NO BAIL! Australia - Allison Baden-Clay, Brisbane QLD, 19 April 2012 -#30

[louisepiglet]

Just a query to Lightning Jack

If you don't think GBC did kill ABC, what is your theory about who killed Allison.
I'n not being a smart**se, I genuinely would like to know your thoughts.

 

[ozazure]

Surely the defence uses the lack of information tended to them at the time of the bail hearing in their arguments, they'd be stupid not to. I think the whole point is you get up there and say "nah they haven't got anything on him! serious!" with a straight face and try and refute whatever is put forth like the blood can't be Allison's because a) they didn't prove it and b) they only know of a chipped tooth.

 

[BJsleuth]

You won't see a mention of it, certainly not from the QPS. The fact is that we don't actually know the true financial position of the BUSINESS. As I pointed out earlier, GBC was a qualified accountant, so you may be sure that none of this is persoanl debt - accountants are not that stupid.

If the business went under, so what?




The BUSINESS may well have been in financial trouble, but as above, this is business debt, not personal. I doubt somebody who understands finance, as GBC would, would commit murder over it. Thats just unbelievable!

I also don't agree with the one million dollar figure. As I pointed out, being a guarantor is not a debt, so scratch at least $335K from the figure please, then scratch the parent's investment in the business. We are down to $600K max, with only $290K pressing. Sorry, but the "dire financial circumstances" just does not wash. GBC's defense will blow it out of the water.

Being a guarantor IS a debt if the applicant is unable to pay.

 

[LightningJack]

Lightning,it would be super if you could share your opinions on what you believe actually happened, and by who, and any motive you might have theorised? Im not able to grasp your intention here, specifically regarding the financial trouble he was in, or as you say, NOT IN? Its possible I may have missed some posts, it is hard to keep up sometimes

Thanks

Thank you for your question Minnie.

Frankly, I do not know.

I am disturbed that the autopsy found no cause of death, as stated by the defense.

That GBC did not make bail is not surprising, since nobody who is charged with murder ever makes bail (or extremely rarely), so to me that is not indicative of guilt. That the QPS is able to paint a bad picture of somebody is also meaningless to me - they are very good at that and can make anybody look bad if they so want, even you.

The so called blood evidence was only a luminol test. Luminol can react with many things, particularly things found in cars (eg. cleaning fluids). The defense made the point that no injuries were found on the deceased other than a chipped tooth (and who knows when it was chipped?), so to say that her blood was there in the car is far fetched.

As to the finances, I am just adding a little balance to the argument and I truly do not believe the situation was as dire as the QPS make out. I believe that the defense will tear this argument to shreds.

I am not a troll as some here have implied, who themselves are trolling with childish comments that I will choose to just ignore.

I am interested in the supposed evidence, however much of it is highly speculative and again will be torn to shreds in court. I have yet to see something that I would regard as solid.

I think its likely that GBC told a few tales to the QPS, however this also is not unusual and not necessarily indicative of guilt.

Lost more to say and I shall over the next few days

 

[louisepiglet]

Being a guarantor IS a debt if the applicant is unable to pay.

Exactly. And if they can't pay then what the guarantor owns comes into play.

 

[LightningJack]

She had to die of something. And if it was natural causes how did she end up in the creek.

How do you know she didn't suicide?

 

[LightningJack]

Sorry but you are wrong on that one...

"We won't be releasing any details in relation to the cause of death at all,'' Detective Superintendent Mark Ainsworth said yesterday.

http://www.news.com.au/national/all...ret-until-arrest/story-e6frfkvr-1226381604075

Thats a month old and before the arrest. The defense are privy to the autopsy.

 

[minni]

You won't see a mention of it, certainly not from the QPS. The fact is that we don't actually know the true financial position of the BUSINESS. As I pointed out earlier, GBC was a qualified accountant, so you may be sure that none of this is persoanl debt - accountants are not that stupid.

If the business went under, so what?




The BUSINESS may well have been in financial trouble, but as above, this is business debt, not personal. I doubt somebody who understands finance, as GBC would, would commit murder over it. Thats just unbelievable!

