Australia - Warriena Wright, 26, dies in balcony fall, Surfers Paradise, Aug 2014 #6

[MZD]

Very sad to hear about Rrie's old scar marks

Wondering then if the Crown's case is going down the path that she had a prior history of self-harm...leading to the conjecture that she had suicidal tendencies.

 

[MZD]

2.09am: Male states that if she “was going to go all kung fu on me then I will kick your (expletive)”. Calm conversation.

2.11am: Sound of a struggle and ruffling sound of recording device. Female: “That really hurt my vagina.” More struggling and male laughing, to which female replies: “You sound like a (expletive)”.

2.12am: Male states she is insane. Sounds of background clicking. Male: “They are not real they are only fake.”

http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au...s/news-story/6c9264557282aa42377cfb46d0b875cb


I agree, ausgirl, when Warriena said he sounded like a f*****, this would have escalated things, he wanted to punish her. The bolded part, GT hurt her vagina? With the fake thing? Hmmmmm?

I'm curious, at what stage during this time did he ask for a DNA sample

 

[Trooper]

no questions for the pathologist from the defence.

 

[Ausgirl]

I'm curious, at what stage during this time did he ask for a DNA sample

IIRC: It was just before things really escalated.. I think he was holding her down, and she says she needs to take a sh_t (maybe to get him to let her up again). He then says she can go, because he needs a DNA sample. The he says "F__ me" or something to the recorder.

 

[nowvoyager]

I'd also assumed what GT pulled out and was carrying, was a phone but I can see now that it would be too large. Before that was mentioned though, I thought he seemed to be walking oddly on those early CCTV shots, not drunk, but uncomfortably. Now I think having played over a few times whatever he had, he put down the back of his pants and he seems to be touching his back and maybe shifting it around.
Whatever it was he seemed to dispose of somewhere round Orchid on Cavill, which is where he had lived in a unit some time before Avalon. I guess what with that and the nightclub scene, he was pretty familiar with that part of SP.
If it was the "fake things" then it was plural, not singular, so I don't think a gun, and it wasn't gun-shaped. Could it have been something like numchucks, something he shouldn't have had, even replicas, that he wanted to get rid of? Maybe she was playing round with those and maybe that's what she hit him with, not (or not only) the telescope brace. Just some random thoughts.

 

[Ausgirl]

You can hold or press on a person's throat to make breathing harsh and difficult without leaving any marks at all, let alone breaking the hyoid or leaving 'strangulation' marks. He wasn't trying to 'strangle' her, imo, he was using it to control and intimidate.

 

[MZD]

IIRC: It was just before things really escalated.. I think he was holding her down, and she says she needs to take a sh_t (maybe to get him to let her up again). He then says she can go, because he needs a DNA sample. The he says "F__ me" or something to the recorder.

Ah ok right. So the DNA sample is essentially...from her going to the toilet...?

I had been previously wondering if the DNA sample comment was due to whatever action was happening around her vagina for it to hurt.

And then wondering if there had been some kind of 'prop' involved.

Potentially that's what he was carrying down in the carpark.

 

[UndiscoveredTruth]

Thanks for posting all the tweets and keeping us up-to-date with the goings on in the courtroom, Amee! Much appreciated.

 

[Amee]

Day 4 of Gable Tostee trial for murder of Warriena Wright

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...t/news-story/70bf67a00289317e98c757e642329e23

 

[Ausgirl]

Ah ok right. So the DNA sample is essentially...from her going to the toilet...?

I had been previously wondering if the DNA sample comment was due to whatever action was happening around her vagina for it to hurt.

And then wondering if there had been some kind of 'prop' involved.

Potentially that's what he was carrying down in the carpark.

I think he was just being creepy, and the fact she's dead not long after makes it more so.

Just another "presage" of her fate, along with the multiple balcony comments, coincidental or not.

 

[Ausgirl]

I'd also assumed what GT pulled out and was carrying, was a phone but I can see now that it would be too large. Before that was mentioned though, I thought he seemed to be walking oddly on those early CCTV shots, not drunk, but uncomfortably. Now I think having played over a few times whatever he had, he put down the back of his pants and he seems to be touching his back and maybe shifting it around.

I was thinking the same thing. See what I mean about how he's walking? Grabbing his crotch area, reaching down there for something, and next he has this item in his hand.

Good call on the back of pants thing, I see it too.

 

[Fieldsroyal]

This case could go either way - up to the 12 jury members - GT's audio recording may save him or be his undoing depending on how the jury perceive the audio.
A couple of personal observations about the audio:- WW sounds genuinely terrified and in distress as if her breathing has been impaired - i find it troubling and chilling actually - I don't hear any such distress in GT to me he is almost enjoying the events as they unfold cat and mouse like - even the alleged assault on him ("Oww") seems false to me as if a tiny rock had been thrown playfully. I also note the way GT turned vicious suddenly (when called a "******" - this may have hit him too close to home I feel - repressed homosexual perhaps) and appears to have interfered with WW's vagina (rape with a sex aid?) - my prediction is guilty manslaughter - in my view he has definitely "caused" this girl's untimely death through his actions. Her misadventure in choosing to scale the balcony is consistent with her being shoved around, tackled, strong armed around the throat, raped (perhaps), threatened with being "knocked out", phone confiscated and with-held, subjected to insinuation about being "thrown off the balcony". Jury could go either way - only takes one knuckle head to disrupt the course of justice.

