ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Gable Tostee , murder cases , New Zealand cases

Reply
Old 17th October 2016, 04:24 AM   #321
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 424
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Why do you hope they heed it? I repeat, why are you so invested in this idiot's innocence?
I just told you - because the judge gave them a directive that they should not take his actions after she fell into account when determining guilt or innocence. Am I supposed to be hoping they ignore the judge, just because I don't like the look of his face? If they follow his directive and find him guilty, I have no problem at all with that.
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 05:15 AM   #322
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,531
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
He did not illegally detain her - he was defending himself & his property
Untrue.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Police officers detain people everyday
Irrelevant.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
and I have seen bouncers do far worse than what Tostee did and nobody questions it
Have you reported these illegal actions to the authorities?

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
So there is no "should have".
Yes, there is.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
What happened - has happened. Rather we can look at the motive and the underlying motive for both of them is inebriation. Would she have climbed off the balcony had she been sober - hell no.
Irrelevant. If she hadn't been locked on the balcony she wouldn't have died.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
As for poor Wareina she could have / should have stopped drinking earlier, or told him please dont put me on the balcony when I am drunk,
Did you actually read the transcript? Or just the bits that supported your opinions?

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
she could have actually been nice and not commited assault for an hour -
Unsupported assertion.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
So as there was no underlying causality apart from inebriation for either party
Untrue. There's the matter of Tostee illegally imprisoning Wright in a dangerous locale rather than take other steps.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
As for justice I dont see that it can be just to find him guilty, it may be that the precidence can result in justice in other cases or it may result in further unjust guilty verdicts
Or, and this might be a revolutionary concept to you, it might prevent further deaths.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 05:18 AM   #323
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,531
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
This business of stating locking someone on a balcony is unsafe I don't buy in any way shape or form.<snip>
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
It is unsafe with hindsight only.
Complete nonsense.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 05:19 AM   #324
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,531
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Lawyers are obliged professionally to leave common sense at the door. They are always acting for some one, prosecutors, defence attorneys, parties to a divorce. Even appeal court judges are acting for the status quo of the last decision.
You have a winning hand as ANAL, you can dine from the tin labelled common sense with no fear.
More utter rubbish.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 05:21 AM   #325
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,531
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Excuses for the murderer, blame for the victim.
Yeah.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 05:24 AM   #326
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,531
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Huh, just a plain old misogynist.



Now, where else have I seen that quote, or something very similar.

That's right, Twitter, tweeted by a gareththomasnz, bodybuilder:



Well, you've got one less to worry about now, eh?
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 05:25 AM   #327
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,531
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
A couple more tweets that may shed some light on the posting in this thread:


Nothing to see here.
Maybe after Trump loses he should move.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 07:18 AM   #328
kali1137
Muse
 
kali1137's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Purgatory, PA
Posts: 647
I read through the transcripts of what he recorded and have some questions and opinions on the case. First, he is very much responsible for her death. I wouldn't go so far as to say murder but definitely manslaughter. He keeps her against her will, there can be no doubt about that. She asked to leave and he said no with a smug "because you were a bad girl". There is no self protection involved in that, he was angry and punishing her. It is very reasonable to assume that it would be dangerous to put a highly inebriated person on a high balcony. Not just because it has happened before but common sense, and also - because it has happened before. His behavior after is also very telling. He lies and leaves out details when telling the story to his father. I am also confused about him calling her phone several times after. Especially knowing it was in his pocket.
So to my questions - why was he recording all this to begin with in the first place? The second question, if he was completely innocent in all this why not lock her outside the apartment and call the police? How much trouble could she have possibly caused for him if he innocent of any wrong doing and had all her destruction on tape?
kali1137 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 12:21 PM   #329
Fixit
Scholar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 91
Originally Posted by Hard Cheese View Post
I just told you - because the judge gave them a directive that they should not take his actions after she fell into account when determining guilt or innocence. Am I supposed to be hoping they ignore the judge, just because I don't like the look of his face? If they follow his directive and find him guilty, I have no problem at all with that.
I think the Judge's comments are critical, there's no blueprint as to how someone should react, or will react in such a situation. When Tostee asked his father why such '****' happened to him one can read sinister or regret - certainly not predict guilt or innocence from them alone.
Fixit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 06:07 PM   #330
gareththomasnz
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 29
Dont think they wil aquit also I wasnt aware he had someting in his hand when leaving

Looking at that pic she probably could have made it to the next balcony had she swung it right

So far I still think he deserves aquittal but have we heard all evidence presented in the trial?

