- Joined
- Jun 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,534
- Reaction score
- 10,092
Anyone attending the mention tomorrow? Is it an open court?
Yes, if anyone is going to court tomorrow, can you please let us know your perspective on things. Thanks.
Anyone attending the mention tomorrow? Is it an open court?
Anyone attending the mention tomorrow? Is it an open court?
I live in Perth and have followed the Rayney case with great interest as work in the legal industry (as did/do the Rayneys) and have friends and colleagues who knew/know them both. The general consensus IMO is that the evidence against LR while suspicious was circumstantial and not set in stone. The Police are also taking a hammering for various blunders of evidence and drama as far as the arrest went and inappropriate media briefings. That doesn't seem to be the case with GBC. This case appears IMO to have more solid evidence against GBC and GBC appears to be rather dim witted compared to LR. IMO. IMO.
But on the flip side a man in Ipswich (QLD) today got found guilty of murdering his wife and the reason? Wait for it... LIFE INSURANCE! GBC, start worrying! Sentenced to 20 years. Let's hope GBC gets the same judge!
We know almost nothing about the prosecution's case really, imho. A lot of circumstantial stuff in both cases![]()
Ashley McDermid‏@AshleyMcDermid
Court hears 473 witnesses in Baden-Clay murder case. Up to 35 of them may be cross-examined during committal hearing
Ashley McDermid‏@AshleyMcDermid
Correction: make that 45 witnesses. Crown has agreed to 35. Baden-Clay's lawyers want to grill another 10. @9NewsBrisbane
Wonder why A.McD wants an additional 10 that the Crown don't want. Wonder what their angle is.
A.McD - assuming you mean Ashley McDermid - is the reporter for Channel 9.
The defence lawyer is Darren Mahoney.
And while Alioop is our verified legal brain, I suspect it's a case of the 45 being the "core" witnesses at the heart of the case, and the prosecution are only agreeing to 35 of those being cross-examined. Perhaps Alioop can tell us whether or not this cross-examination is before the trial - i.e. testing their statements in a closed session - or are they referring here to the trial itself? I'm not too clear on that point. Can't the defence cross-examine ALL witnesses that the prosecution present at the trial anyway? And vice versa?
KG1, none of those links has anything.