Australia - Warriena Wright, 26, dies in balcony fall, Surfers Paradise, Aug 2014 #5

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #781
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...-tourist-warriena-wright-20151014-gk8yo6.html

Gable Tostee has been committed to stand trial for murder over the death of a New Zealand tourist who fell from his 14th-floor apartment balcony in August 2014.
A committal hearing was due to be held at the Southport Magistrates Court on Thursday, however court staff confirmed Mr Tostee's lawyers and prosecutors agreed to a registry committal.
It means both parties have consented to the murder case going straight to the Supreme Court without further evidence being aired in the Magistrates Court. A date for the trial has not been set.
 
  • #782
I hope Warriena gets some some justice. Tostees and their defense have tried to drag her name through the mud in my opinion, they seem very baden clay.
 
  • #783
  • #784
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...-tourist-warriena-wright-20151014-gk8yo6.html

Gable Tostee has been committed to stand trial for murder over the death of a New Zealand tourist who fell from his 14th-floor apartment balcony in August 2014.
A committal hearing was due to be held at the Southport Magistrates Court on Thursday, however court staff confirmed Mr Tostee's lawyers and prosecutors agreed to a registry committal.
It means both parties have consented to the murder case going straight to the Supreme Court without further evidence being aired in the Magistrates Court. A date for the trial has not been set.

Thanks wewillgetyou. Good call to send this case straight to trial but it would have been interesting to hear any further evidence submitted at the committal hearing. Having said that, I think we've heard all there is to hear until the prosecution lay their cards on the table at the trial. I'm tipping that Tostee will be found guilty of manslaughter. He'll be sentenced to seven and out in five. Hope I'm wrong.
 
  • #785
  • #786
Lordy, he could end up back in jail again. Wonder if he gets frequent stuff up points?
Actually no, these are trivial matters that will not attract custodial sentences, darling. Men know about these things.

I hope Warriena gets some some justice. Tostees and their defense have tried to drag her name through the mud in my opinion, they seem very baden clay.

Justice has been served. Newton's third law states "For every action, there is an equal (in size) and opposite (in direction) reaction.".

Tostee has four other charges he is listed to appear for tomorrow.

They are public nuisance and assaulting or obstructing a police officer in January 2014, and drink driving and breach of bail from July 2014.
http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au...-warriena-wright/story-fnje8bkv-1227569125669
Unrelated to this case. However, I'm sure you'll be pleased to hear that the likelihood of the public nuisance charges sticking are very slim. There's a spanner in the works, and certain men and women know about these things, darling. You can thank me profusely when you read about it in the next few days.

<modsnip>

There is no other evidence, the persecutorial prosecution have made it clear their flimsy case rests pretty well on the audio. The attempt to gather so many neighbour statements to concoct a case out of nothing shows how desperate the <modsnip> prosecutors are, to present something to add bulk to their very flawed brief of dreams.

But <modsnip> let says a manslaughter verdict is given. <modsnip>

<Modsnip>

These are my edicts. No further correspondence will be entered into.
 
  • #787
‘Police won’t allege Tostee pushed Tinder date off 14th storey balcony’ when he stands trial

Krystal Johnson October 15, 2015, 6:00 am

Police believe Tostee didn't push her off the balcony but his actions were responsible for her death at 2:20am that next morning.

Tostee, who is on bail, has since served 10 months behind bars for a high-speed police pursuit which took place after a music festival in Byron Bay in July last year.

He has taken to both social media and a bodybuilding forum to proclaim his innocence in Ms Wright's death and also changed his name by deed poll to Eric Thomas.


He still appears in court under the name Gable Tostee.

attachment.php

https://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/a/298...off-14th-storey-balcony-when-he-stands-trial/
 
  • #788

Attachments

  • 1410216033983.jpg
    1410216033983.jpg
    22.6 KB · Views: 111
  • #789
Either way this 🤬🤬🤬 will never truly be free again.

His parents must be so proud of how he's shown his and his family's character.
 
  • #790
Accused Tinder killer Gable Tostee posts a picture of himself playing GOLF and describes his trial as a 'witch hunt' in bizarre Facebook rant

Gable Tostee, the 29-year-old Gold Coast carpet layer accused of killing his Tinder date Warriena Wright went out and practised his golf swing just days after been ordered to stand trial for alleged murder.

