GBC Trial General Discussion Thread #1

[they'll get you]

So, if the particular piece of hair found attached to the blood stain didn't happen to have a fresh foil in it, (or, like blood, if there is no way to tell whether a foil is that fresh or not), then I guess what we already know is all there is to know about the blood stain.

If Allison had a full head of colour and foils it would cover any natural hair growth. I call it the GT stripe

 

[they'll get you]

It is because they can't date the blood or hair that they asked the girls if mummy had ever sat in the third row of seats that pop up from the boot space. And also if mummy had ever hurt herself. They are trying to show its unlikely that Allisons hair and blood got in the boot area prior to the night she went missing. They only had the captiva for a few weeks.

I think that why the children were asked if Allison had ever hurt herself and they said only a twisted ankle. No blood involved with that.

 

[they'll get you]

Looking at the photos, I think it would be pretty hard getting into the LHS of the bed with the treadmill, but this may just be the way the photos are taken, truncating distance. Not a nice thing to look at first thing in the morning ...
I should probably have a better look but I couldn't see the sleep apnea device. The way Phillip Broom described GBC's snoring, all females in the house would be good sleepers if he didn't use the machine and snored away ... But then a few conference drinks would make all the difference, especially red wine, so maybe it was just Phillip's misfortune and a combination of things that led to him copping an earful.

Good point poss where is that machine? I don't know what it looks like but I can't see it in the left hand side of the bed or in the lounge room. Are they portable? Maybe he took it where he stayed after the crime scene was declared.

I think I remember TM saying he snored too.

 

[they'll get you]

Kind of get tired of depression talk, first I'm not sure I believe it but there are many levels of depression which one is capable of functioning just fine. Most women who know of their husbands affair would experience some depression, right? That said, thinking she could have been strong enough to move on from him given her strong family ties, not sure but wishing she had I guess

Don't give up depression yet.

Everyone is pointing at Allison's depression. I recon g MUST have had a form of mental depression with all the darting and weaving of the affair and the business shuffling.
I recall in Phillips Broom's statement there were tears from g.

His was self administered. He deserved his own woes. 'Reap what you sow'.

In hindsight Allison was a very strong woman to put up with all this incompetent rubbish. For years she received his rubbish from left field and still remained upstanding.

 

[redlightthroughpaper]

If Allison had a full head of colour and foils it would cover any natural hair growth. I call it the GT stripe

TGY, my theory is this;
We know that the hair attached to the blood in the car was blonde. ABC had blonde foils put in her hair on the 19th April. Prior to that she had an all over red colour on the 14th and her grey regrowth touched up on the 12th and then likely nothing for 8-9 weeks prior (so pre Sparky).
So, if the hair was a head hair - and if tests can show that it was very recently bleached - then it would seem extremely likely that the hair got there at some point after she left the hairdressers on the 19th. And because the hair was attached to the blood stain, it would also seem extremely likely that the blood got on there at the same time imo.
Or, if the hair is found to have not been very recently bleached, then it would seem that it would be a hair from prior to the 14th (when she had the all over red colour) - so the blood would likely also have been there from prior to the 14th too imo.
Or, the hair in question may not even be a head hair so my ramblings about hair colouring might be completely irrelevant anyway.

 

[they'll get you]

Yes, it technically could be a ground for appeal if the lie was prejudicial to the accused. Say someone gave evidence and said I saw GBC throw Allison over the bridge but that was proven to be a lie, then that would be very prejudicial obviously. Whether that lie by itself would result in a conviction being quashed and retrial ordered would be up to the appeal judge. The judge would examine who that witness was and what amount of weight the jury likely put on their evidence and what the prosecution, defence and judge said to the jury about this witness. They may for eg have said, we don't think this person is credible but we had to present the evidence for fairness reasons and can't pretend it didn't exist.

Ah just dreaming if the cars were caught on someone's dashcam!
Dash cameras are more prevalent today than two years ago.
I can dream!

 

[Radster]

The phone app showed that Allison's phone was at 61 Boscombe Road at the same time that Kellie Thompson and Sergeant Curtis were talking with GBC and showing him that "There it is!".
Scraps the dog lived at 61 Boscombe Road Brookfield. Scraps was going ballistic (for some unexplained reason) on the night of Allison's disappearance.
What was happening at 61 Boscombe Road (behind the BC residence) that would a usually quiet dog to be acting so unusually?

Hmmm, this got me thinking, Ladybird. So what if the fight started at home, Allison marches out in anger/fear/hurt, heads down Boscombe Rd, GBC follows on foot and catches up to her (Scraps barks as people near his place), GBC tries to muffle her yelling at him by putting his hand over her mouth, this prompts a shrill scream for dear life (heard by many) and a giant tussle in the grass (hence the foliage, which is probably similar around the area to the BC's carport) and he goes too far. Deliberately or otherwise, she stops breathing (it wouldn't take long). He lifts her over his shoulder, walks home praying no-one sees him (and no-one did), puts her in the boot, double-checks the kids are asleep and off he goes to Scout country. Woops, left the phone behind (perhaps it fell out of Allison's hand or pocket in the struggle).