I also don't agree with the one million dollar figure. As I pointed out, being a guarantor is not a debt, so scratch at least $335K from the figure please, then scratch the parent's investment in the business. We are down to $600K max, with only $290K pressing. Sorry, but the "dire financial circumstances" just does not wash. GBC's defense will blow it out of the water.

even if GBC was a qualified accountant, which I am yet to see a link....this by no means indicates he 'knows finance' as you say. Finance and Accounting are two separate things. What is it that makes you think he "Knows" finance?
if you could start providing some links to your posts please, or use 'IMO'

thankyou

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

Thank you for your question Minnie.

Frankly, I do not know.

I am disturbed that the autopsy found no cause of death, as stated by the defense.

That GBC did not make bail is not surprising, since nobody who is charged with murder ever makes bail (or extremely rarely), so to me that is not indicative of guilt. That the QPS is able to paint a bad picture of somebody is also meaningless to me - they are very good at that and can make anybody look bad if they so want, even you.

The so called blood evidence was only a luminol test. Luminol can react with many things, particularly things found in cars (eg. cleaning fluids). The defense made the point that no injuries were found on the deceased other than a chipped tooth (and who knows when it was chipped?), so to say that her blood was there in the car is far fetched.

As to the finances, I am just adding a little balance to the argument and I truly do not believe the situation was as dire as the QPS make out. I believe that the defense will tear this argument to shreds.

I am not a troll as some here have implied, who themselves are trolling with childish comments that I will choose to just ignore.

I am interested in the supposed evidence, however much of it is highly speculative and again will be torn to shreds in court. I have yet to see something that I would regard as solid.

I think its likely that GBC told a few tales to the QPS, however this also is not unusual and not necessarily indicative of guilt.

Lost more to say and I shall over the next few days

Ligtening Jack. you are making your statements based on what the defense has said in regards to the blood test and the no COD. But you are not willing to accept the Prosecution and Police? And that those who believe what the Police say are wrong? It is a fact that the Prosecution did not have to table all the evidence they have at the Bail hearing. It has also been stated that the defense was basing there arguements on the information of what they know at that time- Obviously they do not know all that the Police and Prosecution have. At a bail hearing it is not necessary for them to disclose this information to the defense.

I don't believe the Police are out just to find a scapegoat and paint a bad picture of them.. Thats a bit insulting to all the hardworking and good men and women of our Police service.


Baden-Clay's defence barrister, Peter Davis, SC, said in his submission supporting Baden-Clay's bail application that "the Crown's case as presently explained rests largely on highly prejudicial evidence that lacks any probative value".
http://optuszoo.com.au/news/state/courier-mail/baden-clay-no-flight-or-suicide-risk/710521?from=mostpopular

Note the comment 'As presently explained'.. does not mean ALL has been presented.. but based on what has been presented.

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

Thats a month old and before the arrest. The defense are privy to the autopsy.

Why are we arguing this point? It has been stated numerous times by police they will not be releasing COD. It has also been stated they do not need to declare all their information at Bail hearing. Unless you are part of the defense, how do you know for FACT that they are privy to this or that there has been no COD ascertained?

 

[louisepiglet]

How do you know she didn't suicide?

I don't. Lightning Jack I am assuming you are a man. As a mother of three children, like Allison, I would never do that to my children. I have suffered from deep depression many times but have never even considered that. I'm sure most mothers feel this way. More fathers than mothers suicide. Depressed fathers often feel that their children will be better off without them. Many mothers who suicide kill their children because they feel that their children will not be ok without them. Allison appeared to have loved her daughters very much and made sure that they had all the experiences little girls like to have. She would not have chosen to leave them. IMO

 

[UnfoldingTruth]

How do you know she didn't suicide?

It would be good if you could suggest a reasonable explanation as to how she did this? Walked to Kholo creek? lay herself down and died?

In reality if you read all the information on this case. It is I would say almost impossible she did committ suicide. It appears you do not accept anything the police put forward in this case, as they have said from way back it was unlawful Homicide- NOT suicide.. I am wondering why you are only willing to accept anything, that the Defense is saying?? (what little of it there is)..

