GBC Trial General Discussion Thread #4

[bellgirl]

Can anyone please give me the address of the court I'm going to?

Brisbane Magistrates Court, Level 6, Room 17. But please don't worry Kiwi - they'll be so many people you'll just end up following the crowd. Everyone's going in the same direction. If you're there when the sun comes up and you're first - just ask admin

It's surreal to actually be part of the trial - hope you feel this way too. Looking forward to your posts!

 

[Trooper]

even murderers have good luck. its distributed without fear or favour among the washed and the unwashed.. its like rain.. falls on the just and the unjust..

 

[Her Honour]

Yes it's something that has been at the forefront of my mind from the start. If we assume that the toys etc. were scattered in an attempt to divert attention from the blood, GBC obviously knew that the blood was there. Why was there no attempt to remove it? He called police, he must have known that they were going to attend, surely you would tidy up "loose ends" before making the call in case they did respond quicker than anticipated.

Of course, it may not necessarily have been the blood initially being attempted to be concealed, perhaps related 'activity' in the rear - other marks/evidence. I think it's fair to say, on the evidence, that the most likely explanation is that the stuff was grabbed, in haste, from its proximal location, in order to conceal something else having been in or gone on in there, itself evidenced by the blood.

To clarify: I was trying to say the position of the stain made it UNlikely to be menstrual. And yes, I believe it can and would have been differentiated upon testing.

I thought the total volume estimated DID sound significant at the time (i.e. of a scale you'd sure notice had you done it yourself AND to take your point, cleaned up!)

 

[Cattail]

I will bid you all goodnight as it is not long till I have to be up for work


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kiwijayne]

Brisbane Magistrates Court, Level 6, Room 17. But please don't worry Kiwi - they'll be so many people you'll just end up following the crowd. Everyone's going in the same direction. If you're there when the sun comes up and you're first - just ask admin

It's surreal to actually be part of the trial - hope you feel this way too. Looking forward to your posts!

Dare I saw it I'm looking forward to it. From the start here I was enthralled with the case and I get to see it out to the end.

 

[JCB]

Cattail I totally agree, it is a case of contradictions.

It just seems to me that there is something, something that eludes us at this point but will become so obvious if and when it is uncovered which will tie everything up in a neat little package (to quote Homer Simpson...). I've got not the faintest idea what that something is, but I think it's out there! As it stands now, I just can't make the puzzle fit.

 

[JCB]

Of course, it may not necessarily have been the blood initially being attempted to be concealed, perhaps related 'activity' in the rear - other marks/evidence. I think it's fair to say, on the evidence, that the most likely explanation is that the stuff was grabbed, in haste, from its proximal location, in order to conceal something else having been in or gone on in there, itself evidenced by the blood.

To clarify: I was trying to say the position of the stain made it UNlikely to be menstrual. And yes, I believe it can and would have been differentiated upon testing.

I thought the total volume estimated DID sound significant at the time (i.e. of a scale you'd sure notice had you done it yourself AND to take your point, cleaned up!)

Re-read your post, my apologies

And I better be off to bed too, goodnight to all.

 

[catswhiskers]

Thank you for the kind words, they are reciprocated in kind.

1. Yes the Captiva was a new acquisition which obviously narrows the timeframe in which the blood stain occurred, but in my opinion it doesn't narrow it down sufficiently and must be considered only of minor probative value, if at all.

2. I don't necessarily think that this is unusual, I've cut myself fairly significantly on a number of occasions and haven't thought it worthy of notifying someone, unless of course they noticed the wound and later questioned it. There have also been times where I've been in a rush where I haven't even noticed that I had injured myself and it was bleeding fairly profusely. Obviously not saying that this is the case here but nevertheless the possibility exists. DrWatson would be able to help here (if he/she is to return) but particularly vascular areas such as the scalp, feet and perhaps even the hands often bleed profusely from even the most minor of incisions, it's possible that the wound bled for some time and the wound was barely visible shortly thereafter.

3. I'm no pathologist or expert on the female reproductive system (or females in general for that matter!) but I'd have thought it possible to forensically differentiate between menstrual blood and "normal" blood? Or perhaps not, like I said I'm as far from an expert on the subject as you can get! I would be interested in your version of events as to how menstrual blood came into contact with that part of the car because I can't really picture it (but I appreciate that may be a bit graphic for this discussion which is at the academic stage anyway).

4. Seems unusual yes, but I would have thought it would have been just as quick, if not quicker to give the panel a quick wipe over than to throw in a bunch of toys/clothes in a misguided attempt to divert attention. A quick clean obviously wouldn't have removed all traces of blood, but it would seem the obvious thing to do if you were trying to conceal a crime scene. Could be something sinister of course but again in the absence of a likely source of the blood (disregarding the menstrual blood scenario at this time) I couldn't place much value on it.