 

[NatalieJones]

The whole unexplained minute on the balcony is critical to the case. The Jury shouldn't have to pick up on it. The Prosecution should be making a huge deal of it.

 

[Freya1977]

I reckon he'll walk on murder. No evidence of intent, no immediate direct threat. The violence appeared two way prior. He'd locked her out and appeared to walk away. He wasn't banging the door down like Royal.

It's also not foreseeable. At all. In such a short period of time. She was over in less than 10 seconds.

On manslaughter, there's no causation because her own actions interrupted the chain. It's called a novus actus interveniens. He will walk also.

This differs from GBC in that Tostee actually has multiple very good legal defences at his disposal and a QC to put those arguments forward. The jury will be given some very detailed directions.

This will be a good case to see if the Courier Mail can actually demonise someone so far as to exclude a person relying on defences.

Whilst he may be an *******, doesn't mean he's guilty.

This is just a witch hunt. He's just atypical of the man feminists like to hate. I hope he writes a book after this. No one deserves to be subjected to such persecution.

To answer the great mystery, why would someone record it? Simple - to counter false rape allegations. It's easy if you're a woman to label it as 'weird' but try having your life ruined by someone's regret. Pretty wise move for an avid tinderer.

So, you advocate violating a woman by secretly recording her during sex, in case she turns around and accuses you of violating her? Wow. Wow.

 

[Trooper]

So, you advocate violating a woman by secretly recording her during sex, in case she turns around and accuses you of violating her? Wow. Wow.

and they walk among us, Freya.. looking ordinary, nothing special.....

 

[Freya1977]

and they walk among us, Freya.. looking ordinary, nothing special.....

That's for sure. The world is going crazy. It's reminiscent of the Trump apologist attitudes going around at the moment. It's so bloody degrading.

 

[Trooper]

That's for sure. The world is going crazy. It's reminiscent of the Trump apologist attitudes going around at the moment. It's so bloody degrading.

'It's easy if you're a woman to label it as 'weird' but try having your life ruined by someone's regret.'................ I don't know.. this was the bit that shook me. I mean.. try having your life ruined by actual rape, pal.. .. craziness comes and goes...although I take your point, it seems as if the centre will not hold.....

 

[Freya1977]

you are so right, that button is a beautiful, beautiful thing, it only took me 7 days to figure it out... hmff....

Oh I think I need to start using that button too. Hehe

 

[JCB]

You can hold or press on a person's throat to make breathing harsh and difficult without leaving any marks at all, let alone breaking the hyoid or leaving 'strangulation' marks. He wasn't trying to 'strangle' her, imo, he was using it to control and intimidate.

One of the many flow on effects from the Baden-Clay High Court decision is that the speculation outside the confines of the evidence admitted at trial has been clarified. While what you are saying may be possible (I'm not a medical professional so I simply don't know), the Crown has not made that allegation during this trial. Cash QC used the terms "strangled" and "choked" which definitely implies a forceful motion, one presumably intended to cause injury or worse. Dr Little gave evidence that is is very difficult to do without inflicting muscular injury and so on this basis, the contention of the Crown must be rejected.

Outside of the choking/strangulation allegation, the Crown presented very little in the way of specifics as to how Warriena may have feared for her safety to the extent that she saw her only reasonable option was to attempt to descend the outside of the building. There were verbal threats made by both parties but no indication (that has been presented anyway) that either would follow through. Again it's possible that Gable was threatening Warriena in a manner that was not evident during the audio recording but as this was not raised in court, it would be impermissible to speculate and so cannot be taken into account.

It's very important to note that only Gable exhibited evidence of an assault, Warriena had no wounds whatsoever that could be attributed to an altercation with Tostee. Yes, Gable is a large man and probably wouldn't have had a great deal of trouble fending off a diminutive female but if he was assaulted, and the evidence suggests he was, it may well have been very confusing for him. As a male myself, if I was being assaulted by another male I'd have no issue with using whatever force was reasonably necessary to stop the assault but as a female I'd probably find myself conflicted - Obviously I'd want to assault to stop but I'd be mindful of my upbringing where I was taught that hitting/restraining a female is wrong under any circumstances. It is something that is drummed into almost all of us from an early age. I may well find myself wanting to retreat rather than escalate and given the close confines of Gable's unit and Warriena's previous refusal to leave, it's not at all surprising to me that isolating Warriena on the balcony until the situation was diffused may have seemed a valid and sensible option.

