NO BAIL! Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 -#29

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
NOW THIS is interesting......should Radster KNOW this, then perhaps Crimestoppers should be rung???? to use this person as a witness???????
Not sure why that would be necessary. She may not have known that at the time, but she certainly would know now. The same like the rest of us know because of the revelation of the video phone contact between her husband, Nigel and Gerard at a time when Gerard claimed to be asleep was made public at the bail hearing.

It was a speculative reason as to why she never went together with Olivia and her husband Nigel to visit Gerard in jail the other day.
 
Can anyone share their reasoning as to the suggestion that investigators have not established a likely cause of death in this case? If that has been reported in the press, has any support for that suggestion been put forward by reporters? It seems highly unlikely to me that there is not sufficient evidence to determine the likely cause of death.

It was reported that the police knew almost immediately what the cod was and that the body was ready for release for burial after just 1 day from what I recall
 
I'm still intrigued by the apparent inconsistency between the defence's claim that the only sign of injury (and I don't think they used the word "external") was a chipped tooth, on the one hand, and the blood in the back of the car on the other hand.

There just HAS to be something else,which only the QPS and Forensic and Scientific Services (FSS) knows about.

I am not able to use my contacts at FSS either, as they are obviously not able to tell me anything and I wouldn't put any pressure on them to do so. So I can only surmise along with the rest of you.

For the defence to have made that claim about the chipped tooth, they would have to have had access to the autopsy report, or at least part of it. I mean - that is one serious claim to make, given that the defence will be relying on that fact.

Of course, we are looking at two separate things here:

1. any evidence of injury that could be the source of the bleeding

2. the cause of death, which may NOT involve any bleeding externally, eg broken bones, fractured skull, neck, etc. I understand from previous posts that the toxicology report was not helpful, which would pretty much rule out drugs etc.

So - we have the QPS suggesting that the blood was involved, and we have the defence saying it couldn't have been. But that doesn't rule out non-bleeding causes of death.

Further information as it becomes available will be VERY interesting....

:waitasec:
 
I thought that it was reported that the $200 000 and $90 000 were owing to partners in a business - Jocelyn Frost and another man whose name I can't remember. Could be wrong!

Yes, I agree with you on this one. The other former partner had a surname something like Bassingthwaite?
 
I'm still intrigued by the apparent inconsistency between the defence's claim that the only sign of injury (and I don't think they used the word "external") was a chipped tooth, on the one hand, and the blood in the back of the car on the other hand.

There just HAS to be something else,which only the QPS and Forensic and Scientific Services (FSS) knows about.

I am not able to use my contacts at FSS either, as they are obviously not able to tell me anything and I wouldn't put any pressure on them to do so. So I can only surmise along with the rest of you.

For the defence to have made that claim about the chipped tooth, they would have to have had access to the autopsy report, or at least part of it. I mean - that is one serious claim to make, given that the defence will be relying on that fact.

Of course, we are looking at two separate things here:

1. any evidence of injury that could be the source of the bleeding

2. the cause of death, which may NOT involve any bleeding externally, eg broken bones, fractured skull, neck, etc. I understand from previous posts that the toxicology report was not helpful, which would pretty much rule out drugs etc.

So - we have the QPS suggesting that the blood was involved, and we have the defence saying it couldn't have been. But that doesn't rule out non-bleeding causes of death.

Further information as it becomes available will be VERY interesting....

:waitasec:


I do believe there is more that is known.. If Police stated they knew how Allison was killed shortly after discovering her body..then it appears there was something that was visible.. Would the defence have full access to autopsy reports for the bail hearing? Or only what The prosecution allows..I would think its full access? The defence also states there is no proof it was Allisons blood found, yet the prosecution says they have proof.. so are the defence just clutching at straws?? or just not privy to some of the information.
 
Oh oliijack, went to show my son your new look avatar for a giggle and find it has been replaced with a much more benign (read boring) one. It was kinda contro perhaps and considering you'd just returned from Coventry, rather brave... He he he.
 
