week or so back and suggested IIRC the possibility of Allison having caught a fingernail on the mechanism for adjusting the back row of seats in the car. Just as one suggestion.

My understanding is there was not a LOT of blood? We are not talking about a volume of blood that necessarily indicates death?

I think if it is a small amount of blood in a car the victim had been using, when no cause of death has been determined - this would not by itself convince me if I was on the jury.

IMO




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Far more blood than would reasonably come from a snagged fingernail. Very scientific of me I know, but it seems to be a splodge of blood, with two or more trickles leading from it. So in my mind it would need to have been a slow bleeding wound of sorts, pressed up against that part of the car for long enough to make the 'splodge' and for blood to trickle down towards the floor. Not something from a minor innocent accident I would think. If Allison had done something like tear a fingernail quite nastily, her reaction would have been to snatch it away rather than leave it there long enough for the blood to stain the car and trickles to run downwards. I know you only used the nail injury as an example, but I think anyone would react similarly to any other minor, self inflicted accidental injury.
Pics of the luminol treated blood stain below - with photos showing the blood with seats in both up and down positions:





http://multimedia.aapnewswire.com.au/Search.aspx?search=Baden+clay

 

[Cattail]

Ducks in a row would be an enormous departure from the norm for Gerard..

I think Trooper I am just struggling to understand the workings of a mind that is very different to my own


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kiwijayne]

Yes most likely. Though IMO that puts paid to the theories of the family being involved - surely amongst them all there would have been someone wise enough to clean up before calling police in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe they where hence the vacumn cleaner? The police may have arrived sooner than they thought and interrupted the plans for a clean up.

 

[JCB]

Ducks in a row would be an enormous departure from the norm for Gerard..

That being the case, it makes it even more astounding that not a single person saw him leaving the house, travelling to the bridge, disposing of Allison's body and then returning home (and left nothing of forensic value either). I can think of 3 possibilities -

1. He's much smarter than some of us give him credit for.
2. He's the luckiest guy on the planet.
3. He didn't do it, well not the disposing part anyway.

 

[JK673]

That being the case, it makes it even more astounding that not a single person saw him leaving the house, travelling to the bridge, disposing of Allison's body and then returning home (and left nothing of forensic value either). I can think of 3 possibilities -

1. He's much smarter than some of us give him credit for.
2. He's the luckiest guy on the planet.
3. He didn't do it, well not the disposing part anyway.

The area where Allison was found is very isolated at night. It may be a well used road but at night time it is dark and cars are few and far between

 

[BJsleuth]

Thank you for the kind words, they are reciprocated in kind.

1. Yes the Captiva was a new acquisition which obviously narrows the timeframe in which the blood stain occurred, but in my opinion it doesn't narrow it down sufficiently and must be considered only of minor probative value, if at all.

2. I don't necessarily think that this is unusual, I've cut myself fairly significantly on a number of occasions and haven't thought it worthy of notifying someone, unless of course they noticed the wound and later questioned it. There have also been times where I've been in a rush where I haven't even noticed that I had injured myself and it was bleeding fairly profusely. Obviously not saying that this is the case here but nevertheless the possibility exists. DrWatson would be able to help here (if he/she is to return) but particularly vascular areas such as the scalp, feet and perhaps even the hands often bleed profusely from even the most minor of incisions, it's possible that the wound bled for some time and the wound was barely visible shortly thereafter.

3. I'm no pathologist or expert on the female reproductive system (or females in general for that matter!) but I'd have thought it possible to forensically differentiate between menstrual blood and "normal" blood? Or perhaps not, like I said I'm as far from an expert on the subject as you can get! I would be interested in your version of events as to how menstrual blood came into contact with that part of the car because I can't really picture it (but I appreciate that may be a bit graphic for this discussion which is at the academic stage anyway).

4. Seems unusual yes, but I would have thought it would have been just as quick, if not quicker to give the panel a quick wipe over than to throw in a bunch of toys/clothes in a misguided attempt to divert attention. A quick clean obviously wouldn't have removed all traces of blood, but it would seem the obvious thing to do if you were trying to conceal a crime scene. Could be something sinister of course but again in the absence of a likely source of the blood (disregarding the menstrual blood scenario at this time) I couldn't place much value on it.

#3, Definitely. Menstrual blood contains endometrial cells.

 

[Cattail]

That being the case, it makes it even more astounding that not a single person saw him leaving the house, travelling to the bridge, disposing of Allison's body and then returning home (and left nothing of forensic value either). I can think of 3 possibilities -

1. He's much smarter than some of us give him credit for.
2. He's the luckiest guy on the planet.
3. He didn't do it, well not the disposing part anyway.

Yes it is all so freaking contradictory.

There is some law which I can't remember the name of that says that at every scene there is some transfer of evidence.

How can one person:

1. Leave both no evidence AND no sign of a clean up inside the house

2.. Have no evidence on person or property that ties him to location of body

Yet 3. Fail to even attempt to wipe a spill of blood in the back of the car.

And I may be wrong here, but if he had wiped that blood away with a wet one, there may be a sign of clean up, but even less evidence it had anything to do with Allison.

It does my head in


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kiwijayne]

That being the case, it makes it even more astounding that not a single person saw him leaving the house, travelling to the bridge, disposing of Allison's body and then returning home (and left nothing of forensic value either). I can think of 3 possibilities -

1. He's much smarter than some of us give him credit for.
2. He's the luckiest guy on the planet.
3. He didn't do it, well not the disposing part anyway.

1 - don't think so.
2 - Brookfield is generally a very quiet suburb and the roads at night are quiet. Easy to avoid detection if know where to go.
3 - Well that is the question. Did he do the deed and then someone else with a different car helped with the disposal.

 

[JK673]

Yes it is all so freaking contradictory.

There is some law which I can't remember the name of that says that at every scene there is some transfer of evidence.

How can one person:

1. Leave both no evidence AND no sign of a clean up inside the house

2.. Have no evidence on person or property that ties him to location of body

Yet 3. Fail to even attempt to wipe a spill of blood in the back of the car.

And I may be wrong here, but if he had wiped that blood away with a wet one, there may be a sign of clean up, but even less evidence it had anything to so with Allison.

It does my head in


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe because it was not just one person.....? Cue twilight music here

 

[Trooper]

That being the case, it makes it even more astounding that not a single person saw him leaving the house, travelling to the bridge, disposing of Allison's body and then returning home (and left nothing of forensic value either). I can think of 3 possibilities -

1. He's much smarter than some of us give him credit for.
2. He's the luckiest guy on the planet.
3. He didn't do it, well not the disposing part anyway.

I don't see the fact that no one saw him on the road or near the bridge as a matter of Gerards cleverness or luck... it would be really bad luck if someone did see him on that road at that hour of the night..