I note the fascination with the item Gable is shown to be holding in CCTV footage however from the moment I saw the images it was apparent to me that it was simply keys on some kind of lanyard or a chain. You can clearly see the outline of the key in one of the images. He is also not wearing gloves, you'll note that Gable's face appears the same colour as his hands and is simply a result of the lighting conditions and capability of the CCTV equipment. The fact that the Crown have not speculated on this "mystery item" indicates that they believe it is not relevant to the case. While we are free to discuss it on an internet forum, it must be ignored by the jury.

There is also much talk on here of the possibility of Gable somehow physically manipulating Warriena over the balustrade and/or being present on the balcony when she fell. There was a witness who directly observed Warriena climbing over the balustrade of her own volition and who spoke to her directly so there is absolutely no allegation that she was assisted over the edge by any means. The Crown have also not asserted in any way that Gable was present on the balcony during the fall, in fact it is their contention that he was inside with the door locked between them and as such, the jury must rely on this as being fact given that this evidence was not disputed by the prosecution, defence or any witnesses presented at trial. If there was ANY chance Gable was involved in physically manipulating Warriena over the edge, believe me the Crown would have been all over it like a seagull on a hot chip.

So the pertinent facts of the trial so far are -

- Warriena was not pushed, she climbed over of her own volition.
- Gable was not present on the balcony when Warriena fell.
- There is physical evidence of an assault on Gable.
- There is no physical evidence of an assault on Warriena.
- A witness was in verbal contact with Warriena immediately before she fell.

The last point is particularly important. For a manslaughter charge to succeed, it must be shown that significant injury or death was a reasonably foreseeable result of the actions of the accused. If I was to lock someone on my high rise balcony I'd expect 1 of 3 things -

1. The person would remain on the balcony until both parties had calmed down and would be let back in.
2. The person would attempt to regain entry by whatever means possible.
3. The person would notify someone that they were being deprived of their liberty and request assistance.

It simply wouldn't cross my mind that someone would attempt the virtually physically impossible task of climbing down the side of a building. Obviously it has happened in this case, however I couldn't consider it a reasonably foreseeable decision. With the Crown's choking allegation coming up short, there has been no credible threat to her safety that has been established during the trial. In any case, why would Warriena attempt a descent which meant almost certain death? The witness 2 floors below was in direct contact with her, why would you she not request his assistance either directly or by calling the police? For me, the possibility of someone trying to descend from 14 stories up would be a long last on my list of possible outcomes, to the point where it's almost inconceivable.

Gable's post incident conduct would appear to be peculiar to say the least but as has already been pointed out, he has a chequered past with police that, rightly or wrongly, appears to have manifested itself in a degree of mistrust. In previous proceedings there have also been suggestions that Gable suffers a number of mental illnesses which may well affect his reasoning in stressful situations. I don't want to preempt the defence strategy however I'd be surprised if a mental health professional wasn't called to give evidence and potentially even Gable himself.

Having said that, the fact that Justice Byrne has discharged the jury for the day and wants to speak to counsel about certain matters does not bode well for the Crown. I would have expected a no case to answer submission from the defence at the conclusion of the prosecution case but Justice Byrne obviously has something he wants to address before any defence application. The trial so far has been very straight forward, no contentious lines of questioning and very little cross examination so I can only speculate that it is to do with the strength of the Crown case. From this point I think 1 of 2 things happens -

1. The murder charge is dropped and the prosecution proceeds solely on the basis of manslaughter.
2. The prosecution is given the chance to discontinue (nolle prosequi)before a directed verdict is given.

Although I have been wrong before (the GBC High Court appeal being one, but I'm far from Robinson Crusoe on that one!) I don't believe there is sufficient evidence to proceed on either charge and it's my belief that you'll either see the Crown withdraw their case later today or a no case submission will be made and a directed verdict will be given by the jury tomorrow morning. At the very least I think tomorrow will see the word murder scrubbed from the indictment, there's no possible way that it can succeed.

 

[Freya1977]

What your selectively leave out that he has given her the opportunity to leave a number of times, asked her to behave so many times, he was a the point where he could not trust her in her current state any more. This is why he did not believe her when she said she wanted to go home.- she had said that before ,and then didnt leave. As Tostee said , she was fighting , and he wanted to separate them via the balcony door to calm her down, and then re attempt to get her to leave. This seems entirely plausible. Dont forget the jury have heard all this on the recording now.

Actually it was "you've been a bad girl", and you do not seem to acknowledge that Tostee was rightly getting angry considering mental and physical disrespect he was enduring. Most men would not show his level of tolerance, nowhere near in fact.

But apart from that Ausgirl, I note you've recanted your earlier vocifierous opinion that Tostee was definitely going to jail. Would you like to disclose why you have changed your mind? You seemed so sure of yourself previously?

His "level of tolerance"? He was STRANGLING her!