Tostee posted a photograph on Facebook of himself about to tee off at a golf course with a buggy and a set of clubs nearby.

The Facebook page is under Tostee's new name, 'Eric Thomas' and he describes his occupation as 'witch' of witch hunt', suggesting he sees himself as wrongfully accused.

New Zealand bank teller Ms Wright, 26, fell to her death from the balcony of Tostee's 14th floor luxury apartment in the early hours of August 8 last year.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hunt-bizarre-Facebook-post.html#ixzz3oz9LX8aM
 
  • #791
Hope he enjoyed the holes, because he has dug himself a very big one MOO
 
  • #792
  • #793
Actually no, these are trivial matters that will not attract custodial sentences, darling. Men know about these things.



Justice has been served. Newton's third law states "For every action, there is an equal (in size) and opposite (in direction) reaction.".


Unrelated to this case. However, I'm sure you'll be pleased to hear that the likelihood of the public nuisance charges sticking are very slim. There's a spanner in the works, and certain men and women know about these things, darling. You can thank me profusely when you read about it in the next few days.

<modsnip>

There is no other evidence, the persecutorial prosecution have made it clear their flimsy case rests pretty well on the audio. The attempt to gather so many neighbour statements to concoct a case out of nothing shows how desperate the <modsnip> prosecutors are, to present something to add bulk to their very flawed brief of dreams.

But <modsnip> let says a manslaughter verdict is given. <modsnip>

<Modsnip>

These are my edicts. No further correspondence will be entered into.
Fairydust it's a shame you wish to avoid further elaboration on your opinions.

"Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a person without intent to kill, usually as a result of a careless, reckless, or negligent act."

In relation to fairydust saying it is a "flimsy" case.. I suspect that the audio will prove that his negligence resulted in her death. How is physically locking an intoxicated person on a balcony of a high rise after you have been verbally aggressive towards her not negligent? Surely it is negligence as a foreseeable consequence would be her trying to escape and falling to her death.

What do you all think? Do you think the prosecution will have a strong case for manslaughter? Or will he walk free?


Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk
 
  • #794
Fairydust it's a shame you wish to avoid further elaboration on your opinions.

"Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a person without intent to kill, usually as a result of a careless, reckless, or negligent act."

In relation to fairydust saying it is a "flimsy" case.. I suspect that the audio will prove that his negligence resulted in her death. How is physically locking an intoxicated person on a balcony of a high rise after you have been verbally aggressive towards her not negligent? Surely it is negligence as a foreseeable consequence would be her trying to escape and falling to her death.

What do you all think? Do you think the prosecution will have a strong case for manslaughter? Or will he walk free?


Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk


If negligence is proven - a strong case IMHO.
 
  • #795
"Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a person without intent to kill, usually as a result of a careless, reckless, or negligent act."
Actually it's a little more complex than that. Context is very important. Lay people read law and interpret it verbatim, and unfortunately that's not how you actually decipher law.

Intent is still actually a part of manslaughter, just not deliberate intent as in murder.
The intent could be described as "someone creating a perilous situation with the capacity to cause harm to another person, when they should have known better to prevent that situation."

There is nothing perilous about being on a large balcony, either sober or drunk. The railing is safety approved, this alone is legal exoneration from any culpability.

The most common manslaughter scenario is killing a passenger when you are driving dangerously. If you wish to draw a parallel between a driver in that context, and a person who withdraws from the presence of another by separating himself from the other party via a glass door , well, that's drawing an awfully long bow , the likes of which has never prosecuted in an Australian court of law.

The prosecution has to prove the deceased was in fear of her life. On the facts given in the news reports, it's simply not provable. It would still be potentially hard to prove even if there was a direct witness, depending on the evidence they gave, which might very well be a personal opinion. Everyone wants to believe fear of attack was the causative factor for the decampment over the railing, however given the state of inebriousness of the party concerned, the prospect of it being something else such as hallucinogenics or similar, is very real.

In other words, there could be other reasons for the decampment. Not just the one you all want to run with. The court will examine all the possible reasons, not ignore them.

