Allison Baden-Clay - GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD #42

[Obsessor]

Could the police that were at the house the other day have been looking for the tooth in the garden beside the back porch?

 

[LadyBird1]

That is a really good question Champagne. I have neither heard or seen anything to suggest that there was an evidence found of how Allison got to where she did shortly after death. No footprints, no vegetation walked on etc. We have all seen the footprints in the mud in those photos from the police and rescue people, they may still even be there. The police would have carefully looked for this type of evidence to see an entry point of how she got there. They didn't even get close to the body until they had a chance to survey the surroundings. Remember the helicopter video of the one policeman standing in the mud pointing at the body from a distance. My guess is they didn't find anything. That is consistent with my drop from the bridge theory.

I hope very much the area was photographed well and truly before any person set one single foot on the ground.
Photographs of the ground around her body, and including in the water.
I wrote a little post regarding "the funny thing about mud in tidal creeks" only recently. Don't know if it pertains to Kholo mud, but strangely footprints etc seem to stay for weeks in perfect order especially under the water.
Of course person who placed her might have been clever in obliterating evidences.

 

[Amee]

Yes, but on a tidal bank there would be moisture most of the time. (I think )

yeah I was thinking of tidal movement washing them away or being covered by sand and such .
never mind

 

[alioop]

Those muddy footprints are there for a while. We can see in Mani's photos taken in July that they were still there then. They just fill with water either from the tide or rain then empty out a bit at low tide. I don't know if that mud would likely dry out at all as it would be covered at the daily high tide.The sticky mud keeps the shape for a long time and they still may be there.

If anyone has been there recently it would be good to know if they are still visible.

 

[emirates1957]

Hmm ... things are not making sense to me. If Allison was found where that concrete block/brick is stuck in the muddy area in those last photos, then she was definitely under water more than once. I cannot understand why she wasn't then washed away with the after those very heavy rains and flood. My understanding is that bodies float after decomposition sets in. Also, I cannot understand why she didn't have more types of plant material on her considering she was under water more than once. When I viewed Makara's stills taken from the news helicopter footing, I thought she was found further to the right of that pylon, i.e. in the area with some grass/vegetation (more elevated) and therefore she would not have been underwater IMO. Could the Hydroligist have been mistaken?

Not sure if it has been discussed previously - could Allison have been weighted down which would ensure that she would be at some point submerged in water - allowing enough evidence to removed and then have the weight released in order for her to be found. Which ensured him of cashing in on the $$$$.

 

[Makara]

Thanks Ali and Marly, I agree that Allison was thrown from the bridge and not dragged to where she was found. (Yes I've changed my mind again! This has kept me awake late into last night). Ever since I saw the attached pic again yesterday I've been thinking about the almost direct line from the bridge to where Allison was found. It's just too easy when you think about it. I've added a red line of decent from the bridge to where Allison was found.

The second attachment was taken by Possumheart from memory, (thanks Possum). It's the only pic I have that really shows the height of the concrete lip below the bridge railings. They're not very high at all and a body would fit easily between the concrete lip and the railings above. It would have been relatively easy for GBC, with or without help, to remove Allison from the car and just drop her over the edge below the railings. It also makes sense that the outgoing tide possibly moved Allison slightly before she became stuck in the mud.

Why the bridge? IMO GBC was heading out to somewhere near the scout camp. It was all familiar territory to him. He had his dead wife in the back of the car and he would have been freaking out big time. He had to dispose of her ASAP. I really don't think he had the balls to even bury Allison at or near the scout camp. It would have all been too much for him and would involve getting dirty. It was just a matter of getting rid of her body quickly. It wouldn't surprise me if he even drove over the bridge and then he had the lightbulb moment of disposing of Allison over the bridge before turning around to do just that.

MOO.

Drop from bridge.


Concrete lip on right of photo.

I agree with Marly that from what we know, which could change, that GBC could have driven a deceased Allison to the bridge, stopped quickly on the bridge itself, got her out of the car and threw her over the rails on the left hand side near those pylons where she was found. He then drove off having only been stopped for a few minutes. She hit the water as the tide was in, floated about a meter under the bridge, then came to rest on the edge of the creek as the water receded and stuck firm in the very sticky thick mud, which created a suction effect. She was then in the position that she was found. When they removed her body, it left an impression in the mud where her body had been.

Where she got stuck in the mud was subject to the daily rise and fall of the Brisbane river's tidal flows so she was at least partially covered by water at high tide. The suction of the mud was sufficient to keep her in place and not get washed out to the river. The extra rainfall that happened the weekend before she was found was insufficient to increase the tidal levels and therefore did not move her body. We know she wasn't moved by the flow of the creek from shortly after death.