Appears to be just defense assertion based on the autopsy report. It would be interesting to know if that was the only forensic result in relation to cause of death that the Crown chose to append. There may well be strategy involved. Purely MOO.

I feel that there is probably strategy involved.

Drip feed info to perps and they give up and nod. They do do this.


Because I cannot mention prisoners names it makes it difficult for me to give you examples. Some take longer and want to change their plea half way through the trial.
 
I'm still intrigued by the apparent inconsistency between the defence's claim that the only sign of injury (and I don't think they used the word "external") was a chipped tooth, on the one hand, and the blood in the back of the car on :

Just Mr Davis doing his job based on the affidavit material provided IMO. This inconsistency is only apparent and will evaporate. MOO. It would only have legs if the defense wants to impugn some procedures at trial. Sometimes the Crown can be too cute. Risks both ways. Totally MOO.
 
Appears to be just defense assertion based on the autopsy report. It would be interesting to know if that was the only forensic result in relation to cause of death that the Crown chose to append. There may well be strategy involved. Purely MOO.

Nearly two months after the body of Allison Baden-Clay was found by a canoeist in a Brisbane creek, her cause of death remains unknown, court documents reveal.
Timeline: Husband's alleged texts, Google searches and phone calls
The documents, released yesterday, formed part of the prosecution case against her husband Gerard Baden-Clay's application for bail in the Supreme Court last week.


Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...d-badenclay-20120626-210bz.html#ixzz1z5KRRI00
 
I want to start by saying that I have not discussed this with her and the following is only based on my opinion of who she is as a person.

I think that Toni could easily put herself in Allison's shoes and her empathy for Allison will ensure that her guard is down and be completely candid and honest. I believe she will be considerate of the feelings of Allison's family.

I truly believe that every step forward from here will be in effort to set an example for her children. She will do what ever is necessary to help convict ABC's killer.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So who does she think the killer could be? If it was my friend I would ask...
 
It was reported that the police knew almost immediately what the cod was and that the body was ready for release for burial after just 1 day from what I recall

Greg can you provide something for that (link) I cannot remember anywhere being quoted as saying they knew COD. Happy to be wrong!

I was always surprised that the body was released so soon and yet publicly no COD stated or reported.
 
How many times do I have to say it?

I do not condone her affair!! I think it was foolish and thoughtless!

I feel for ABC's three daughters and I worry about any torment that may be endured by TMs children!

Not for one second have I ever said it was ok! What I have said is that I believe that she must have loved him and foolishly allowed her heart to rule her head. I have also said affairs happen everyday though that don't usually result in a murder.

AGAIN... I support my friend in my true and strong belief that she had no involvement nor knowledge of ABC's murder. AT ALL.

Never have I said the affair was ok so please do not put words into my mouth.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TM is lucky to have you as a friend and your loyalty is admirable. If in fact she had no knowledge of GBC's alleged plans, in any way shape or form, then she will need some supportive and unwavering friends to help her through this horrible time. I acknowledge that you have said you don't condone the affair.

Personally I absolutely despise the idea of people getting involved with those who are married. The fact that it happens all the time is irrelevant. Everyone knows that innocent people get hurt because of affairs, so if you enter into one, you do so knowing you are contributing to a situation that could cause pain to another woman, and possibly a family, for many years or even a lifetime.

Also, the fact that for some of the time it appears that TM was conducting the affair during a period when Allison was working in the same workplace I think is despicable. To be honest I don't know how anyone could look the wife in the eye and be able to sleep at night. I know I couldnt do it and I wouldnt, and I consider those who do are not nice people, and I'd have a hard time continuing a friendship with someone who I knew was doing this, as all of my friends and I have shared values. We may be different in many ways and we are not perfect, we make mistakes and we forgive, but a major change of behaviour that hurts others and is in complete discord with the shared values of the friendship, well I couldnt see how I could continue a friendship with someone who wasn't the person I thought they were.