If the blood had been found anywhere in the front driver's side (or even passenger side if it could be confirmed that GBC sometimes drove the Captiva with Allison as a passenger) it would be a whole other story. We could explain away that quantity of flowing blood quite easily if it was in the front of the car where Allison would be expected to be sitting for any length of time. But it's not - it's in the rear of the car in an odd position. Even if we imagined that there could be a reason for Allison to be sitting in the second row of passenger seats, she would have to have a fairly substantial actively bleeding knee or outer thigh or similar to cause that spreading stain of blood. The other alternative is that she had some body part bleeding while pressed up against that side of the car while curled up in the trunk space that is formed when the seats are in the folded down position ...

 

[BJsleuth]

Of course, it may not necessarily have been the blood initially being attempted to be concealed, perhaps related 'activity' in the rear - other marks/evidence. I think it's fair to say, on the evidence, that the most likely explanation is that the stuff was grabbed, in haste, from its proximal location, in order to conceal something else having been in or gone on in there, itself evidenced by the blood.

To clarify: I was trying to say the position of the stain made it UNlikely to be menstrual. And yes, I believe it can and would have been differentiated upon testing.

I thought the total volume estimated DID sound significant at the time (i.e. of a scale you'd sure notice had you done it yourself AND to take your point, cleaned up!)

It is my understanding that the blood was in a position that when the seat was up, it wasn't visible, is that correct?. Combined with poor lighting and possibly unexpected bleeding due to the manner of death and it could easily have been overlooked I imagine.

 

[catswhiskers]

It is my understanding that the blood was in a position that when the seat was up, it wasn't visible, is that correct?. Combined with poor lighting and possibly unexpected bleeding due to the manner of death and it could easily have been overlooked I imagine.

Other way around I think BJsleuth - it seems like when the seat was folded down, only the top of the stain was visible, but when in the upright 'seating' position the entire can be seen. At least that's how it appears to me when looking at the police photos. I reckon there's a chance that something could have been covering the carpet area, but an injured part of Allison's body could have been touching the side of the car slightly. The blood could have trickled downwards and not been at all obvious when her body was moved - or not noticed until it was way too late to do anything about it but keep the seats down and toss in some boxes of toys as a hopeful cover up.

 

[FigTree]

MSM (Courier David Murray) Timeline Summary for the Trial.
Days 1-14 Complete

There are also individual Days (1-14) and some others at the Media/Timeline/MSM thread for Baden-Clay Case.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...9April2012-MEDIA-TIMELINE-LINKS-NO-DISCUSSION

:seeya:

 

[BJsleuth]

The photos posted on the previous page answer my last question about the position of the seats and blood. Maybe the other two things explain it - the lighting and the bleeding was unnoticed and not expected with the manner of death. It would be more obvious if it had been cleaned which could also explain why it wasn't.

 

[BJsleuth]

Other way around I think BJsleuth - it seems like when the seat was folded down, only the top of the stain was visible, but when in the upright 'seating' position the entire can be seen. At least that's how it appears to me when looking at the police photos. I reckon there's a chance that something could have been covering the carpet area, but an injured part of Allison's body could have been touching the side of the car slightly. The blood could have trickled downwards and not been at all obvious when her body was moved - or not noticed until it was way too late to do anything about it but keep the seats down and toss in some boxes of toys as a hopeful cover up.

You're right CW. So it would have been just popping the seats up and not checking afterwards perhaps. Thanks for the photos too!

 

[Freya1977]

That being the case, it makes it even more astounding that not a single person saw him leaving the house, travelling to the bridge, disposing of Allison's body and then returning home (and left nothing of forensic value either). I can think of 3 possibilities -

1. He's much smarter than some of us give him credit for.
2. He's the luckiest guy on the planet.
3. He didn't do it, well not the disposing part anyway.

Respectfully disagree. Why would anyone see him at say, 1:00am on a week night? He may very well have passed other cars but i know I don't take notice of every car I pass, nor can you even see the type of car at night with headlights coming at you. The fact that nobody witnessed it happening does not make him smart, and I don't think he's that lucky either seeing he's on trial for the murder.

He may very well have left forensic evidence at the site, but with all that rain and the level of decomposition there was nothing left. Unless he cut himself or left fingerprints somewhere at the bridge, what else would you expect to find there left from a couple of minutes dumping a body?

 

[Freya1977]

Yes it is all so freaking contradictory.

There is some law which I can't remember the name of that says that at every scene there is some transfer of evidence.

