The Crown v Gerard Baden-Clay, 9th July - Trial Day 17

[kiwijayne]

Yes which makes me wonder, if Allison was going to suicide, why would she have charged her phone?

Also why get her hair redone, organise a sleepover, organise to drop dresses off or plan to attend a conference.

It makes no sense really.

 

[BJsleuth]

I'm sure I read it here but hey I could be mistaken.

I googled it was mentioned here some stage but I can't seem to get the link up

That may have been me KJ. I wasn't saying it was endometrial blood, just that it is possible to differentiate menstrual blood from that caused by a wound because menstrual blood has endometrial cells.

 

[Susan12]

I have a question. The jury have to find him unanimously guilty to be found guilty. Do they have to find him unanimously not guilty to be not guilty? How does the ratio work if not all say guilty?

To my mind he did it, whether you want to accept all the pieces as evidence or only some it's still the only reasonable explanation for what happened to her - that she was killed and by her husband. I think the prosecution ran through the alternative options sufficiently to show they are implausible so you have to accept the only one that is. Sometimes I think the process of elimination can go to substantiating evidence and proving a finding in a circumstantial case, like trying to find the cause of death. By saying what it's not you can narrow right down to what it must be. Not everything leaves its own mark which is why elimination can work. Sometimes it's the lack of something that proves it. We use the process of elimination to find causes in other areas of life, this is no different.

The judge said murder is when you intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (that resulted in her death I guess). Manslaughter would be you accidentally caused it but didn't mean to, like hitting someone with a car while drink driving. You didn't mean to hurt them but are culpable. Here the fingernail marks and other scratches show she wasn't suddenly struck down with a single blow not meant to cause serious damage, she was really fighting back. You only fight back that hard if someone is seriously hurting you and for more than a few seconds. So there's intent to hurt her there, whether to kill or not, at minimum it meets the grievous bodily harm, so I'd find for murder rather than manslaughter. I don't think he planned this for weeks, I think something's happened where he's just lost it that night and acted out either rationally or irrationally.

 

[Thinking]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-allison-in-2012/story-fnihsrf2-1226982264933

Good idea Camp Chair. One more time before I turn in for the night - night all

 

[Seeking]

Further to my last post about looking for a better quote, this one is clearer. Allison obviously can't give evidence so someone giving evidence saying Allison said something can be unreliable. That witness may be lying, may have misunderstood, or just isn't correct. Without Allison to clarify what she said, it's a risk to accept that evidence.
Hope that helps.

Thanks Alioop and Freya ...... makes perfect sense... all clear now!.... and still catching up!

 

[JK673]

Playing devils advocate here - stress affects everyone differently.

Why is that devils advocate i think i mentioned stress in my earlier post. She will be very stressed.

 

[JK673]

It could be extreme stress


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes I mentioned she was probably stressed in an earlier post

 

[kiwijayne]

Why is that devils advocate i think i mentioned stress in my earlier post. She will be very stressed.

Heck I think at one stage I fell asleep in court Doh

 

[MadDoc]

In this type of case If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and walks like a duck.....it has a very HIGH probability that it IS a duck.....

But how can you be certain it is a duck, beyond reasonable doubt?

 

[Trooper]

logically.. if a jury decided he was guilty of manslaughter, they would also have to find he did this slaughtering in his sleep. That's the evidence he gave.. sound asleep. Likewise, interfering with a corpse at the Kholo Bridge.. done in his sleep.

irrational.

 

[JK673]

I have a question. The jury have to find him unanimously guilty to be found guilty. Do they have to find him unanimously not guilty to be not guilty? How does the ratio work if not all say guilty?

To my mind he did it, whether you want to accept all the pieces as evidence or only some it's still the only reasonable explanation for what happened to her - that she was killed and by her husband. I think the prosecution ran through the alternative options sufficiently to show they are implausible so you have to accept the only one that is. Sometimes I think the process of elimination can go to substantiating evidence and proving a finding in a circumstantial case, like trying to find the cause of death. By saying what it's not you can narrow right down to what it must be. Not everything leaves its own mark which is why elimination can work. Sometimes it's the lack of something that proves it. We use the process of elimination to find causes in other areas of life, this is no different.

The judge said murder is when you intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (that resulted in her death I guess). Manslaughter would be you accidentally caused it but didn't mean to, like hitting someone with a car while drink driving. You didn't mean to hurt them but are culpable. Here the fingernail marks and other scratches show she wasn't suddenly struck down with a single blow not meant to cause serious damage, she was really fighting back. You only fight back that hard if someone is seriously hurting you and for more than a few seconds. So there's intent to hurt her there, whether to kill or not, at minimum it meets the grievous bodily harm, so I'd find for murder rather than manslaughter. I don't think he planned this for weeks, I think something's happened where he's just lost it that night and acted out either rationally or irrationally.

Good question

 

[JK673]

Good idea Camp Chair. One more time before I turn in for the night - night all

He is looking at us in that photo lol

 

[MadDoc]

Chuckling, I have to say, yes but is it beyond reasonable doubt that it is a duck?

snap!!!

 

[Waitingnow]

Perhaps he didn't travel back home in the Captiva, he was transported back in a 2nd vehicle and the clothes and shoes he had on were removed and dumped.

Absolutely .... Simple answer to this question! All trace of clothing worm that night disposed of ... Even if he traveled back in captiva ... Shoes and clothes off plastic bag done gone ...

 

[JK673]

But how can you be certain it is a duck, beyond reasonable doubt?

Haha I said high probability (85% - 90 %) NOT certainty..... noone can ever be certain (100%)

 

[kiwijayne]

logically.. if a jury decided he was guilty of manslaughter, they would also have to find he did this slaughtering in his sleep. That's the evidence he gave.. sound asleep. Likewise, interfering with a corpse at the Kholo Bridge.. done in his sleep.

irrational.

Apparently that has successfully been used as a defence murder while sleepwalking

http://health.usnews.com/health-new...l-cases-that-invoked-the-sleepwalking-defense

 

[Mr Marple]

My favourite words from QC Fuller....

Mr Baden-Clay risked having his “double life” exposed at the impending run-in, Mr Fuller said.

"The way he was finally exposed in this trial," he told the jury.

"So you can see what he had to lose, ladies and gentleman.”

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...prosecution-20140709-zt1pv.html#ixzz36yQ2ZssV

They're not calling QC Fuller "The Silver Fox" for nothing.

 

[BJsleuth]

I believe GBC didn't want to do the 15 minutes talking to Allison at night because that would have clued her in to too much and enabled her to catch him it still at it. He conceded in the end because he had another plan.

 

[JK673]

Absolutely .... Simple answer to this question! All trace of clothing worm that night disposed of ... Even if he traveled back in captiva ... Shoes and clothes off plastic bag done gone ...

Worm or caterpillar?

 

[JK673]

Absolutely .... Simple answer to this question! All trace of clothing worm that night disposed of ... Even if he traveled back in captiva ... Shoes and clothes off plastic bag done gone ...

Ohhh Good thinking 99