This theory explains a few things:-

Possibly no vegetation from Kholo got on her body as she wasn't carried through the vegetation to the mud bank and there was little if any vegetation on the mud bank. She fell straight into the water and has Doc Watson has said, it is possible that her body suffered no broken bones from this fall. Any bruising or other fall injuries may not have been evident because of the delay in finding her.

The captiva never left the road so it had no mud or vegetation from Kholo on it.

GBC never left the road so he was clean with no clothes or shoes needing to be disposed of, though he may have disposed of those anyway as they may have other evidence on them but he didn't transfer any vegetation or mud into the car.

He may have intended her to end up in the Brisbane river and be found by river traffic so he could claim on insurance. That was a good location to do that as it was a good drop off spot very close to the river. Had he been a couple more meters further on the bridge and dropped her closer to the middle of the creek she may well have ended up in the Brisbane river.

All that could have been achieved by one person as he is the only person that has been charged with not only the murder but the interference with the body.

 

[DrWatson]

Not sure if it has been discussed previously - could Allison have been weighted down which would ensure that she would be at some point submerged in water - allowing enough evidence to removed and then have the weight released in order for her to be found. Which ensured him of cashing in on the $$$$.

She wasn't weighted down. She was lying on her right side, her back facing the creek, with her head towards the main river end of the creek, and her lower half under the bridge, with the upper half out from under. If you see what I mean

I agree with Alioop that I think she was simply rolled over the edge of the bridge, under that bottom rail, and fell parallel to the bridge (i.e. almost right angles to the creek). She would have landed in water and soft sticky mud if it was around midnight, as the tide would have just started going down. I think her lower half was in slightly deeper water (pointing towards the middle of the creek) and may have simply floated gently around, pivoting her until she became parallel to the bridge pylon footings - or about a 70-80 degree pivot. (Note that the bridge supports are not at right angles to the bridge/road - they run diagonally under it, along the line of the creek itself). Maybe the movement of the water that moved her around just that little bit was actually the turbulence and reverberation from the opposite bank that resulted from her drop into the water?

I think that she simply stuck in that goopy mud as the tide went down, and at subsequent high tides, she would have been partially covered. But to float, even assuming no suction effect of the mud (and anyone who has tried to walk in tidal mud would know the feeling), she would have needed much more water depth to float her and to move her - which is why the hydrologist confirmed that the body had NOT been moved by the water - the levels were not high enough.

This theory (which is all it is, by the way) would satisfy several points as outlined by Alioop, but it also has one big advantage - it is simple. I don't think there was any crafty, complicated planning involved at all. All the thoughts about carrying her down the bank in the dark, either wrapped up or not, just to place her half under the bridge, raises the obvious question - WHY? Why on earth would someone even think about doing that? What advantage would it be?

We know where she was found, and how she was lying when found, so we have to come up with a theory as to how she got there. And simple is usually the best...

OK - now I'm happy for anyone to poke holes in this theory...

 

[marlywings]

Because I still believe he did not plan to killer that night, I now believe he did not actually plan to leave her at the bridge. I believe he started driving in that direction, scared, in a trance like state, looking for a suitable spot, maybe even thinking of the Scout grounds, but found his opportunity to get rid of her when approaching the bridge, no other cars in sight, etc. After reading Marly's post further up, I now also tend to believe that he dropped her from the bridge into the water (unravelling the body from whatever wrap he had her covered with at the moment of disposal) and the body slowly drifted to the position she was found in. The location she was found in is not an easy spot to get to, too muddy, sticky, etc. I believe she came to rest there by the slow movement of the water towards the pylon that night. He must have been in a state of mind in which he only thought of getting rid of her ... and not if the body would be found soon, not if it would take 7 years to declared her dead if the body was not found, not if he could or could not collect the insurance soon, etc. That thought process is IMO an "after the fact" line of thinking, once he got rid of any evidence and had time to make up his story.

Yep I agree re his state of mind/getting rid of her. He would have been maxed up with adrenaline as I don't think our mr modsnip was too good at planning anything. Killing her & claiming insurance may have been in his muddled mind for some time in the future but I don't think there was any plan at all that night. Either way, whether her body was found in the mud under the bridge or in Brisbane River, he would have later figured he'd be able to make the insurance claim because his story was "she'd suicided".