This would explain:
(1) The fact the kids didn't hear anything.
(2) The fact other neighbours did.
(3) The behaviour of Scraps.
(4) The foliage in the hair.
(5) The location of the phone and GBC's semi-startled response to the police locating its signal nearby.

Of course, this doesn't explain why the phone wasn't subsequently found. Maybe he threw it in a drain near where the struggle occurred? Maybe he didn't lose it but instead brought it home, smashed it to bits and flushed it down the toilet, hence his surprise that it was still giving any signal at all.

Thoughts?

 

[DrWatson]

Allison's phone

I hope the police searched that area with a metal detector, it was only 50 metres away! Just a thought.

Most of those geolocation apps on an iPhone are accurate to within a few metres. On my iPhone, it can not only place me in the house (with no satellite view access), but mostly put me in the right room too. It's very impressive - it uses not only satellite GPS (which obviously doesn't work indoors) but also triangulation from cellphone towers and WiFi access points. If Allison's phone was outdoors, eg in the scrub somewhere, it would be accurate to within 2 or 3 metres.

They had police and SES doing a fingertip crawl search, plus they had a helicopter with a "pinger" detector to locate the phone as they kept trying to call it. They were also listening for the sound of the phone ringing as it was being called. I would think that the entire area within 100m in all directions of the back garden of 61 Boscombe Rd (which is over the back fence from the BC house) was searched with a fine toothcomb - and as far as we know, Allison's phone was never found.

I think the prosecution mentioned this in the opening statement.

So, if they couldn't find the phone, yet the app showed it as being there, it was either:

1.very well hidden

2.removed before or during the search

3.the app was wrong (highly unlikely)

Or they DID find it - and have been keeping it up their sleeve.

 

[Bobbie Elliott]

No need to lose hope IMO. It was Allison's hair caught in her blood found in the back of a newly acquired Car which appeared to have been cleaned and boxes of children's toys placed on top to distract. Good solid Police investigation explored beyond the decoy boxes of toys and uncovered Allison's blood stain and hair in the back driver's side of the car. This evidence needs to be included in the Jury's deliberations IMO.

Also, it wasn't Allison's car, and she had her own perfectly good car to pack groceries into.

I think that I'm getting the hang of this circumstantial stuff. Far too many potentially incriminating facts with explanations which don't fit quite with common sense &/or the regular patterns of those involved.

I also must apologise to my fellow Websleuthers for not thanking all of you as much as you deserve. I'm having a long-running battle with my "thanks" button. Sometimes it works OK, but mostly it doesn't. I get sick of spending time mucking around with it when there is so much vital reading to do.

 

[Bazinga]

I have just looked at the video tour of the house and noted the treadmill in the bedroom.
I would bet that IF Allison did put exercise clothes on that night or morning and IF she wanted to do exercise it would have been to do a walk on the treadmill. Hair done and dark outside and a treadmill option.

 

[Whirligig]

TGY, my theory is this;
We know that the hair attached to the blood in the car was blonde. ABC had blonde foils put in her hair on the 19th April. Prior to that she had an all over red colour on the 14th and her grey regrowth touched up on the 12th and then likely nothing for 8-9 weeks prior (so pre Sparky).
So, if the hair was a head hair - and if tests can show that it was very recently bleached - then it would seem extremely likely that the hair got there at some point after she left the hairdressers on the 19th. And because the hair was attached to the blood stain, it would also seem extremely likely that the blood got on there at the same time imo.

:goodpost:

 

[Whirligig]

I think that I'm getting the hang of this circumstantial stuff. Far too many potentially incriminating facts with explanations which don't fit quite with common sense &/or the regular patterns of those involved.

I hope so, Bobbie. Reading and hearing the witness statements in the last week have made me feel rather confused. None seemed to be very strong on their own. I hope that all circumstantial evidence taken together will in the end paint a convincing picture, without reasonable doubt, of what really happened that night.

 

[they'll get you]

Hmmm, this got me thinking, Ladybird. So what if the fight started at home, Allison marches out in anger/fear/hurt, heads down Boscombe Rd, GBC follows on foot and catches up to her (Scraps barks as people near his place), GBC tries to muffle her yelling at him by putting his hand over her mouth, this prompts a shrill scream for dear life (heard by many) and a giant tussle in the grass (hence the foliage, which is probably similar around the area to the BC's carport) and he goes too far. Deliberately or otherwise, she stops breathing (it wouldn't take long). He lifts her over his shoulder, walks home praying no-one sees him (and no-one did), puts her in the boot, double-checks the kids are asleep and off he goes to Scout country. Woops, left the phone behind (perhaps it fell out of Allison's hand or pocket in the struggle).

This would explain:
(1) The fact the kids didn't hear anything.
(2) The fact other neighbours did.
(3) The behaviour of Scraps.
(4) The foliage in the hair.
(5) The location of the phone and GBC's semi-startled response to the police locating its signal nearby.

Of course, this doesn't explain why the phone wasn't subsequently found. Maybe he threw it in a drain near where the struggle occurred? Maybe he didn't lose it but instead brought it home, smashed it to bits and flushed it down the toilet, hence his surprise that it was still giving any signal at all.

