Allison Baden-Clay - GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD #47

[alioop]

The big question I have is will GBC himself take to the stand?

I think not.

 

[overloaded]

I think not.

can he be forced to?

 

[alioop]

No, an accused person does not have to give evidence in their own defence. But if they choose to, then they will be cross examined by the prosecution. Danny Boyle would no doubt love to cross examine GBC but it's very unlikely he will get the opportunity.

 

[Mountain Misst]

We have already had a small sample of Toni as a prosecutorial witness...it wasn't too bad, she tried avoiding stuff, it was mainly a hoo haa of emotional justification , but at that session the purpose from the prosecutors angle was to prevent Our Boy from getting bail. So Danny let Tone piffle on... she was a minor player in prosecution terms for that particular session, which was successful..He didn't get bail.

But at the big stage , the main event, the Supreme Court shindig , the place where the rubber hits the road, Toni as the prosecution witness will have been carefully woodshedded, rehearsed, stiffened up either by the carrot or the stick and Mr Boyle will be asking some of those indelicate and dreadful questions, which Toni as his witness has to answer as God is her witness with no ambiguity whatsoever. Or Else.

THEN, Mr Boyle will have to run interference for her and guard her from the tentacles and venom of Gerards barrister. THAT will be intriguing. Because Gerard will have to deny Toni.. like the third crow of the . They will have to portray Tone as a menopausal madwoman afflicted with an over active imagination. It's all he has. By the time this trial comes round Gerard will be telling us he once saw Toni at a bus stop somewhere, and only once.

:winner: Any chance we can get you into the jury, Trooper? Foreman would be nice.

 

[Couldbe]

Hopefully, TM would react to the denigrating questioning by the Defence Barrister in a way that she would spill beans that she may have otherwise not wanted to reveal.
.... a vision of TM, at the height of questioning, conjures up a young (well youngish) woman becoming utterly confused and a mess.... and a good outcome for the Defence. As Trooper said, Danny Boyle will have his work cut out trying to keep her on-track.
Other witnesses have already displayed (at the Committal) some quite sound handling of criticism by the Defence; hopefully they will be as composed, sharp and stable at the Trial.

 

[BreakingNews]

The big question I have is will GBC himself take to the stand?

What would be the point? He seems to have lied most of his life, so being in the witness stand would make no difference to him.

No, he is not required to give evidence.:jail:

 

[Trooper]

. TM must have been facing some very serious charges, which were likely to convict her and put her away for a long time, if she traded immunity as you point out.
I wonder what those charges were going to be? It wouldn't have been enough that she was GBC's mistress, surely. Possibly she was at least an accessory before the fact, and at worst complicit in the crime or the cover-up, to warrant her taking up such an offer from the prosecution. So I imagine what she has to reveal will be crucial to GBC's conviction.
.

edited by me for brevity.


The most obvious indictment would be withholding information. A police notification that anyone with information in re Alison's disappearance is to come forward is not an optional invitation... it is a direction. Toni laid low for about a week, and a smart prosecutor, armed with the info that no exact time of death has been established , as it subsequently turned out to be, could argue that Toni stayed silent as Alison died slowly without help under the Kholo bridge. This sounds shocking and repellant but it is what could proposed. Making her an accessory after the fact , in spades.

Being Gerards extra is not a crime, stupidity is freely allowed here.

Accessory before??.... Intent on Toni's part would have to be documented.... a smart prosecuter, again , could find lots of inference for that, which I am sure that whoever interrogated her would have advised.

I think they got her on the raw by divulging Gerards extra extra pants stuff, and Toni blurted out the Bruce Overland stuff and it all fell to rubble after that. For Gerard. She was the prosecutors witness from then on, and all her 'secret' emails and phone calls and the face to face visit with Gerard at the flat etc would have been under strict Police supervision.

 

[Trooper]

He cant be forced to testify,, however.. his barristers cant stop him from testifying... they are under his instructions , technically..

I think he will.. He believes his strongest talent is persuasion. A lifetime of smooth dribble has convinced Gerard that anyone could see what a fluffy puppy he is, he loves to yap.. honestly... I really think he will do exactly that.

 

[they'll get you]

Trooper for PM

Fantastic thinking, beautiful mind.

 

[Spotted Reptile]

edited by me for brevity.

Are you saying I'm verbose?:blushing::truce:

Seriously, I agree that after the fact is more likely than before the fact. I'm not sure if one charge carries heavier penalties than the other, but if TM rolled over for the prosecution she must have some treasure which is worth the deal on their part.

 

[they'll get you]

:winner: Any chance we can get you into the jury, Trooper? Foreman would be nice.

Ahh 'The Troopster,'
:seeya:

 

[Couldbe]

He cant be forced to testify,, however.. his barristers cant stop him from testifying... they are under his instructions , technically..