I can imagine Allison arriving home looking gorgeous after the hairdo. They were broke, he's probably flipped out when he heard she'd spent money on herself & to be spiteful he told her the precious TM was going to be at the conference the following day. Allison launched at him & scratched into his face....he's punched her & knocked her out (one punch can & does kill) for hurting/scarring his pretty (in his mind), face.

Can we fast forward the countdown clock??...lol.

 

[Obsessor]

respectfully snipped- he'd be able to make the insurance claim because his story was "she'd suicided".

His story wasn't this when he reported her missing. It may have been that way in his head when he dumped her, but by morning that had become mashed up with all the other stories he had invented during the night, so another, or actually several others came out.

 

[Obsessor]

She wasn't weighted down. She was lying on her right side, her back facing the creek, with her head towards the main river end of the creek, and her lower half under the bridge, with the upper half out from under. If you see what I mean

I agree with Alioop that I think she was simply rolled over the edge of the bridge, under that bottom rail, and fell parallel to the bridge (i.e. almost right angles to the creek). She would have landed in water and soft sticky mud if it was around midnight, as the tide would have just started going down. I think her lower half was in slightly deeper water (pointing towards the middle of the creek) and may have simply floated gently around, pivoting her until she became parallel to the bridge pylon footings - or about a 70-80 degree pivot. (Note that the bridge supports are not at right angles to the bridge/road - they run diagonally under it, along the line of the creek itself). Maybe the movement of the water that moved her around just that little bit was actually the turbulence and reverberation from the opposite bank that resulted from her drop into the water?

I think that she simply stuck in that goopy mud as the tide went down, and at subsequent high tides, she would have been partially covered. But to float, even assuming no suction effect of the mud (and anyone who has tried to walk in tidal mud would know the feeling), she would have needed much more water depth to float her and to move her - which is why the hydrologist confirmed that the body had NOT been moved by the water - the levels were not high enough.

This theory (which is all it is, by the way) would satisfy several points as outlined by Alioop, but it also has one big advantage - it is simple. I don't think there was any crafty, complicated planning involved at all. All the thoughts about carrying her down the bank in the dark, either wrapped up or not, just to place her half under the bridge, raises the obvious question - WHY? Why on earth would someone even think about doing that? What advantage would it be?

We know where she was found, and how she was lying when found, so we have to come up with a theory as to how she got there. And simple is usually the best...

OK - now I'm happy for anyone to poke holes in this theory...

I like it. :clap:

I like that it does away with all the added bits that have confuddled the story before- stuff we have no evidence for anyhow.

So..... Did he act alone???

Were the sightings at 4am relevant???

and Doc....Whats the story with the roundabout??????? hehehe

Keep going while you're on a roll!!!!

 

[Curiousasacat]

How do we find out the show and episode that he apparently watched when he googled taking the fifth? Would be interesting to see the crime committed. Wasn't it a crime show he was watching(Alledgedly)

Wow some beaut posts atm,pages again filling fast. I hate to think how much time we will spend here in a couple of days,couple of weeks.

Just my opinion, I also believe he tossed her over the bridge, he chose the simple way in my opinion.

 

[DrWatson]

I like it. :clap:

I like that it does away with all the added bits that have confuddled the story before- stuff we have no evidence for anyhow.

So..... Did he act alone???

Were the sightings at 4am relevant???

and Doc....Whats the story with the roundabout??????? hehehe

Keep going while you're on a roll!!!!

Heheh - I'm on a roll out of here for a few hours. Some people unfortunately have to work! Glad you like the theory so far (all theories evolve).

And you WOULD have to bring up that roundabout, wouldn't you? :floorlaugh:

 

[alioop]

We still don't know any more about the roundabout or cars being seen at Anstead. Nothing was mentioned about this stuff at the second bail hearing or at the first for that matter.

 

[marlywings]

How do we find out the show and episode that he apparently watched when he googled taking the fifth? Would be interesting to see the crime committed. Wasn't it a crime show he was watching(Alledgedly)

Wow some beaut posts atm,pages again filling fast. I hate to think how much time we will spend here in a couple of days,couple of weeks.

Just my opinion, I also believe he tossed her over the bridge, he chose the simple way in my opinion.

From the second bail hearing...

December 18, 2012

In his bail application, Mr Baden-Clay's lawyer Peter Davis, SC, said a police officer had verified an episode of The Good Wife contained "numerous references" to taking the fifth and self incrimination

Mr Baden-Clay said he had been watching The Good Wife on Channel 10 and the episode had mentioned the two laws so when his mother asked what they meant he googled to explain it to her.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...-challenged-20121217-2bj9y.html#ixzz2LmaYR2t0

 

[Makara]

No hole poking from me Doc. It all makes perfect sense. Thank you.