You say that you thought the affair was "foolish and thoughtless". Agreed, but I also think of it as "callous"? When someone has an affair, as GBC did, multiple lies are told to the wife on a regular basis, sometimes multiple lies daily. If you are the mistress you must know the wife is going to feel suspicious, maybe confused, neglected, vulnerable, for at least some of the time. You also know (unless you are paying for everything) that your lover is spending money on you, and time with you, that could have been spent on his wife and children. You could even be contributing to the children going without things. And to flaunt the affair around the place and to conduct it right under the nose of the wife who is in your workplace? I consider it worse than thoughtless.

As for TM's knowledge of GBC's alleged plans to murder Allison - I'm not sure she didnt know or possibly suspect something but because it wasn't specific she selfishly didnt say or do anything about it, only thinking of herself. After all, IMO she has already shown she is quite selfish and possibly a little callous. I guess we'll never know what was in her mind.

I am still open to the possiblity she actually did know, although I think it less likely. It's just that the unfolding of thise case has led to GBC being arrested for murder and some fairly dramatic evidence being revealed, and that's just for starters. Those who have believed for some time that GBC was the perp and would be arrested, were considered by many to be 'jumping the gun' and doing the wrong thing for being certain and not keeping an open mind for a longer period of time. Now that we've heard about some of the prosecution case it actually looks to me like some of the behaviour of GBC in relation to the alleged murder and other facts are even more damning than we imagined, and I suspect there could be worse to come that hasn't been revealed.

So in relation to TM I'm just saying that nothing would surprise me. She may be totally unaware but you never know. Some people thought GBC was a lovely gentle man.

PS I'm not condemning you for being her friend, you don't have to justify yourself for these types of choices. It's just that your posts sparked my alternative thoughts about some of the issues.
 
Greg can you provide something for that (link) I cannot remember anywhere being quoted as saying they knew COD. Happy to be wrong!

I was always surprised that the body was released so soon and yet publicly no COD stated or reported.

It was stated in media Police knew how Allison was killed shortly after her body had been found. Its also been stated Police would not be releasing COD so as to not jeopardize case and that they may not release it until the trial..

http://couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/allison-baden-clays-cause-of-death-may-remain-secret-until-arrest/story-e6freoof-1226381467054

'ALLISON Baden-Clay's cause of death may remain a closely guarded secret until her killer is charged after investigating officers yesterday ruled out releasing the key detail.

But shortly after the grim discovery of her body police had clear views on how Mrs Baden-Clay died, people close to the case have told The Sunday Mail.

It is understood Mrs Baden-Clay's body was cleared for release for burial only a day after she was found, with police confident they had the information they needed.'
 
Can anyone share their reasoning as to the suggestion that investigators have not established a likely cause of death in this case? If that has been reported in the press, has any support for that suggestion been put forward by reporters? It seems highly unlikely to me that there is not sufficient evidence to determine the likely cause of death.

I suppose that no evidence to ascertain 'cause of death' could just mean that there are multiple possibilities (here's hoping) that could've resulted in death, but that it is not possible to pin point exactly what it was.
I would've thought that sufficiency, to some degree, in determining ABC's cause of death would have been provided, somewhat, by the presence of blood in the 4wd; (eg,was it arterial/venous, does it correspond to any injuries sustained by ABC? etc, etc). The police did confirm that it was ABC's blood.
 
I noted questions regarding GBC's DNA testing at Indorippilly police station. Is it possible that scratches on chest and torso were discovered when taking a sample of chest hair for comparison? It depends what they're looking for I imagine. Then they wanted the beard hair and to shave that. MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
222
Guests online
3,597
Total visitors
3,819

Forum statistics

Threads
604,474
Messages
18,172,752
Members
232,614
Latest member
SacramentoKing
Back
Top