GBC Trial General Discussion Thread #2

[spratsmum]

These were all self inflicted though, spratsmum. A man, like a woman, has to take some responsibility. Imo, GBC has a great support network, so I don't think of GBC fighting some lone battle.
He wasn't ashamed to ask friends for exorbitant amounts of money, what kind of person does that? A desperate fool or someone acquainted with getting their own way? jmho

I do acknowledge that PrimeSuspect, but men like Gerard have been used to someone looking after them, cleaning up after them, mothering them. GBC has never grown up, he is just a child whose playmates weren't playing nice and he spat the dummy. If the parents and OW are involved in some way (and I believe they probably are) even if it was after the crime, truly who would risk there own live and freedom, you might on a spur of the moment action, but when you had more time and were rational, you would have to talk sense firstly to yourself and then in this case GBC. I know there have been cases were parents have taken the fall for their children, but OW, she has her own children and husband, her income is the church - it just seems to me that one of them, over all this time, would have seen sense. Everyone can't fall on the sword for the sake of GBC, or perhaps they can.

Just on OW, I don't think if she was staying with her parents on the 19th, that she could have failed to be aware of the goings on. Too many people, cars moving, talking, phone calls etc, one of them would have woken her.

 

[LollyPop]

Somewhat OT but I had the craziest dream last night that I was visiting Arthur Gorrie (aka GBC's current place of residence) and while I was waiting, for what I don't know, I thought I'd catch up on here. When I scrolled down to the bottom of the page, there amongst the list of members names viewing this page was GBC. Gave me such a fright I woke up! anic:anic:

 

[spratsmum]

Somewhat OT but I had the craziest dream last night that I was visiting Arthur Gorrie (aka GBC's current place of residence) and while I was waiting, for what I don't know, I thought I'd catch up on here. When I scrolled down to the bottom of the page, there amongst the list of members names viewing this page was GBC. Gave me such a fright I woke up! anic:anic:

that is a good one Lollipop, I often wonder who reads this page, and I won't be surprised if the defense stands up one day soon and quotes one of our scenarios or thoughts. To be perfectly, we have spent more hours trying to understand this case then they have. So GBC if you are out there, in the ether, could you give us a few clues, even hints we would be very thankful .

 

[BJsleuth]

I have been reading the judgement in Rayney and found this statement:

The State contended it is so highly unlikely that someone would attack the deceased outside her home that such a possibility should be rejected. Ordinarily the community hopes that such events do not happen, but on occasions the community is shocked to learn that such attacks do occur. More importantly, the question for the Court is not whether it is likely that someone would attack the deceased outside her home at 9.45 pm at night. Nor is the Court asked to decide who killed the deceased if it was not the accused. The task given by law to the Court is to decide whether the evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt that the accused killed the deceased.

Also Rayney had lied about which car he drove to a dinner in relation to a name card found near the body. The judge accepted that he had lied but said that lying about this did not prove that he had done the murder.

I would think from this that GBC lying about the scratches on his face is not enough proof to be found guilty.

Also that no matter how unlikely someone else did it, that is also not enough for proof.


It may be different in this case as it is a jury trial. But I think it shows how hard it can be to get a conviction with only circumstantial evidence.

This is what I think. As a jury, you can only go on the evidence presented by witnesses at trial. You can't find someone guilty because you think they're lying. I think it will be a not guilty verdict.

 

[enthralled]

Was there an opportunity for GBC and TM to meet (after popping girls to bed and prior to or as Allison arrived home from hairdresser) on the 19th?

Could the philanderers have argued and TM scratched GBC's right cheek not Allison?

Still catching up here.

I believe if TM scratched his face she would have told the police immediately, because isn't it the scratches that have really got things started and gave police the idea that her darling GBC could have murdered his wife?

 

[marlywings]

Adding in a reminder to everyone...

IF you state something as fact then you need to supply the relevant media or document link.


No link = no post.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

This is what I think. As a jury, you can only go on the evidence presented by witnesses at trial. You can't find someone guilty because you think they're lying. I think it will be a not guilty verdict.