She wasn't weighted down. She was lying on her right side, her back facing the creek, with her head towards the main river end of the creek, and her lower half under the bridge, with the upper half out from under. If you see what I mean

I agree with Alioop that I think she was simply rolled over the edge of the bridge, under that bottom rail, and fell parallel to the bridge (i.e. almost right angles to the creek). She would have landed in water and soft sticky mud if it was around midnight, as the tide would have just started going down. I think her lower half was in slightly deeper water (pointing towards the middle of the creek) and may have simply floated gently around, pivoting her until she became parallel to the bridge pylon footings - or about a 70-80 degree pivot. (Note that the bridge supports are not at right angles to the bridge/road - they run diagonally under it, along the line of the creek itself). Maybe the movement of the water that moved her around just that little bit was actually the turbulence and reverberation from the opposite bank that resulted from her drop into the water?

I think that she simply stuck in that goopy mud as the tide went down, and at subsequent high tides, she would have been partially covered. But to float, even assuming no suction effect of the mud (and anyone who has tried to walk in tidal mud would know the feeling), she would have needed much more water depth to float her and to move her - which is why the hydrologist confirmed that the body had NOT been moved by the water - the levels were not high enough.

This theory (which is all it is, by the way) would satisfy several points as outlined by Alioop, but it also has one big advantage - it is simple. I don't think there was any crafty, complicated planning involved at all. All the thoughts about carrying her down the bank in the dark, either wrapped up or not, just to place her half under the bridge, raises the obvious question - WHY? Why on earth would someone even think about doing that? What advantage would it be?

We know where she was found, and how she was lying when found, so we have to come up with a theory as to how she got there. And simple is usually the best...

OK - now I'm happy for anyone to poke holes in this theory...

 

[alioop]

How do we find out the show and episode that he apparently watched when he googled taking the fifth? Would be interesting to see the crime committed. Wasn't it a crime show he was watching(Alledgedly)

Curious, it was The Good Wife and he claims he was watching it with his mum a few days before Allison went missing and she asked him what "taking the fifth" meant so he googled it and explained it to her. I think this is one of the truths he has told. After all he explained it in an affidavit for the second bail hearing. Interesting that he didn't explain anything else, just this.

He did speak to different police officers that day at Brookfield telling them his version though he didn't provide details to certain questions like " what did you and your wife talk about last night". It wasn't until he spoke to his lawyer by phone from the police station the next day, that the lawyer told the police he would not be making a formal statement and he never has.

 

[Makara]

I like it. :clap:

I like that it does away with all the added bits that have confuddled the story before- stuff we have no evidence for anyhow.

So..... Did he act alone???

Were the sightings at 4am relevant???

and Doc....Whats the story with the roundabout??????? hehehe

Keep going while you're on a roll!!!!

Doc loves talking about the roundabout. :floorlaugh: Why don't we re-visit it one more time before the committal hearing? Ya with us Doc? :floorlaugh:

 

[alioop]

Makara, I am over the roundabout! Unless I have any new info I am leaving it alone.

 

[Makara]

His story wasn't this when he reported her missing. It may have been that way in his head when he dumped her, but by morning that had become mashed up with all the other stories he had invented during the night, so another, or actually several others came out.

Obby, IMO GBC thought his report of Allison's disappearance would simply be treated as a missing person's case. He never thought for a moment that the Police would be onto him so quickly. He would have quickly realised that he was under suspicion when the crime squad were called in and that's when he started making mistakes. He didn't state early on that he thought Allison was suicidal, he said the opposite in fact. IMO he knew that Allison's body may be found eventually and he thought that it would be treated as a murder by person or persons unknown. I'm wondering if at any time between when Allison was dropped at the bridge and when her body was found 11 days later, did GBC or any other BC members go back to see if she was still there?

He found himself in the position of having to explain scratches on his face, bruising on his body and a cut on his hand. He would have been in panic mode and decided it would be a good idea to smash his friend's car into a pylon to escape a Police examination of his body. He apparently told the girls that Allison had fallen down a hole and wasn't coming back. This was related to the Police by OW and I believe what she said was "Gerard told the girls at 6:00am that Mummy had fallen down a hole and wasn't coming back. Is that OK?" IMO that comment from OW was dripping sarcasm directed to the investigators. In other words, "What do you think he's told the girls...that Mummy fell down a hole?"...etc.

What a tangled web we weave....

MOO.

 

[Makara]

Makara, I am over the roundabout! Unless I have any new info I am leaving it alone.

:floorlaugh: C'mon, you know you want to Ali. :what: