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

[Strangeworld]

Maybe it's paranoia kicking in, but some days on here I feel manipulated i.e. getting caught up in conversations, and revealing more and more about my thoughts on the case in response to certain posts. Starting to wonder if there MAY be 'insiders' visiting trying to determine the way the public views this case. Does anyone know if legal teams in the past (not pointing fingers, could be either side of the fence) have used this technique to test out theories, trigger discussion on specific topics, etc?

 

[marlywings]

:-( you would be surprised then.. It happens more than we might think. Often when a body hasn't been discovered for a significant amount of time.. But family and friends are preparing for the worst this is one of those things that family and legal reps will have on their list.

In sudden deaths such as accidents it may take loved ones longer to react and think of these things due immediate issues of confusion and anguish but then once the dust begins to settle you start thinking about the welfare and financial security of your family and children.

IMO only... Everyone acts differently.. But very few can say they have experienced such a situation. I hope I didn't offend u marlywigs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Oh I agree re the "everyone acts differently"...normal human beings act one way...killers act differently to that.

 

[JK673]

After reading many posts by Lightning Jack, I would like to make some comment on GBC's capacity to successfully conduct himself in business and finance management (both cashflow and assets).

The CV tendered to the court stated that GBC received a TE score of 900. A ranking you get when you matriculated/graduated from high school (Year 12 in Qld). For those "not in the know", the TE score pre-dated the OP score here in Queensland. The highest TE score was 995 and it incremented downwards in points of 5. You pretty much needed a TE score of 995 or at least 990 to get into study medicine. 980 ish upwards would get you into law. The point I am making here is that a TE score of 900 is pretty low down the food chain in the way of academic merit. I could believe someone with that score might be able to do an accounting degree but I would be absolutely astonished to hear of anyone with a score that low having the capacity to go on to get e.g. CPA.

just some info:

The highest TE score you could get was 990. 900 was not low, today it would be equvalent of maybe an OP of 4 (i am estimating here). i was actually surprised that he would have got such a high TE score, but he went to a g rammar school, and back then theschool average did help ones individual TE score. in saying that, a TE score is not indicative of ones intelligence. it is indicative of how much work you may have done. you will notice that physiotherapy may need an OP of 1 that only shows how popular the course it,not how intelligent you have to be to study it.
so it is possible to have become a CPA.......

 

[BJsleuth]

I'm sure the forensic financial analysts will or have already gone over GBC's affairs with a fine tooth comb.

 

[marlywings]

I wonder if the Defence Triplets are now getting concerned after learning of the guilty verdict in the Sica trial. Considering it took years to arrest Sica, and only 2 months to arrest GBC, will the trio now ponder if their job is more difficult than what they initially thought?

Haha "defence triplets"...that's cute CC...lol.

I think their job will be all uphill after today's verdict.

 

[Completelyconfused]

Anyone else noticed that all the C21 signage is GONE from the Taringa premises. That didn't take long

 

[Even]

Okay, I have a question for you. If your partner was missing for 11 days and a body is found, would you submit life insurance claims the same day, before the body had been identified as being your partner? ... or would you be distraught and grieving and thinking of funeral arrangements? Would you be requesting an urgent Death Certificate to satisfy requirements of the insurance companies?

I think if I was innocent and had no means for paying for a defense I would probably phone my financial advisor and say well you've seen the news expect the worse and have things ready to go otherwise I'm not going to be able to even pay for the funeral. Same goes for guilty. But the order would definitely be me at the bridge after hearing of something on the news, followed by informal identification based on what they're saying she is wearing, followed by phoning the financial advisor, followed by formal identification some time later. But then when I'm stressed I move into a doing mode. Make a list, action the list, and repeat.

To be honest I'd like there to be some solider evidence. Like
NBC phone logging onto GBC wireless at 1am in the morning or GBC phone logging onto NBC wireless at 2am. Something that places them in locations they say they were not.

 

[Timmy]

Haha "defence triplets"...that's cute CC...lol.

I think their job will be all uphill after today's verdict

 

[Wozzle]

Hmm the addition of a new lawyer and seemingly a few new pro GBC posters???? Honestly three is a crowd !!!! I can't see that working!!! Can't imagine the 3 of them ever agreeing on the 'same' money, or same page, or same outcomes.