I think he will.. He believes his strongest talent is persuasion. A lifetime of smooth dribble has convinced Gerard that anyone could see what a fluffy puppy he is, he loves to yap.. honestly... I really think he will do exactly that.

Can he choose to appear last?
Can he decide to testify half-way through the trial ..... once he has observed how things are going for him?

Yep ..... and what would he have to lose, especially if his Lawyers told him that there is possibly some strong evidence stacked against him.

 

[LadyBird1]

Seriously, I agree that after the fact is more likely than before the fact. I'm not sure if one charge carries heavier penalties than the other, but if TM rolled over for the prosecution she must have some treasure which is worth the deal on their part.

Accessory after the fact?

 

[Trooper]

Can he choose to appear last?
Can he decide to testify half-way through the trial ..... once he has observed how things are going for him?

Yep ..... and what would he have to lose, especially if his Lawyers told him that there is possibly some strong evidence stacked against him.

Once the prosecution has rested its case, it entirely up to Gerard , under advisement for which he pays for, when he testifies, or if.. but I think he will. He doesn't have the opportunity to testify while the Crown makes it's case for his conviction. ... the Crown wouldn't call on Gerard to make its own case. I'd think he'd appear last, once all the defence witnesses have testified, this is the usual thing.... possibly he could testify twice on a matter of conflict.....

His defence would know exactly what the Crown is putting forward and strategy would be worked out...no surprises in that context.. so he'd know, going in , whats coming up.

I still think that come July, its not improbable that he will plead guilty.... its not a long shot... there is a discount in sentencing in it, a discount for saving taxpayers money, the courts time, etc, saving the family of Alison more stress... all these things are considered in that particular event...

and that's ok too... when he is sentenced, the entire body of the crime will be delineated and re constructed towards the weighting given to the sentence.... we'll get the guts of it both ways.

 

[Trooper]

Accessory after the fact?

before the fact... she helped plan and knew of and collaborated and conspired before the murder..etc


after the fact.... she assisted, consoled, gave shelter to, withheld information from the police etc... obstructed, gave false testimony, etc... whole lot of stuff , these are just from memory

 

[Couldbe]

Thank you so much for your answers to my questions Trooper. They are very helpful in setting a scene for what could happen at Trial time.

One more question that you may be able to answer ....... if GBC pleads guilty, would any further charges be possible ..... i.e. the further implication of somebody(s)?
I was actually thinking that during the Trial, some information may come to light with regard to GBC having assisting in the crime, but if he pleaded guilty, this would prevent that from possibly happening .... thereby negating that possibility and sparing that somebody(s)?

 

[Trooper]

Thank you so much for your answers to my questions Trooper. They are very helpful in setting a scene for what could happen at Trial time.

One more question that you may be able to answer ....... if GBC pleads guilty, would any further charges be possible ..... i.e. the further implication of somebody(s)?
I was actually thinking that during the Trial, some information may come to light with regard to GBC having assisting in the crime, but if he pleaded guilty, this would prevent that from possibly happening .... thereby negating that possibility and sparing that somebody(s)?

As it stands, he faces 2 charges, both being prosecuted at the same trial... the murder, and the interference with the corpse. He could plead guilty to one and not the other, or both..right now, his position is not guilty to both charges. Then a separate trial would ensue, I think, if he only pleads guilty to one.. I don't see the other being dropped. Mainly because it is such an integral part of the overall crime. She didn't bury herself under the bridge.

I THINK you are asking... would he take the heat for someone who could have assisted him.. in the murder?? in the interference?? both?? well... he could. That would not be taken as a free pass for the person, though. Gerard is then in the position of having to be convincing that he did it all himself..

lets say, theoretically.. that 2 cars are involved, both being driven at the same time, in opposite directions.. from the murder location to the burial location... 2 converging points. Physics will tell us that Gerard couldn't have been driving both cars . That would require a suspension of logic difficult to overcome.

If that is the case... theoretically.... yes , other charges of a similar nature would follow at the direction of public prosecution.

Would he take it , though?? depends...

 

[Trooper]

of course,, it would be a very dicey business pleading guilty to one charge and not the other... you can see the difficulty.. I murder my wife at home and some stranger relieves me of the corpse and carries it away.. or.. someone murdered my wife in the carport , so I took the corpse away... .. it would boil down to, in that event, pleading guilty to only one charge, which one he was most embarrassed by... I jest a bit there, but only marginally... it still leaves him in the you-know-what. He doesn't GAIN anything.

 

[Couldbe]

Poor Olivia will need some therapy if GBC admits to his guilt.

 

[Trooper]

there will be a huge outpouring, in tongues, in Swahili, in Biblical language as yet unexplored, up there in FNQ that will he heard in Hobart, could be..the roof will shake.