Most of the anti Tostee rantings on this forum are assuming guilt on Tostee's behalf, also I dont think any of you have listened to more than the final 5 - 10 minutes recorded if any at all.

Its "innocent until proven guilty", and "the whole truth"

The whole truth in this case means the whole recording & all evidence presented to the jurors, not the transcripts which portray 20% of the information the actual recording does. Not just the nasty bit of the recording but all of it in full context.

That is non-bias

Also right now Tostee is an innocent man that stands accused. So have any of you presented any evidence of his guilt?

No I dont think so. What you have done is ignore much of what transpired and twisted things to match your bias.

This is not a situation where Tostee must prove he is innocent. The crown must prove he is guilty of murder or manslaughter.

I dont think they can as he was the victim of a prolonged hour long assault which none of you it seems have bothered to listen to on the recordings. He also did not assault the woman. Her response was disproportionate and irrational because she was blind drunk. As was her violence through out the evening.

Innocent untill proven guilty - not guilty until proven innocent

If you have just heard the last 5 minutes & read some transcripts then bugger off - you dont have enough info to form an opinion

You people are a lynch mob - disgraceful

Last edited by gareththomasnz; 17th October 2016 at 06:23 PM.
gareththomasnz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 06:38 PM   #331
Shiner
Motor Mouth
 
Shiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Dont think they wil aquit also I wasnt aware he had someting in his hand when leaving
I think this is new information. I don't recall it being mentioned before. It is interesting though.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Looking at that pic
Which pic?

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
So far I still think he deserves aquittal
Yep. You've said that a few times now. Although you started this post expressing doubt?

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
The whole truth in this case means the whole recording & all evidence presented to the jurors, not the transcripts which portray 20% of the information the actual recording does. Not just the nasty bit of the recording but all of it in full context.
You were asked to provide a link or directions to a full recording. You obviously know where to find that. You didn't produce.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
That is non-bias
.
Haha. Funny. You said "non-bias".

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
This is not a situation where Tostee must prove he is innocent. The crown must prove he is guilty of murder or manslaughter.
Has someone in this thread suggested otherwise?

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
I dont think they can

Yep. We know. Got it loud and clear.

Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
then bugger off -
No. I don't want to.

Last edited by Shiner; 17th October 2016 at 06:39 PM.
Shiner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 06:41 PM   #332
gareththomasnz
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 29
Lets wait & see

There is a bias toward convicting tostee on this forum - Putting a drunk idiot on a balcony after they assaulted you does not constitute manslaughter

I am not your mother - perform your own internet search for the recordings

Things that would change my mind -

1. He did infact sexually assault her earlier in the evening

2. He had seriously assaulted her, actually punched her hard in the guts or similar

Frankly the way she was behaving had he slapped her in the face or yelled in her face full volume I still would not consider him to be guilty

Now if you have not listened to the recordings of her behaviour for 30-40 minutes then go and look for it.

We could just show a video of the police putting Tostee in jail and rant on hey look at this poor man - the police are putting him in jail - never mind why

That is the mentality of bias that you folks have displayed - lynch mob

Last edited by gareththomasnz; 17th October 2016 at 06:49 PM.
gareththomasnz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 06:47 PM   #333
Shiner
Motor Mouth
 
Shiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Things that would change my mind -

1. He did infact sexually assault her earlier in the evening

2. He had seriously assaulted her, actually punched her hard in the guts or similar
Amazing. Two things that could never actually be proven, huh? There's that old "non-bias" again.
Shiner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 06:58 PM   #334
gareththomasnz
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 29
Shiner I'm going to ignore you.

Now interesting that I dont think anybody on here has pointed out Tostee has been getting psychiatric assistance.