Yes Liadan, the mind boggles. I am imagining Larry, Curly and Mo! I am always bamboozled when I think of defence lawyers and how they avoid 'the elephant in the room' ie if the client wants to plead 'not guilty' then the lawyer can't ever ask them if they actually ARE or not, and if the client then tells them that they ARE guilty and they've begun proceedings as 'not guilty', then the lawyer must withdraw from the case (am I making sense? I'm sure someone explained this very very well earlier - probably Hawkins?! - by saying the lawyers first responsibility is to the court, and not the client). How can a lawyer have any sort of an honest, trusting and open relationship with their client, if the client is pretending to be innocent, but it's as clear as *advertiser censored* on a bull that they are NOT. It seems such an ethical dilemma to me....and it must take a very 'special' sort of person to do such a job. What did Chris Nyst's old man Eddie say when Chris said he wanted to do acting, when Dad wanted him to have a 'proper' job? If you want to be an 'actor' then do law because the very best acting is done by lawyers!! (or something to that effect - see Marlywings for appropriate link - yes I'm only able to produce a 'wink' but not a 'link'!) I understand that everyone deserves a 'defence' regardless of their guilt or innocence, but I couldn't ever find it within myself to be able to 'defend' someone I probably considered was 'guilty'. I could not 'suspend disbelief' as it were. Am I making sense? I do comprehend that the lawyer's job is to 'test evidence' and not make moral judgements, but there seems something very wrong with attempting to 'free' someone you might personally consider IS guilty. Does anyone else feel this way? So we watch with interest how our trio of performers will conduct themselves.....whilst never mentioning the 'G' word. :shush:

PS And the 'elephant in the room' is certainly not ME Gregory....even though you've taken to calling me 'Wobble' rather than 'Wozzle' (*how could Greggles possibly know that I've put on 4kg while sleuthing - and eating too much chocolate? Hmmmmm......*)

 

[frustrated detective]

Well folks it's almost three weeks since GBC's arrest!!!...

Wednesday will be another big footy night in Brisbane...will there be further arrests on this night??

Full moon, too ... anything's possible!

 

[Fuskier]

yes, that is true and i have not said that all police are clean and law abiding, but we do come on a forum with the agenda of having a go at the qps either. if he has had bad expeiences, he needs to voice them in another forum for that. in his first post today he brought that issue in himself when there was no need, it was a deliberate dig at the qps for no reason and if it was meant to be a deiberate dig, he could have said it a different way, after all, he seems very well spoken.

Agreed, as far as we know QPolice have conducted a thorough investigation into the murder of Allison Baden-Clay, on the basis of evidence, they have charged an alleged murderer. We understand from MSM that the investigation is ongoing. The matter is now before the Courts and we have been informed that the case has entered a period of sub judice. MOO

 

[Woombite]

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.

My experience tells me that most people regardless of their socioeconomic status would not give too much of a hoot if an individual loses their own money without care. However, borrowing in good faith from friends and family and then welching would be viewed differently by most people's standards.

 

[alicat]

Quite often you will find that partners will start the claim process early on insurance policies due to the financial pressures of funeral costs (some insurance claims have a special release condition where you get a small portion of funds early for immediate costs (same as some superannuation funds) ... And when a partner passes the funeral costs combined with no working, or getting legal help, psychologists etc .. It doesn't take long for you to switch to survival mode and lodge a claim yourself (Or due to legal advice).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Super companies generally reimburse your payments for the funeral costs. By the time you go through DHS (previously APRA) and fill out the multiple pages of questions then get it approved you still need to contact your super company and then fill in their paperwork and get it paid. DHS can take up to a month to look at your claim, let alone assess it.

Having said that, IF he was claiming super to pay for Allison's funeral he would claim HIS own super and not hers. Claiming super due to a death can be long and complicated even on the best of terms (murders generally take longer to assess as they go back and forward more times than you can imagine!)

 

[ollijack]

I agree that the forum is for analysing the case, but when someone doesn't have the qualifications to diagnose someone as a narcissist or a psychopath et,c and state that he is such, is hardly a discussion. He may have appeared to display some of the characteristics of an online description of these disorders, but you would need to be a psychiatrist and examine him at length to determine that he does have these disorders. Yet he has been called all of these things in this forum without any diagnosis from any professional.
When my son I thought he may have had ADHD and had him assessed to determine if it were the case and there was a lot of testing involved, after which I was told he was not. I would think that a disorder of the nature that gbc has been assumed of having by some in this forum, it would take more than a few traits picked out of an online description to assess.

But that's how the forum works. We aren't trying to diagnose him. We don't claim to be professional. We just discuss and guess and what ifs etc. it's just a forum. That's all. Xxxx

 

[minni]

Yes Liadan, the mind boggles. I am imagining Larry, Curly and Mo! I am always bamboozled when I think of defence lawyers and how they avoid 'the elephant in the room' ie if the client wants to plead 'not guilty' then the lawyer can't ever ask them if they actually ARE or not, and if the client then tells them that they ARE guilty and they've begun proceedings as 'not guilty', then the lawyer must withdraw from the case (am I making sense? I'm sure someone explained this very very well earlier - probably Hawkins?! - by saying the lawyers first responsibility is to the court, and not the client). How can a lawyer have any sort of an honest, trusting and open relationship with their client, if the client is pretending to be innocent, but it's as clear as *advertiser censored* on a bull that they are NOT. It seems such an ethical dilemma to me....and it must take a very 'special' sort of person to do such a job. What did Chris Nyst's old man Eddie say when Chris said he wanted to do acting, when Dad wanted him to have a 'proper' job? If you want to be an 'actor' then do law because the very best acting is done by lawyers!! (or something to that effect - see Marlywings for appropriate link - yes I'm only able to produce a 'wink' but not a 'link'!) I understand that everyone deserves a 'defence' regardless of their guilt or innocence, but I couldn't ever find it within myself to be able to 'defend' someone I probably considered was 'guilty'. I could not 'suspend disbelief' as it were. Am I making sense? I do comprehend that the lawyer's job is to 'test evidence' and not make moral judgements, but there seems something very wrong with attempting to 'free' someone you might personally consider IS guilty. Does anyone else feel this way? So we watch with interest how our trio of performers will conduct themselves.....whilst never mentioning the 'G' word. :shush:

PS And the 'elephant in the room' is certainly not ME Gregory....even though you've taken to calling me 'Wobble' rather than 'Wozzle' (*how could Greggles possibly know that I've put on 4kg while sleuthing - and eating too much chocolate? Hmmmmm......*)

I feel this way, IMO. every time I hear a case in the media, or even watch any type of law movie or law episode on tv, I dwell on this, (probably ever since I first watched Primal Fear actually haha, left me cold that movie, but it was brilliant).
It seems like it takes a particular type of person to be a defense lawyer MOO.
You get the impression that moral character doesn't come into it, when someone is trying to win a case. Im probably right off track here, but this is how I see it and just my thoughts, right or wrong.

I found even when studying accounting, that there are ways around everything. If you are morally 'shallow', you can manipulate and manouver anything. I guess in any profession you can take advantage, doctors can do it, mechanics can do it, lawyers, accountants...and 'gasp' even politicians!!

having said that, there must then be defense lawyers who only take on defendants that they believe in, surely? wow, its a complicated debate this one, I would love to hear more from some of the lawyers on here. I realise I have steroetyped defense lawyers, but would like to know that I'm mistaken in my narrowminded impression.

How does a lawyer deal with the situation if they don't trust their client? can they bow out? what are their choices?

trust Greg to touch on the only variation of your nickname that might create a chocolate induced stress disorder!!!

 

[alicat]

I don't think I would like to be on the jury, but would love to be able to watch proceedings.
There are not many unsecured loans made to companies by banks. Exposure to loss is the bottom line with Banks. You have to have an exemplary proven track record. Also, you can only gain early access to superannuation if you are in ill health or have a terminal illness. Or are behind in your mortgage and the bank has served notice on you in regards to mortgagee possession.Other than that, tough luck. And business debts are not even considered. Has to be arrears on the family home. In all cases they will only release an amount that will pay your medical expenses or clear home loan arrears. They make you jump through hoops.
I think if you're the murderer, the further away the body, the better. QPS took a long time to charge GBC. I'm sure they would have investigated every aspect of GBC and ABCs lives. They wouldn't want any surprises at trial.
All of the above is my opinion, which, when we come down to it, will have no effect on the outcome whatsoever.

You can also claim your super if you are in financial hardship (not necessarily losing your house) as long as you've been on certain centrelink benefits for 26 consecutive weeks and you are eligible for a Q230 (under age 55) or a Q251 (over age 55). You just need to contact your super fund directly, not DHS, and seek their paperwork and complete it and pass over your Q2-- form generally along with bills.

 

[marlywings]