 

[Indromum]

How do you know she didn't suicide?

Suicide??? How did Allison get to Kholo Creek Bridge? Please explain.

 

[minni]

Thank you for your question Minnie.

Frankly, I do not know.

I am disturbed that the autopsy found no cause of death, as stated by the defense.

That GBC did not make bail is not surprising, since nobody who is charged with murder ever makes bail (or extremely rarely), so to me that is not indicative of guilt. That the QPS is able to paint a bad picture of somebody is also meaningless to me - they are very good at that and can make anybody look bad if they so want, even you.

The so called blood evidence was only a luminol test. Luminol can react with many things, particularly things found in cars (eg. cleaning fluids). The defense made the point that no injuries were found on the deceased other than a chipped tooth (and who knows when it was chipped?), so to say that her blood was there in the car is far fetched.

As to the finances, I am just adding a little balance to the argument and I truly do not believe the situation was as dire as the QPS make out. I believe that the defense will tear this argument to shreds.

I am not a troll as some here have implied, who themselves are trolling with childish comments that I will choose to just ignore.

I am interested in the supposed evidence, however much of it is highly speculative and again will be torn to shreds in court. I have yet to see something that I would regard as solid.

I think its likely that GBC told a few tales to the QPS, however this also is not unusual and not necessarily indicative of guilt.

Lost more to say and I shall over the next few days

Ok, thankyou for responding Lightning Jack,
your above points are all reasonable. I do disagree with some thoughts, such as the autopsy not finding a COD. I realise it was said that it was not ascertained. My opinion on this is that it may be being withheld by either family request, or some other reason? However, I don't think this is neither here nor there in relation to GBC. the fact is she is as dead as anyone can be. SHE IS DEAD AND SOMETHING CAUSED IT

Secondly, a lot of the evidence is circumstantial, yes. But IMO, seasoned detectives have incredibly astute instincts and did not stumble out of 20 weeks at Police Recruit Training Camp, so they know what they are looking for. For me, the pieces of the puzzle are falling into place quickly and logically, but I am also of the belief that there is a chance he will be found innocent, but more specifically, I do believe there is a chance (about 0.000000005%, that he is in fact innocent)
You may not have been here long, but I think if you ask anyone, you will find that I struggled very very much with the thought he was guilty...sometimes I fought tooth and nail to try and find anything that could show his innocence. So Im not narrow minded, or heartless.

As for the financial aspect, I feel opposite to you, and think he was in trouble. My thoughts on this are he's always been in trouble yet manages to 'luck' himself through each dilemna...just my opinion

again, thanks for responding in a courteous way

just one other thing...I think that although you have mentioned your 'for' arguments, you have avoided many of the 'against' ones, that, IMO, cant be ignored

 

[LightningJack]

Yes, actually I have. My lending experience taught me that the "blue collars"
as you call them are afraid of losing things, ie house , car etc.
To the ones from the big end of town reputation is everything. Because it shows that you failed once. You could fail again. And bankruptcy means you cannot borrow funds or be a company director for 5 - 7 years.

So why does your blue collar comment not raise the ire of others - it says exactly what I said, only using different words.

5-7 years? is that all? Business failure is very very common and is not the biog deal you make it out to be. It is how somebody rises from it that is of note.

 

[DrWatson]

Well, based only on the facts we know, it would be highly unlikely for ABC to have suicided. And if she did, then somebody would have had to move her car back from Kholo Creek.

The other option would be that she found another way to get to Kholo Creek - eg a lift from a friend, and maybe dropped off somewhere close by, and then jumped off the bridge.

But, that wouldn't gel with the inconsistencies of the phone charging times, the phone calls, the Facetime calls, etc. And jumping off the Kholo Creek bridge would have caused more injuries than a chipped tooth.

If she had not wanted to jump, but if she had simply wanted to drown, why use little Kholo Creek when the much bigger Brisbane River was only metres away? And plenty of people use the river.

I think suicide is HIGHLY unlikely, for various reasons. Not impossible, but highly unlikely.