How can one person:

1. Leave both no evidence AND no sign of a clean up inside the house

2.. Have no evidence on person or property that ties him to location of body

Yet 3. Fail to even attempt to wipe a spill of blood in the back of the car.

And I may be wrong here, but if he had wiped that blood away with a wet one, there may be a sign of clean up, but even less evidence it had anything to do with Allison.

It does my head in


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's very simple. He didn't know she bled.

 

[catswhiskers]

Actually now I am going to qualify my own previous post - in the police pics of the car and the blood stains, it does look like the first row of passenger seats is in the folded down position. Maybe when they were upright the blood wasn't visible at all? The blood is on the tyre hump (no idea what that is really called), but when the police took the photos with the toys in the back - that first row of seats was in the upright position, and only the second row was down (so the toys are actually on top of those folded down seats - creating the boot space.

 

[Fluffykins]

Just asking and not in resp9nse to anyone but Is there a roll eyes emoticon anywhere???

Here 'tis:

It's third row down about the middle when I expand the list to full screen ... or type as : rolleyes : without the spaces.

 

[FigTree]

My bold...

If the blood had been found anywhere in the front driver's side (or even passenger side if it could be confirmed that GBC sometimes drove the Captiva with Allison as a passenger) it would be a whole other story. We could explain away that quantity of flowing blood quite easily if it was in the front of the car where Allison would be expected to be sitting for any length of time. But it's not - it's in the rear of the car in an odd position. Even if we imagined that there could be a reason for Allison to be sitting in the second row of passenger seats, she would have to have a fairly substantial actively bleeding knee or outer thigh or similar to cause that spreading stain of blood. The other alternative is that she had some body part bleeding while pressed up against that side of the car while curled up in the trunk space that is formed when the seats are in the folded down position ...

I think because the blood was found in the back of the car it is significant - and by one small detail of evidence given...

One of the children said:

She said she didn’t sit in the back seat of Snowy “very often”.
The girl said her school backpacks were left in the boot of the car, and so were her parent’s computers and work bags.
She said it wasn’t very often that someone sat in the very back seat of Sparky, either.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/day-12-gerard-badenclay-on-trial-accused-of-murdering-wife-allison-in-2012/story-fnihsrf2-1226971633938

 

[Deleted member 83851]

I wonder how many members of the jury have suffered from depression. Just wondering. Seems the issue of it has held great import in this trial. Certainly got a lot of people talking.

Personally the amount of weight put on Allison's depression, as a defense for GBC, makes me feel angrier than I thought I would be. Even though everyone has been warning us here for the last 2 years that when the case eventually got to court Allison's memory would be raked over the coals, this sneaky undermining of her capabilities still surprised me. Well what do you know. They actually went there. Instead of trying to find a possible alternative to GBC. Hmmm.

 

[Fuskier]

<modsnip>

We have now been privy to the full prosecution's case, the evidence, the defence witnesses, the lengthy auto-biographical life story of GBC and the alternative explanation of events by the defence. Anybody is entitled to form an opinion about his guilt or innocence, (especially at this point), just as the jury must. Anyone can have an opinion about what his punishment ought be. If someone wants to remain open to considering possibilities other than GBC killed his wife that does not make that person "unbiased or more open minded or better or worse than anyone else.
About the depression - I also have experience with depression and anxiety and as I've read so have a number here. The point is not that Allison did not have depression nor that she didn't seek and receive treatment for depression. The point is that GBC and his family testified to a description of Allison that was irrelevant (years before) so as to try to make her look suicidal at the time of her death. The fact is her behaviour around the time of her death was a good indication that her depression was well controlled and she was not suicidal. Then there is also no way the defence can present a plausible version of events with Allison committing suicide. Well, actually I don't think they can but let's see in their closing. I'm not offended that the defence would detail Allison's depression, past symptoms, recent symptoms but it is awful to manipulate the fact she has depression to create reasonable doubt and help her murderer to avoid punishment. That offends me deeply!
As you say here "nobody is qualified to answer on Allison's behalf or make suppositions that she would, or would not do a particular act." I agree! How dare GBC or his family speak to this!

Lastly, the prosecution can only put forward the evidence they have. It is pointless to criticise a lack of evidence regarding certain elements of their version of events. They cannot find evidence that wasn't left behind. But with the evidence they do have
fingernail-like scratches on GBC's face that very day
Allison's blood in the back of a new car
Plant material in her hair indicating her hair was on the ground at home
And circumstantial evidence aplenty including financial motives, affair with mistress and mistress applying particular pressure that very day, testimony of the accused that he lies everyday to everybody.
I hope the jury can consider that there is no other reasonable alternative to what happened.
If they find GBC guilty I won't consider them a lynch mob.

Thank you Bazinga. Well said.