GUILTY Australia - Lynette Dawson, 34, Sydney, Jan 1982 *Arrest* #4

[DRT]

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/twin-brothers-chris-and-paul-dawson-inseparable-no-more/news-story/c44efda5fcc48e5af7f0600402a31f52

The picture of Paul Dawson (and Marilyn) mentioned in the podcast. Cost the photojournalist a $350 fine for illegal parking his bike to get the photo.

Actually a non subscriber picture. At least at this point in time.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

'I thought it would never be solved': Journalist Wendy Page on 20 years covering Lynette Dawson's disappearance

While producing three programs about the disappearance of Lyn Dawson, Wendy Page spoke to a wide range of people connected to the case — family, friends, Chris Dawson and his teenage lover.

www.abc.net.au

Australian Story journalist Wendy Page on 20 years reporting on the mystery of what happened to Lynette Dawson​

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Justice and journalism: the Chris Dawson guilty verdict gives Australia two reasons to hope for progress | Van Badham

The story of Lynette Dawson’s murder is notable not merely because it is sensationally grisly and impossibly sad

www.theguardian.com

Justice and progress for women: the Chris Dawson guilty verdict gives Australia reasons to hope​

 

[drsleuth]

Troop have you read this ??

R v Dawson - NSW Caselaw

www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au

Order pursuant to s 8(1)(e) of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 that publication of any details of or concerning the fact that the accused Christopher Michael Dawson has applied for legal aid, or with respect to any appeal by him from the decision of the Legal Aid Commission refusing any such application, be prohibited until further order of the Court.

So Chris applied for legal aid & was ( eventually ) refused

A few interesting points :

7. Mr Dawson also owes a significant debt to family members who have advanced monies for the payment of his legal fees incurred in his defence of these proceedings. Mr Dawson has no independent resources to pay his lawyers and his solicitor has for some time been acting for him on a pro bono basis. Fees for counsel retained to date have been paid by a member of his family.

9. Without descending into the details, Mr Dawson and his wife are now separated. That occurred in about 2020.

11. Mr Walsh has also indicated that Mrs Dawson lent Mr Dawson in excess of $200,000 from her superannuation to assist him with the payment of legal fees. That loan would entitle Mrs Dawson to an equivalent adjustment, in addition to other rights she may have upon the breakdown of the marriage.

12. On 26 April 2022, Mrs Dawson wrote to her husband in these terms:
“Christopher, we have now been separated for 2 years and I hereby give you final notice that I will no longer be assisting you financially.

I have tried to be supportive but please understand that I need to remove myself from your unfortunate situation for my own emotional and financial survival.”

 

[drsleuth]

R v Dawson - NSW Caselaw

www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au

JUDGMENT​

1. HIS HONOUR: In 1983, Mr Dawson commenced proceedings in the Family Court of Australia seeking a dissolution of his marriage to Lynette Dawson and orders with respect to their matrimonial property. The application for dissolution of their marriage was filed on 29 April 1983. Mr Dawson swore an affidavit in support of an application to dispense with service on the same date and a later affidavit in support of an application for property settlement on 16 September 1983. The Crown now proposes to tender these documents. The tender is opposed by Mr Dawson. He submits first that the documents fall foul of s 138 of the Evidence Act 1995, secondly that they are inadmissible as their reception is somehow in breach of the Harman principle and thirdly that I should otherwise refuse to admit them pursuant to s 90 of the Act as use of admissions which they contain would be unfair to him.

21. There does not appear to me to be any unfairness attaching to the Crown’s proposal to adduce this evidence or for it to be used in this trial. Mr Dawson is the author of the documents, created by him for legitimate litigious purposes. Having regard to the issues that the Crown is required to establish, there can be no unfairness to Mr Dawson if this evidence is admitted.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

9. Without descending into the details, Mr Dawson and his wife are now separated. That occurred in about 2020.

I do remember we knew that and talked about it here.

 

[Via Marple]

Troop have you read this ??

R v Dawson - NSW Caselaw

www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au

Order pursuant to s 8(1)(e) of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 that publication of any details of or concerning the fact that the accused Christopher Michael Dawson has applied for legal aid, or with respect to any appeal by him from the decision of the Legal Aid Commission refusing any such application, be prohibited until further order of the Court.

So Chris applied for legal aid & was ( eventually ) refused

A few interesting points :

7. Mr Dawson also owes a significant debt to family members who have advanced monies for the payment of his legal fees incurred in his defence of these proceedings. Mr Dawson has no independent resources to pay his lawyers and his solicitor has for some time been acting for him on a pro bono basis. Fees for counsel retained to date have been paid by a member of his family.