The "stranger danger" scenario would hold more water (sorry - no pun intended) in that she could have been either met by someone she knew, or picked up by a stranger (the screams on Rafting Ground Rd???) and taken by car to Kholo Creek or the scout camp, and then killed out there. I would imagine that would be the first line that the defence would take.

But that doesn't quite fit with what we know about GBC's phone - although, as Hawkins has already pointed out, proving that the phone did this or that, and proving that GBC was the one actually USING the phone when it did those things, are two separate issues. Even if the iPhone's GPS logs show it went out to Kholo Creek - that doesn't PROVE that it was GBC who took it there.

So yes - there are possibilities other than the one that looks the most obvious. I still think the most obvious one is the most likely - but, as I have said all along, one MUST keep a mind that is receptive to alternatives, and perhaps to surprising twists.

The problem is, we are working in the semi dark, with only the information that has been released by the police, the media, and the defence at the bail hearing. We HAVE to assume that the QPS have a lot more than that.

As for the financial situation, I suspect that it may or may not have been the primary motive, but even if the affair with TM and the desire to bail out of the marriage were the main motive, the financial aspects would have come into play - hence the insurance claims etc. Maybe that was to be just the bonus? And I would also disagree that the amount of debt has been overhyped - the degree to which that would influence somebody is a very personal thing and there are lots of other inter-dependent factors that would determine just how much that amount of debt would weigh on somebody.

Just my :twocents: again...

 

[Firesnake]

I must just say that the Max Sica Guilty verdict has renewed my faith in the QPS and the Queensland justice system.

This was a case based on circumstantial evidence.

Justice for Allison

 

[LightningJack]

Ok, thankyou for responding Lightning Jack,
your above points are all reasonable. I do disagree with some thoughts, such as the autopsy not finding a COD. I realise it was said that it was not ascertained. My opinion on this is that it may be being withheld by either family request, or some other reason? However, I don't think this is neither here nor there in relation to GBC. the fact is she is as dead as anyone can be. SHE IS DEAD AND SOMETHING CAUSED IT

Secondly, a lot of the evidence is circumstantial, yes. But IMO, seasoned detectives have incredibly astute instincts and did not stumble out of 20 weeks at Police Recruit Training Camp, so they know what they are looking for. For me, the pieces of the puzzle are falling into place quickly and logically, but I am also of the belief that there is a chance he will be found innocent, but more specifically, I do believe there is a chance (about 0.000000005%, that he is in fact innocent)
You may not have been here long, but I think if you ask anyone, you will find that I struggled very very much with the thought he was guilty...sometimes I fought tooth and nail to try and find anything that could show his innocence. So Im not narrow minded, or heartless.

As for the financial aspect, I feel opposite to you, and think he was in trouble. My thoughts on this are he's always been in trouble yet manages to 'luck' himself through each dilemna...just my opinion

again, thanks for responding in a courteous way

just one other thing...I think that although you have mentioned your 'for' arguments, you have avoided many of the 'against' ones, that, IMO, cant be ignored

The defense definitely said that COD was not ascertained in the autopsy.

I didn't actually say he wasn't in financial trouble, only that it was not as "dire" as painted by the QPS. My hunch is that he was in fact ready to let the business go belly up. I find it hard to believe as a motive, very hard.

God help GBC should I turn against him

For now, I will stick with "innocent until proven guilty".

 

[marlywings]

5-7 years? is that all? Business failure is very very common and is not the biog deal you make it out to be. It is how somebody rises from it that is of note.

Ok... his business fails...he's fully in debt...should have declared bankruptcy..then he should have just divorced Allison??

 

[Flinders]

Is this a version of how lending may or may not work? Not looking for trouble but an understanding of..... What the??

Bank's $5m to Groves without paperwork

by: Meredith Booth From: The Courier-Mail March 06, 2012 12:00AM


FORMER ABC Learning Centres boss Eddy Groves would seal a deal with the Commonwealth Bank on a handshake - with the bank only later preparing the paperwork, the Supreme Court in Adelaide heard yesterday.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/...l-on-a-handshake/story-fn6ck45n-1226289860338