Not for violence or aggression but for depression and self esteem issues.

I wonder if Wareina also has some psychiatric background. I could find zero internet footprint on wareina wright even searching exclusively prior to the unfortunate evening. I can not find anybody online even claiming to be friends of the deceased. That is quite unusual.

"Should Ms Wright’s mental state be considered due to alcohol consumption?"

My god I wonder what the judge will say

Quote:
The jury deliberating on the verdict in the trial of Gable Tostee have been told not to speculate about a silver item he was holding as he left his Gold Coast apartment after Warriena Wright fell to her death from his balcony.

The Brisbane Supreme Court jury asked Justice John Byrne four questions, including if they should take into consideration how drunk Wright was and an item seen in Tostee's hand on CCTV footage after she died.

Justice Byrne told the jury they should not consider Tostee's conduct after the alleged offence as part of their deliberations, but were open to interpret if Wright's state of mind was influenced by alcohol.

Last edited by gareththomasnz; 17th October 2016 at 07:27 PM.
gareththomasnz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 08:18 PM   #335
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,511
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Now interesting that I dont think anybody on here has pointed out Tostee has been getting psychiatric assistance.

Not for violence or aggression but for depression and self esteem issues.
Really?

A bodybuilder with self-esteem issues?

I am *********** shocked.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 08:21 PM   #336
gareththomasnz
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 29
Bigoted remark noted from the atheist

Quote:
He also said as Mr Tostee's age was not part of the evidence they must not draw any conclusions from it.

However, the jury is allowed to consider if Ms Wright's state of mind was influenced by alcohol, the court heard.
Clearly the jury is in dissagreement or they wouldnt be asking stupid questions

Also average IQ is not so bright so this can go either way


I think the two outstandingly stupid questions are about his age and if the fact she was drunk are relevant

Kewl if it went to hung jury then we could argue for six months... not

Last edited by gareththomasnz; 17th October 2016 at 08:24 PM.
gareththomasnz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 08:24 PM   #337
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 42,352
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Shiner I'm going to ignore you.

Now interesting that I dont think anybody on here has pointed out Tostee has been getting psychiatric assistance.

Not for violence or aggression but for depression and self esteem issues.

I wonder if Wareina also has some psychiatric background. I could find zero internet footprint on wareina wright even searching exclusively prior to the unfortunate evening. I can not find anybody online even claiming to be friends of the deceased. That is quite unusual.

"Should Ms Wright’s mental state be considered due to alcohol consumption?"

My god I wonder what the judge will say
More excuse the murderer blame the victim nonsense.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 08:34 PM   #338
Ben1985
New Blood
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 23
Originally Posted by kali1137 View Post
So to my questions - why was he recording all this to begin with in the first place? The second question, if he was completely innocent in all this why not lock her outside the apartment and call the police? How much trouble could she have possibly caused for him if he innocent of any wrong doing and had all her destruction on tape?
I seem to recall reading somewhere that he claimed he'd been stolen from previously, and so he always recorded his hook-ups so that he could prove someone was there if something went missing.
Ben1985 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 09:23 PM   #339
Shiner
Motor Mouth
 
Shiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,796
Oh my. What ever will I do now? Ignored? By someone with an agenda? That's never happened.

On Tostee's youtube account, there is video of a woman stealing his wallet from his loungeroom. Taken by fixed surveillance camera.

I've always found it curious that he had surveillance before the night Ms Wright fell to her death, but apparently had no working camera, or no camera that night.

Makes me wonder what he was carrying .......
Shiner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 10:05 PM   #340
gareththomasnz
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 29
Its looking in his favour from the judges responses

Quote:
UPDATE: THE jury has handed another note to Justice John Byrne, again delaying a decision in the murder trial of Gable Tostee.

One question the jury asked was if Tostee removing Warriena Wright from his home to the balcony constitutes removing her from his home. Justice Byrne’s answer was yes.

Another was when does the act to remove a disorderly person begin, to which he responded it did not matter.

The jury was then sent back to continue their deliberations.
My poll has a few respondents but most are not guilty.