9. Without descending into the details, Mr Dawson and his wife are now separated. That occurred in about 2020.

11. Mr Walsh has also indicated that Mrs Dawson lent Mr Dawson in excess of $200,000 from her superannuation to assist him with the payment of legal fees. That loan would entitle Mrs Dawson to an equivalent adjustment, in addition to other rights she may have upon the breakdown of the marriage.

12. On 26 April 2022, Mrs Dawson wrote to her husband in these terms:
“Christopher, we have now been separated for 2 years and I hereby give you final notice that I will no longer be assisting you financially.

I have tried to be supportive but please understand that I need to remove myself from your unfortunate situation for my own emotional and financial survival.”

What a fall from grace! He resented Lyn using a bank card. Now he had to borrow from the third wife's superannuation. This is out of control..

 

[TootsieFootsie]

This is an article from 2018, during the time of a dig at the house.

Inside Lynette Dawson’s $2.4m former Bayview home

The five-bedroom Gilwinga Drive property on Sydney's Northern Beaches where police are searching for Ms Daw...

www.9news.com.au

The Northern Beaches home where police suspect the remains of Lynette Dawson could be buried was sold last year for more than $2 million and described as an “elegant family sanctuary”.

In some of the photos you can see bushland behind, just saying...

 

[DRT]

Troop have you read this ??

R v Dawson - NSW Caselaw

www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au

Order pursuant to s 8(1)(e) of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 that publication of any details of or concerning the fact that the accused Christopher Michael Dawson has applied for legal aid, or with respect to any appeal by him from the decision of the Legal Aid Commission refusing any such application, be prohibited until further order of the Court.

So Chris applied for legal aid & was ( eventually ) refused

A few interesting points :

7. Mr Dawson also owes a significant debt to family members who have advanced monies for the payment of his legal fees incurred in his defence of these proceedings. Mr Dawson has no independent resources to pay his lawyers and his solicitor has for some time been acting for him on a pro bono basis. Fees for counsel retained to date have been paid by a member of his family.

9. Without descending into the details, Mr Dawson and his wife are now separated. That occurred in about 2020.

11. Mr Walsh has also indicated that Mrs Dawson lent Mr Dawson in excess of $200,000 from her superannuation to assist him with the payment of legal fees. That loan would entitle Mrs Dawson to an equivalent adjustment, in addition to other rights she may have upon the breakdown of the marriage.

12. On 26 April 2022, Mrs Dawson wrote to her husband in these terms:
“Christopher, we have now been separated for 2 years and I hereby give you final notice that I will no longer be assisting you financially.

I have tried to be supportive but please understand that I need to remove myself from your unfortunate situation for my own emotional and financial survival.”

So that implies he has no superannuation or very little.

They separated I believe at the end of 2022 when the bail conditions were arranged. From what I can see they both moved out of the home in Coolum which was used for bail together with Peter's place which was totalling $1.5 million (assuming his place was half that). They also had a rental property on the Gold Coast which he was staying at when A Current Affair interviewed him and Paul in the street. So splitting assets 50 50 with $200,000 going to Sue in the 2 properties, he is not exactly poor. As he is now getting free accommodation and board for the rest of his life, he doesn't have much of a need for money, unless of course he appeals.

Chris Dawson granted $1.5m bail after being charged with murdering wife Lynette

Former rugby league player, 70, intends to plead not guilty to killing wife, who disappeared in 1982

www.theguardian.com

Lynette Dawson's ex-husband Chris arrested over her 1982 disappearance

The former husband of missing Sydney woman Lynette Dawson is arrested on Queensland's Gold Coast and is expected to be charged with her murder. He is the focus of the popular Teacher's Pet podcast into the 37-year-old cold case.

www.abc.net.au

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I'm wondering if most teachers could afford a lifestyle in a house like that.

 

[Kemug]

The Northern Beaches home where police suspect the remains of Lynette Dawson could be buried was sold last year for more than $2 million and described as an “elegant family sanctuary”.

One of the meanings of "sanctuary" is a place of safety - this home certainly wasn't a place of safety for Lynette Dawson.

 

[DRT]

R v Dawson - NSW Caselaw

www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au

JUDGMENT​

1. HIS HONOUR: In 1983, Mr Dawson commenced proceedings in the Family Court of Australia seeking a dissolution of his marriage to Lynette Dawson and orders with respect to their matrimonial property. The application for dissolution of their marriage was filed on 29 April 1983. Mr Dawson swore an affidavit in support of an application to dispense with service on the same date and a later affidavit in support of an application for property settlement on 16 September 1983. The Crown now proposes to tender these documents. The tender is opposed by Mr Dawson. He submits first that the documents fall foul of s 138 of the Evidence Act 1995, secondly that they are inadmissible as their reception is somehow in breach of the Harman principle and thirdly that I should otherwise refuse to admit them pursuant to s 90 of the Act as use of admissions which they contain would be unfair to him.