The evidence presented is still ongoing so probably way too early to call.

As is, yes I agree the scratches alone might be hard to tie in with Allison's death unless forensics picked up his dna scrapings on her fingernails, which didn't happen.

If there are witnesses and/or CCTV footage of GBC vehicle from that night, then I think the jury would have to go with guilty. jmo

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Inside the prison where accused wife-killer Gerard Baden-Clay will be held for up to three years

June 24, 2012


THIS is where accused wife-murderer Gerard Baden-Clay will live, possibly for up to three years, as the high-profile case goes through the legal process.

A toilet connected to a sink, a single bed, a mirror, TV, shelf and desk make up a 3m x 4m cell where prisoners spend 12 hours a day inside the Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre.

On arrival, prisoners spend at least their first night in an induction unit and get a booklet outlining their daily routine.

The booklet also explains employment, protection status, medical requests, dental services, optometrist appointments, chaplaincy services, discharge as well as requests for a special diet.

Prisoners receive an amenities allowance of $9.55 a week.

A Queensland Corrective Services spokesman said that jobs - including cleaning or kitchen duties, horticulture work in gardens or maintenance - pay $2.80-$8.50 a day.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/accused-wife-killer-in-purgatory/story-e6freon6-1226406390099

bbm

Maybe, there is an ironing-job for GBC (in pj's and with shoes on)??

 

[Minerva]

Adding in a reminder to everyone...

IF you state something as fact then you need to supply the relevant media or document link.


No link = no post.

Was that for me? Last two posts edited to show reference to my sources :blushing:

 

[Cattail]

Adding in a reminder to everyone...



IF you state something as fact then you need to supply the relevant media or document link.





No link = no post.

Sorry if I have broken rules quoting from the Rayney judgement. I copied and pasted from the forum on here but I don't know how to put a link in

 

[Forensics]

I have been reading the judgement in Rayney and found this statement:

The State contended it is so highly unlikely that someone would attack the deceased outside her home that such a possibility should be rejected. Ordinarily the community hopes that such events do not happen, but on occasions the community is shocked to learn that such attacks do occur. More importantly, the question for the Court is not whether it is likely that someone would attack the deceased outside her home at 9.45 pm at night. Nor is the Court asked to decide who killed the deceased if it was not the accused. The task given by law to the Court is to decide whether the evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt that the accused killed the deceased.

Also Rayney had lied about which car he drove to a dinner in relation to a name card found near the body. The judge accepted that he had lied but said that lying about this did not prove that he had done the murder.

I would think from this that GBC lying about the scratches on his face is not enough proof to be found guilty.

Also that no matter how unlikely someone else did it, that is also not enough for proof.


It may be different in this case as it is a jury trial. But I think it shows how hard it can be to get a conviction with only circumstantial evidence.

The thing with the Rayney trial was that there was a real possibility of a sexual assault - she was found with her clothing dishevelled and with saliva on the neck of her neck and entrance to her vagina (sorry about the graphic explanation but it was reported as such in the mainstream media) and unidentifed fibres and DNA were found that did not match the victim or her husband. A pathologist who conducted the post mortem examination conceded that she could have been the victim of a sexual attack.

The state did not address or disprove the theory and this, combined with the inability to prove its own case is why the judge ruled as he did.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wes...leared-of-murder/story-fnhocxo3-1226768049622

 

[marlywings]

Sorry if I have broken rules quoting from the Rayney judgement. I copied and pasted from the forum on here but I don't know how to put a link in

Go to address bar at top of page, one click to highlight the address (link), right click, in box that comes up click "copy". Then go to your reply post that you want to add the link to, right click & click "paste". The link will be added to your post.

 

[BJsleuth]

The evidence presented is still ongoing so probably way too early to call.

As is, yes I agree the scratches alone might be hard to tie in with Allison's death unless forensics picked up his dna scrapings on her fingernails, which didn't happen.