I think he was recording in case there were false rape or assault allegations. Which there may well have been the next day had she not fallen off the balcony.

Last edited by gareththomasnz; 17th October 2016 at 10:08 PM.
gareththomasnz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 10:20 PM   #341
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,910
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
Its looking in his favour from the judges responses



My poll has a few respondents but most are not guilty.

I think he was recording in case there were false rape or assault allegations. Which there may well have been the next day had she not fallen off the balcony.
I think we can totally rule out a verdict of murder at this stage.
In the case of a manslaughter conviction the judge presumably has complete discretion on sentencing.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 10:22 PM   #342
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 424
Originally Posted by Shiner View Post
On Tostee's youtube account, there is video of a woman stealing his wallet from his loungeroom. Taken by fixed surveillance camera.

I've always found it curious that he had surveillance before the night Ms Wright fell to her death, but apparently had no working camera, or no camera that night.

Makes me wonder what he was carrying .......
If he was disposing of surveillance gear (say a small camera on a stick) and presumably wiping any recording on it, don't you also wonder why he didn't erase the recording on his phone? If there was no recording, the Crown wouldn't have much of a case.
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 10:45 PM   #343
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,910
Unable to reach a verdict. This is where theater of the absurd begins.
Beyond reasonable doubt is the bar, and this has clearly not been reached.
What purpose is achieved by a war of attrition in the jury room now?

Of course it may be 11 not guiltys and one guilty, in which case a just result is still possible.

Last edited by Samson; 17th October 2016 at 10:46 PM.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 10:49 PM   #344
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 424
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Unable to reach a verdict. This is where theater of the absurd begins.
Beyond reasonable doubt is the bar, and this has clearly not been reached.
What purpose is achieved by a war of attrition in the jury room now?
Agreed. I also think these two directions don't leave much for them to debate

Quote:
The judge said the jury had asked when does a person behaving in a disorderly manner start? He told the court and jury the answer was it does not matter, if the jury is satisfied reasonable force was used to remove a disorderly person then it must find the accused not guilty of both murder and manslaughter.

The judge said the jury's second question regarded whether removing someone from a balcony constituted removal from a property, Justice John Byrne said the answer was "yes."
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 10:59 PM   #345
Shiner
Motor Mouth
 
Shiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by Hard Cheese View Post
If he was disposing of surveillance gear (say a small camera on a stick) and presumably wiping any recording on it, don't you also wonder why he didn't erase the recording on his phone? If there was no recording, the Crown wouldn't have much of a case.
I've always wondered why he disclosed the audio. It is just as damning for him as it is exonerating. (If it is either) I'm sure he thought it would exonerate him.

Purely hypothetically, I think a video might show things differently than the audio tape.
Especially when things got physical. Using his body weight to pin her. Choking/not choking her.

It does seem a long shot. Just thought I'd put it out there. I'm feeling lonely now that I'm being ignored.
Shiner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 11:04 PM   #346
gareththomasnz
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 29
I wonder do you guys know how long a jury may deliberate for max in Queensland as its a hung jury at present

Clearly there will be one or two of them unable to aquit on grounds of bias ;-)

Judge has told them to keep debating - could this go on all week?

Last edited by gareththomasnz; 17th October 2016 at 11:05 PM.
gareththomasnz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 11:07 PM   #347
Shiner
Motor Mouth
 
Shiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,796
Here is the link to the quoted news article.

http://www.news.com.au/national/quee...80d8e6127ded9e

I really can't see how the judge's ruling that he had successfully removed her from his property can possibly hold water. Try that one on a real estate agent. "I'm not paying for the balcony. It isn't part of the property"

But going off the way the question was asked and that ruling, I think he's going to walk.

