Is it possible that this alleged behaviour by the B C family is an extension of earlier patterns around this son? Is it possible that he can do no wrong? Is it possible that he can even murder someone and his family will defend and protect him from consequences? The B C family allegedly have been busy behind the scenes organizing more legal eagles to defend their son.
This is quoted in MSM:
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/baden-clays-lawyer-barred/story-e6freoof-1226413880866
'...It is understood Baden-Clay is bringing in three legal advisers - Mr Mahony, Mr Nyst and a third unnamed lawyer - to bolster his defence team. Mr Nyst is believed to have been approached by Baden-Clay's family...'
How are they going to finance all of these Lawyers?
Are they now planning a 'film' about it to make millions? Hypothetically, has this been discussed with the Lawyers? future financial gains?
Dealing with people who may believe that they are above The Law is never easy.
We have Laws and Courts of Law in this country to call them to account. I am hoping that Criminal Law proceedings can bring Justice and put a stop to this family, hypothetically,using this murder to 'make money' at some time in the future. A Crime has been committed. The charges are serious. They are about the killing of Allison Baden-Clay who was murdered in the prime of her life.
The Police investigation yeilded evidence and subsequently charged the alleged murderer accordingly within The Law.
Surely proving 'beyond reasonable doubt' is not reduced to being just 'a game' about the guilt or innocence depending upon the Lawyers one has acquired? A Jury of 12 selected men and women are considered to represent the average, reasonable person in the community. This assumes an average level of education, intelligence, housing, income, average decent, law abiding life, etc.
Given that The Law is an adversarial process, does it seem unfair that these average, reasonable people are pitted against several highly educated, highly trained Legal Eagles? It seems to be an unequal match right from the start. Let us hope that the Prosecuting side is matched equally to prevent this kind of disadvantage within the legal system itself. I imagine that the 'admisability of evidence' will be crucial in this case.
I hope that these 12 jurors will be educated by The Court, beforehand, about what constitutes 'reasonable doubt' and when circumstantial evidence points beyond reasonable doubt.
It is not show time. This is our Criminal Legal system in action.
It is not hard to speculate about how 'powerless' Allison may have felt within a family where allegedly the son can do no wrong. Hypothetically, if this happened to TM or any other female, we would see similar behaviour to defend and protect one who can allegedly do no wrong. If found not guilty, he can claim the Insurance and Superannuation etc. Hypothetically, we can imagine that they might sue the Police and Government for wrongful arrest and gain a huge payout in the millions, make a film out of it, write books and generate huge financial gains from it all. Then historically the name would still be famous with added extras of how clever they all were. My opinion only, not fact.