Thoughts?

Roadster that so reminded me of Lisa Harnam and Simon Gittany. Similar story, similar ending.

 

[louisepiglet]

I looked for the apnea machine too. If he did use it, which I doubt, it would record dates and times..

Wouldn't he have the apnea machine in gaol. It is a health thing not just for not annoying other people with snoring.

 

[Neuromancer]

If there is a test that can tell whether or not a strand of hair has been very recently bleached, then it might tell us whether the hair that was attached to the blood was from the 19th or prior to the 12th/14th. Waiting with baited breath for the forensics again now!

It doesn't take much of a test really. Visual inspection will show the lighter colour, and bleached segments are slightly thicker. Bleach works by lifting up the hair cuticles: imagine a layer of tiny fish scales all over the hair; bleach makes these stick out more perpendicularly to the hair shaft, and is necessary for the bleach to get under the cuticle to remove the hair pigment. It's what makes badly bleached hair more stiff and straw-like.

Anyone with longish hair who has regular lightening foils can examine a single strand and see 2-3cm bands showing whether that particular strand was caught in a foil at each salon visit. The bleached segments are noticeably thicker.

The bleach in foils don't go right down to the very base of the hair strand, so there will always be some unprocessed hair to compare to.

(btw at the risk of sounding flippant - this discussion is so very "Legally Blonde"

 

[Whirligig]

I think the issue is whether it can be established how long ago the hair was bleached if it was, i.e. very recently (same day) or some time before.

 

[LadyBird1]

Hmmm, this got me thinking, Ladybird. So what if the fight started at home, Allison marches out in anger/fear/hurt, heads down Boscombe Rd, GBC follows on foot and catches up to her (Scraps barks as people near his place), GBC tries to muffle her yelling at him by putting his hand over her mouth, this prompts a shrill scream for dear life (heard by many) and a giant tussle in the grass (hence the foliage, which is probably similar around the area to the BC's carport) and he goes too far. Deliberately or otherwise, she stops breathing (it wouldn't take long). He lifts her over his shoulder, walks home praying no-one sees him (and no-one did), puts her in the boot, double-checks the kids are asleep and off he goes to Scout country. Woops, left the phone behind (perhaps it fell out of Allison's hand or pocket in the struggle).

This would explain:
(1) The fact the kids didn't hear anything.
(2) The fact other neighbours did.
(3) The behaviour of Scraps.
(4) The foliage in the hair.
(5) The location of the phone and GBC's semi-startled response to the police locating its signal nearby.

Of course, this doesn't explain why the phone wasn't subsequently found. Maybe he threw it in a drain near where the struggle occurred? Maybe he didn't lose it but instead brought it home, smashed it to bits and flushed it down the toilet, hence his surprise that it was still giving any signal at all.

Thoughts?

My thinking too Radster. If he (or another family member) had a single opportunity after the QPS left, he (or they) could have whisked to that spot straight away and retrieved it. Preferably under the cloak of darkness. (unless the neighbours were away.) But retrieving that phone would have been top priority.

 

[Makara]

It doesn't take much of a test really. Visual inspection will show the lighter colour, and bleached segments are slightly thicker. Bleach works by lifting up the hair cuticles: imagine a layer of tiny fish scales all over the hair; bleach makes these stick out more perpendicularly to the hair shaft, and is necessary for the bleach to get under the cuticle to remove the hair pigment. It's what makes badly bleached hair more stiff and straw-like.

Anyone with longish hair who has regular lightening foils can examine a single strand and see 2-3cm bands showing whether that particular strand was caught in a foil at each salon visit. The bleached segments are noticeably thicker.

The bleach in foils don't go right down to the very base of the hair strand, so there will always be some unprocessed hair to compare to.

(btw at the risk of sounding flippant - this discussion is so very "Legally Blonde"

Hi Neuromancer, I broached the subject of the hair stand being recently coloured in an earlier thread. There was some discussion about it but I can't recall now what was said. I'll see if I can find my post.

 

[spratsmum]

Had Allison and Gerard ever owned a house that they lived in? The inside photos don't show much furniture and the yard and garage are really in need of a mow and clean up. I was quite surprised that they hadn't accumulated much furniture.

I have been thinking about Olivia Walton, I think she will be hard to crack, her military training will serve her well under cross examination and I don't think she will give anything away.

 

[Howie]

I have just looked at the video tour of the house and noted the treadmill in the bedroom.
I would bet that IF Allison did put exercise clothes on that night or morning and IF she wanted to do exercise it would have been to do a walk on the treadmill. Hair done and dark outside and a treadmill option.

I've also wondered whether Allison walked outside vs using the treadmill. Being a dedicated treadmill user myself, I noted that the TV on the dresser faced AWAY from the treadmill. I ALWAYS watch a TV/video when I'm on the treadmill so that I can distract myself from this unpleasant, boring task!! It could mean that the treadmill was currently "not in use". But I agree with other Websleuthers' observations that it would be unlikely that Allison would have gone for a power walk outdoors when her hair was freshly coiffed and she had an early start for the conference. The very same conference that Toni M was also going to attend!