If there are witnesses and/or CCTV footage of GBC vehicle from that night, then I think the jury would have to go with guilty. jmo

It is still early. I'm waiting for them to pull a rabbit out of their hat but nothing stated in the summary is convincing. I think if the prosecution had it, they would have included it in the summary.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

It is still early. I'm waiting for them to pull a rabbit out of their hat but nothing stated in the summary is convincing. I think if the prosecution had it, they would have included it in the summary.

If GBC does get a 'not guilty' from jurors, what happens about his imprisonment for nearly 2 years? Would he be compensated?

 

[marlywings]

The evidence presented is still ongoing so probably way too early to call.

As is, yes I agree the scratches alone might be hard to tie in with Allison's death unless forensics picked up his dna scrapings on her fingernails, which didn't happen.

If there are witnesses and/or CCTV footage of GBC vehicle from that night, then I think the jury would have to go with guilty. jmo

I agree PrimeSuspect. The evidence we have to date is all mainly from bail hearing & committal hearings. For the bail hearing only enough evidence was required to have bail denied. With committal hearing, only enough evidence was needed to show the case should go to trial.

From bail hearing...

June 30, 2012

Justice David Boddice rejected Mr Davis's argument, saying the circumstantial case had factors that "if accepted by a jury" would make a strong argument.

"I do not accept the contention that the Crown case is a weak case," he said, denying bail.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-allisons-murder/story-e6freoof-1226412721085

-----------------------------------------------------

Committal Hearing...

March 20, 2013

‘‘I'm of the opinion the evidence is sufficient to put the defendant on trial on the offences charged,’’ Mr Butler said.

‘‘It will be for the jury to assess the evidence ...

‘‘That much is apparent by the fact that only 40 witnesses were examined out of some 285 witnesses whose statements have been tendered.’’

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...-for-murder-20130320-2geno.html#ixzz35LCK8Gsq

 

[spratsmum]

If GBC does get a 'not guilty' from jurors, what happens about his imprisonment for nearly 2 years? Would he be compensated?

unfortunately yes, someone itemised it in a post late last week - he will make a lot of money, at our expense.

He would girls back then as well, are they still at Brookfield State School, if they are it would mean he would likely move back to that area. Perhaps Bruce Flegg could give him a job!

 

[Cattail]

Go to address bar at top of page, one click to highlight the address (link), right click, in box that comes up click "copy". Then go to your reply post that you want to add the link to, right click & click "paste". The link will be added to your post.

I have added the link. Sorry :seeya:

 

[spratsmum]

As I am sitting here spending hours on a beautiful Sunday in Brisbane, the question once again comes to mind, why does this case compel me so, what is it that I find almost addictive. I don't know anybody involved, I don't live near Brookfield, but I am vitally interested in everything about it.

 

[kiwijayne]

unfortunately yes, someone itemised it in a post late last week - he will make a lot of money, at our expense.

He would girls back then as well, are they still at Brookfield State School, if they are it would mean he would likely move back to that area. Perhaps Bruce Flegg could give him a job!

I don't think they are at Brookfield School don't they live with the Dickie's?

Not sure Bruce will have a job himself to be honest.

 

[Timmy]

As I am sitting here spending hours on a beautiful Sunday in Brisbane, the question once again comes to mind, why does this case compel me so, what is it that I find almost addictive. I don't know anybody involved, I don't live near Brookfield, but I am vitally interested in everything about it.

I know! I feel the same way. Almost 'driving myself crazy' with my obsession. So many questions that will probably never be answered.

A couple of random thoughts that have already been discussed but I just can't let go of...

1. Why did GBC not just say on that morning to police that he and Alison had had a fight the night before about his affair and she had scratched him and then ran off?

2. Why, when they asked about her state of mind, did he not say, she had been really depressed and he was worried she was suicidal and that's why he had phoned the police so early?

3. Like others have said, I really don't believe GBC would have known what Allison was wearing that morning AND it is far more likely that if she had a Lorna Jane outfit that she would wear that outfit when walking out in public in Brookfield and the actual outfit she had on when she was found would much more likely be what she was wearing around the house the night before (when he did actually see her) and also if it was baggy .... Much easier to get over her hair without messing up her new hairdo.