One also needs to understand that adults are not defacto nannies for other adults. You are essentially responsible for your own choices, even still to a degree when you are drunk. If I am walking down the street, and I collide with a drunk and berate him, and then he steps out into traffic and gets killed, do you think I am culpable ? No.

If you really want to know what gets prosecuted as manslaughter, go and research some other cases. It is never anything like this case. On that basis, these charges seem to be a total non sequiter. As it is these days, Police will charge anyone they don't like on a whim.
 
  • #796
Actually it's a little more complex than that. Context is very important. Lay people read law and interpret it verbatim, and unfortunately that's not how you actually decipher law.

Intent is still actually a part of manslaughter, just not deliberate intent as in murder.
The intent could be described as "someone creating a perilous situation with the capacity to cause harm to another person, when they should have known better to prevent that situation."

There is nothing perilous about being on a large balcony, either sober or drunk. The railing is safety approved, this alone is legal exoneration from any culpability.

The most common manslaughter scenario is killing a passenger when you are driving dangerously. If you wish to draw a parallel between a driver in that context, and a person who withdraws from the presence of another by separating himself from the other party via a glass door , well, that's drawing an awfully long bow , the likes of which has never prosecuted in an Australian court of law.

The prosecution has to prove the deceased was in fear of her life. On the facts given in the news reports, it's simply not provable. It would still be potentially hard to prove even if there was a direct witness, depending on the evidence they gave, which might very well be a personal opinion. Everyone wants to believe fear of attack was the causative factor for the decampment over the railing, however given the state of inebriousness of the party concerned, the prospect of it being something else such as hallucinogenics or similar, is very real.

In other words, there could be other reasons for the decampment. Not just the one you all want to run with. The court will examine all the possible reasons, not ignore them.

One also needs to understand that adults are not defacto nannies for other adults. You are essentially responsible for your own choices, even still to a degree when you are drunk. If I am walking down the street, and I collide with a drunk and berate him, and then he steps out into traffic and gets killed, do you think I am culpable ? No.

If you really want to know what gets prosecuted as manslaughter, go and research some other cases. It is never anything like this case. On that basis, these charges seem to be a total non sequiter. As it is these days, Police will charge anyone they don't like on a whim.
Mmm you make very good points Fairydust.

It is just so frustrating that if he had taken a different path at multiple times points Warriena could still be alive:

I.e. Not offering her more alcohol when she was already drunk;
Letting her go home when she wanted to (he seemed to distract her);
Calling her a cab and sending her on her way instead of locking her on a balcony.


Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk
 
  • #797
I don't think police charge people on a whim. Too much paperwork.
 
  • #798
  • #799
It is just so frustrating that if he had taken a different path at multiple times points Warriena could still be alive:
Do not forget, had the deceased taken a different path, the outcomes could also be different. Balanced points of view are better than lopsided ones.

* Not offering her more alcohol when she was already drunk;
She could have declined it. She was not forced.

* Letting her go home when she wanted to (he seemed to distract her);
He offered to walk her. She could have left. He did not keep her.

* Calling her a cab and sending her on her way instead of locking her on a balcony.
She was emphatically told to leave earlier. She chose not to. Bear in mind a physical altercation had occurred at this point. Both were in a heightened state.

Yes, if only they both took a different path....but such postulations are pointless now. All of these things will be examined in detail, and then considering in detail by the jury.
 
  • #800
I don't think police charge people on a whim. Too much paperwork.

<modsnip>

In any case, I would suggest you spend some time in a court, District/Magistrates/Appeals/ Supreme, etc doesn't matter, any one will do. You will soon learn that Police cases and are frequently thrown out. You also forget the prosecution's attempt to hold Tostee on remand for some two years failed due to dishonest manipulation of the evidence (whats is known as smudging) to create a misleading narrative to suit their case. It should never have been put up in the first place if they were interested in being fair. Note Police cannot be charged criminally for this, which of course fosters this very incompetence and breeds a devil-may-care attitude within their ranks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
82
Guests online
3,394
Total visitors
3,476

Forum statistics

Threads
632,664
Messages
18,629,890
Members
243,239
Latest member
Kieiru
Back
Top