21. There does not appear to me to be any unfairness attaching to the Crown’s proposal to adduce this evidence or for it to be used in this trial. Mr Dawson is the author of the documents, created by him for legitimate litigious purposes. Having regard to the issues that the Crown is required to establish, there can be no unfairness to Mr Dawson if this evidence is admitted.

So these are what got him in trouble. One obvious lie leads to questions about everything he said. These were filed 15 months after Lyn's murder. He couldn't blame memory here. The bankcard purchases started out on her own account then went to their joint statements.

19
Although the debate in support of this application did not descend to the detail of the material contained in Mr Dawson’s affidavits, one example of what he swore to be true in 1983 may serve to highlight my attitude to the Crown’s desire to adduce evidence. Mr Dawson’s application for dissolution of the marriage described, as one of the arrangements proposed by him for the welfare of the children, that Lynette Dawson left the matrimonial home in January 1982 and that he commenced a de facto relationship with JC in April 1982. The application also asserts that since January 1982, apart from some telephone calls during that month, Mr Dawson had not heard from Lynette Dawson, who had been reported to the police as a missing person.

1. 
   Mr Dawson’s affidavit sworn in support of his application to dispense with service also contained these paragraphs:
   

“2. During the latter half of 1981, the marriage between myself and the respondent was not a happy one and in early January 1982 we attended counselling in an endeavour to assist our marital situation.


3. Shortly after attending counselling, in January 1982, the respondent, without notice to me, left the former matrimonial home and did not advise me of any forwarding address. During the first week following her vacation of the former matrimonial home, the respondent telephoned me and said to me words to the effect that she was going away to think things over and intended to return when she had sorted things out.


4. In February 1982, I received my bankcard statement which showed that the respondent had effected two purchases on our joint account at Warriewood Square during the latter part of January.


5. Shortly after receipt of my bankcard statement, as I had not heard from the respondent, I made enquiries through her family and was informed by them that they had also not heard from her. As I have been left with the children of the marriage, I was concerned at not hearing from the respondent and accordingly in February 1982, I reported her to Mona Vale Police as missing. I believe that the Police have made enquiries seeking to ascertain her whereabouts, but I am informed by them and verily believe that they have not been able to contact her.


6. The respondent’s mother had, with my agreement, seen her grandchildren at least once a month and she collects the children from me. I have asked her on numerous occasions whether she has heard from the respondent, her daughter, but have been informed by her that she has made exhaustive enquiries seeking to find her daughter but has not been successful.


7. I have no idea of the whereabouts of the respondent and am unable to provide any information which would enable documents to be served upon her.”

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Seems he was just "too clever" for his own good

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I'm getting the thought that he wasn't worried about where on the property they searched.
As long as they didn't search the bushland area behind the property.

 

[Annalize]

So that implies he has no superannuation or very little.

They separated I believe at the end of 2022 when the bail conditions were arranged. From what I can see they both moved out of the home in Coolum which was used for bail together with Peter's place which was totalling $1.5 million (assuming his place was half that). They also had a rental property on the Gold Coast which he was staying at when A Current Affair interviewed him and Paul in the street. So splitting assets 50 50 with $200,000 going to Sue in the 2 properties, he is not exactly poor. As he is now getting free accommodation and board for the rest of his life, he doesn't have much of a need for money, unless of course he appeals.

Chris Dawson granted $1.5m bail after being charged with murdering wife Lynette

Former rugby league player, 70, intends to plead not guilty to killing wife, who disappeared in 1982

www.theguardian.com

Lynette Dawson's ex-husband Chris arrested over her 1982 disappearance

The former husband of missing Sydney woman Lynette Dawson is arrested on Queensland's Gold Coast and is expected to be charged with her murder. He is the focus of the popular Teacher's Pet podcast into the 37-year-old cold case.

www.abc.net.au

His brother has probably helped him tie up his finances so that his 3rd wife will not be provided for at all, financially, emotionally, physically.. she will provide her superannuation for his legal defence, though he knows he is guilty.. yet he somehow doesn't have anything to contribute to his own defence.. everyone else should pay for his incompetence and criminality.. sound familiar.. Big brother's advice that if Prince Chris divorced Lyn, he would lose financially, lose custody of the children and have ongoing responsibilities for Lyn and the children.
It seems that women should "pay" for the great honour of being part of his life. Like all the great predators.. he chooses genuine, kind, hardworking, well respected, honest women to exploit.. when there is nothing left to gain, he disposes of them, one way or another.
He is his own worst enemy.. so many chances to change his ways.. but his self preservation is his motivation for everything.. I think they were raised Catholic??.. good luck at the pearly gates Prince Chris

 

[Trooper]

Troop have you read this ??