Yes Liadan, the mind boggles. I am imagining Larry, Curly and Mo! I am always bamboozled when I think of defence lawyers and how they avoid 'the elephant in the room' ie if the client wants to plead 'not guilty' then the lawyer can't ever ask them if they actually ARE or not, and if the client then tells them that they ARE guilty and they've begun proceedings as 'not guilty', then the lawyer must withdraw from the case (am I making sense? I'm sure someone explained this very very well earlier - probably Hawkins?! - by saying the lawyers first responsibility is to the court, and not the client). How can a lawyer have any sort of an honest, trusting and open relationship with their client, if the client is pretending to be innocent, but it's as clear as *advertiser censored* on a bull that they are NOT. It seems such an ethical dilemma to me....and it must take a very 'special' sort of person to do such a job. What did Chris Nyst's old man Eddie say when Chris said he wanted to do acting, when Dad wanted him to have a 'proper' job? If you want to be an 'actor' then do law because the very best acting is done by lawyers!! (or something to that effect - see Marlywings for appropriate link - yes I'm only able to produce a 'wink' but not a 'link'!) I understand that everyone deserves a 'defence' regardless of their guilt or innocence, but I couldn't ever find it within myself to be able to 'defend' someone I probably considered was 'guilty'. I could not 'suspend disbelief' as it were. Am I making sense? I do comprehend that the lawyer's job is to 'test evidence' and not make moral judgements, but there seems something very wrong with attempting to 'free' someone you might personally consider IS guilty. Does anyone else feel this way? So we watch with interest how our trio of performers will conduct themselves.....whilst never mentioning the 'G' word. :shush:

PS And the 'elephant in the room' is certainly not ME Gregory....even though you've taken to calling me 'Wobble' rather than 'Wozzle' (*how could Greggles possibly know that I've put on 4kg while sleuthing - and eating too much chocolate? Hmmmmm......*)

I like your wink Wozzle

WHEN CHRIS NYST was just a young lad he told his father that he wanted to be an artist. "Get a real job," came the response that most fathers seem to give in that situation. A couple of years later Nyst got the acting bug. "I want to be an actor," he told his father. This time his father pointed him in the direction of the television. No, not to study the methods of all those thespians. Rather, he suggested he should watch Perry Mason because he reckoned a lawyer was the closest thing to being an actor that could be classified as a real job.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/books/nyst-work-if-you-can-get-it/2006/09/01/1156817043226.html

 

[Timmy]

I like your wink Wozzle

WHEN CHRIS NYST was just a young lad he told his father that he wanted to be an artist. "Get a real job," came the response that most fathers seem to give in that situation. A couple of years later Nyst got the acting bug. "I want to be an actor," he told his father. This time his father pointed him in the direction of the television. No, not to study the methods of all those thespians. Rather, he suggested he should watch Perry Mason because he reckoned a lawyer was the closest thing to being an actor that could be classified as a real job.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/books/nyst-work-if-you-can-get-it/2006/09/01/1156817043226.html

And let's face it -the accused could desperately do with some acting lessons!!

 

[KG1]

Thats a better point than you possibly realise.

So the evidence is, from that, that GBC's financial position was not as "dire" as the police made out. Thank you.

Fact is that we do not know his true financial position, or that of the business (why does everybody forget that we have a Pty Ltd company here???) but rather only the QPS bleat that he was in "dire financial strife", with figures that have clearly been padded to make them look as bad as possible.

Let me tell you something about the police. They can look at you, or you, or you or YOU and make you look bad. They are very good at that, believe me.

Is it then possible that the Pty Ltd company was trading whilst insolvent? If so ASIC would be interested? Further, you would know that directors of companies are personally liable for unpaid employee withholding tax (director fees, payments or any drawings by a director from the company come under that also), and unpaid Superannuation Guarantee Contributions (SGC) and directors can and will be prosecuted by the ATO for same. There may be a lot of debt there also, and the penalties by the ATO are huge.

 

[minni]

I agree that the forum is for analysing the case, but when someone doesn't have the qualifications to diagnose someone as a narcissist or a psychopath et,c and state that he is such, is hardly a discussion. He may have appeared to display some of the characteristics of an online description of these disorders, but you would need to be a psychiatrist and examine him at length to determine that he does have these disorders. Yet he has been called all of these things in this forum without any diagnosis from any professional.
When my son I thought he may have had ADHD and had him assessed to determine if it were the case and there was a lot of testing involved, after which I was told he was not. I would think that a disorder of the nature that gbc has been assumed of having by some in this forum, it would take more than a few traits picked out of an online description to assess.

Elmo, I agree, there is a lot of testing involved when diagnosing a mental illness. it can take years in many cases. and you will find that an illness or diagnosis will most often exist with another diagnosis, for example, anxiety may be present in people with Asperger's, it's called comorbidity.

But this is just a forum for discussion, and posters have talked about everything from narcissism, sex addiction, blood spatter and even weed identity and nuisance factor!!! Everyone has an opinion, thats what this is all about, no one need be GBC's personal psychiatrist, because we are just tossing around ideas and thoughts. Also, the way diagnoses are made can be heavily based on traits and behaviours, initially. the adhd diagnosis is sometimes solely based on the ridiculous questionnaire that lists behaviours which, in my opinion, 9 out of 10 boys possess!

I think that GBC exhibits so many of the traits listed in the sociopath/antisocial personality type, that it is hard to ignore, but I dont think anyone is diagnosing him just yet