R v Dawson - NSW Caselaw

www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au

Order pursuant to s 8(1)(e) of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 that publication of any details of or concerning the fact that the accused Christopher Michael Dawson has applied for legal aid, or with respect to any appeal by him from the decision of the Legal Aid Commission refusing any such application, be prohibited until further order of the Court.

So Chris applied for legal aid & was ( eventually ) refused

A few interesting points :

7. Mr Dawson also owes a significant debt to family members who have advanced monies for the payment of his legal fees incurred in his defence of these proceedings. Mr Dawson has no independent resources to pay his lawyers and his solicitor has for some time been acting for him on a pro bono basis. Fees for counsel retained to date have been paid by a member of his family.

9. Without descending into the details, Mr Dawson and his wife are now separated. That occurred in about 2020.

11. Mr Walsh has also indicated that Mrs Dawson lent Mr Dawson in excess of $200,000 from her superannuation to assist him with the payment of legal fees. That loan would entitle Mrs Dawson to an equivalent adjustment, in addition to other rights she may have upon the breakdown of the marriage.

12. On 26 April 2022, Mrs Dawson wrote to her husband in these terms:
“Christopher, we have now been separated for 2 years and I hereby give you final notice that I will no longer be assisting you financially.

I have tried to be supportive but please understand that I need to remove myself from your unfortunate situation for my own emotional and financial survival.”

They don't call you Dr Sleuth for nothin!!......I had not seen it, but it was well and truly on the cards that somewhere this aspect of Dawson's nonsense would be re visited... Ms Dawson 3 left it a bit late, but eventually, she saw the light in the tunnel was actually a full speed train on a collision course. With her.


It was only a matter of time before Mrs Dawson #3 realised her position, socially, legally and financially. She is actually not Mrs Dawson 3rd at all, and as her own lawyer will tell her, she has no obligations whatsoever. Dearie me,, what a tangle!.. and she has already done about 1/4 mill dollars in loans etc I would think that the Sims family would be after Lyns father's money that he lent them.

And then, the daughters... Someone has a lifetimes work there adjusting the intricate and convoluted web that Dawson has woven, most of it without plan or thought, just consequences of a lifetime of lying his head off.

His 'unfortunate situation' has the opportunity to be matched by the solicitor who handled his first 'divorce'. ( and every divorce thereafter ) which may turn out to be a lifetime's career built on a deliberate contempt of court, thus rendering every court case he has been involved with being a matter of careful re consideration.. what a legal mess. !! There could be an influx of Dawson's on the court calendar .......

 

[nightrider17]

I think the sister-in-law has also proven to be a low life person.

Allowing CD and JC to stay at her place at Christmas 1981 - (but later saying she wasn't pleased - insert eye rolling).

Her saying she just thought LD was the type of person to have skin that easily bruised.

I think she is a integral player in this - I don't believe she was a insignificant player.

I think she knew what was going down all along.

Providing Alibi's, support to CD in his new relationship, going along with the disappearance story line for credibility sake - just basically a pathetic individual.

I hope she lost some money and community respect with her part in propping up this fiasco.MOO

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I'd love to know his movements, ie did he go to Bunnings and buy a shovel, did Bunnings even exist then.
There must have been other hardware stores then, ie Mitre 10. Tool King? etc.

No one seems to have come forward saying they'd seen him in the time period in question, or neighbours remembering seeing him in the garden or surrounds.
It's such a long time ago now.

I suppose torture is out of the question ?

Just kidding

 

[Bats]

...with regard to an appeal...
...since this has been an entirely circumstantial case that has been decided by a "judge only"...for me, there really isn't much room there for an appeal....they'd have to convince 3 judges that his honour, got it wrong....very difficult in my opinion...not to mention costly...

I can't help but think how guilty Chris's brothers must feel right now if they had anything to do with Lyn's murder...

 

[Tweet57]

...with regard to an appeal...
...since this has been an entirely circumstantial case that has been decided by a "judge only"...for me, there really isn't much room there for an appeal....they'd have to convince 3 judges that his honour, got it wrong....very difficult in my opinion...not to mention costly...

I can't help but think how guilty Chris's brothers must feel right now if they had anything to do with Lyn's murder...

Not sure if 2 of them have a conscious. Think they would be more peed off about the $$ they may have had to help with. Probably happy for him to sit in custody and give the family a breather.