Last edited by Shiner; 17th October 2016 at 11:08 PM.
Shiner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 11:25 PM   #348
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 424
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
I wonder do you guys know how long a jury may deliberate for max in Queensland as its a hung jury at present
It's at the judge's discretion. For a murder charge they have to come up with a unanimous verdict, if they can't he will keep directing them to go back until they agree. Ultimately if he thinks there is no way they will come to an agreement, he can dismiss the jury....but that would be last resort
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 11:35 PM   #349
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,910
Originally Posted by Hard Cheese View Post
It's at the judge's discretion. For a murder charge they have to come up with a unanimous verdict, if they can't he will keep directing them to go back until they agree. Ultimately if he thinks there is no way they will come to an agreement, he can dismiss the jury....but that would be last resort
We have a seriously hung jury on this thread, which may be representative.
On the Lundy thread, once Atheist examined the evidence we got a unanimous not guilty, the same evidence with which the jury found unanimous guilt.
That was a binary choice, this case sits on a continuum, but not even lionking seems to expect a verdict of murder.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2016, 11:54 PM   #350
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 424
Originally Posted by Shiner View Post
Here is the link to the quoted news article.

http://www.news.com.au/national/quee...80d8e6127ded9e

I really can't see how the judge's ruling that he had successfully removed her from his property can possibly hold water. Try that one on a real estate agent. "I'm not paying for the balcony. It isn't part of the property"
The balcony is part of the property under the law

Quote:
Occupants (Home Invasion) Protection Bill 2002

A “dwelling house” includes—
(a) a building or other structure where someone lives; and
(b) a building or other structure that is—
(i) within the curtilage of a dwelling house; and
(ii) occupied in connection with the dwelling house or whose use is ancillary to the occupation of the dwelling house;

However the law says he is permitted to remove someone from the property. Whether he is successful isn't relevant.

Quote:
(1) It is lawful for an occupant of a dwelling house to use any force or do
anything else the occupant believes is necessary—
..
(b) to cause an intruder in the dwelling house to leave the dwelling house; or
..
(d) to defend himself or herself, another occupant or anyone else lawfully in the dwelling house (“invitee”) against violence used or threatened against any of them by an intruder who is—
(i) attempting to break or enter the dwelling house; or
(ii) in the dwelling house;
i.e if you threw an intruder out into your front garden and locked the door, technically they are still on your property - but you're permitted to eject them.
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2016, 12:06 AM   #351
gareththomasnz
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 29
Awaiting the next trial 2018

Aside: Large black man gets drunk with Tostee. Beats Tostee up for an hour and after wrestling Tostee locks him on the balcony. As Tostee is calling the cops he gets a carving knife from the kitchen to defend himself and scare the baddy.

Large black man with tatoo's & biker jacket then climbs over balcony to escape, screaming and hollering but falls to his death.



You see all fof the fuss is because it was a pretty girl. She has the exact same rights and responsibilities as any other adult. But because it is a pretty girl who screamed at the end just the same as had she been an actual victim - there is a knee jerk reaction.

She was not actually a victim in this incident IMHO

It needs to be unanimous for Murder but not manslaughter apparently, does it need to be unanimous to aquit?

Last edited by gareththomasnz; 18th October 2016 at 12:34 AM.
gareththomasnz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2016, 12:49 AM   #352
alex04
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 483
Originally Posted by Shiner View Post
I've always wondered why he disclosed the audio. It is just as damning for him as it is exonerating. (If it is either) I'm sure he thought it would exonerate him.

Purely hypothetically, I think a video might show things differently than the audio tape.
Especially when things got physical. Using his body weight to pin her. Choking/not choking her.

It does seem a long shot. Just thought I'd put it out there. I'm feeling lonely now that I'm being ignored.
This article says that the police discovered the recording.

Quote:
The audio recording, which was discovered by police on a Sony Xperia phone they found in Tostee’s father’s car, has been released by the court.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world...rder-1.2831431
alex04 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2016, 12:54 AM   #353
alex04
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 483
Originally Posted by gareththomasnz View Post
It needs to be unanimous for Murder but not manslaughter apparently, does it need to be unanimous to aquit?
As far as I'm aware, any decision needs to be unanimous.
alex04 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2016, 01:00 AM   #354
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,910
Originally Posted by alex04 View Post
As far as I'm aware, any decision needs to be unanimous.
In the mother country Jeremy Bamber went down 10 2 after his sister killed the family then shot herself. He's done 30 of LWP so far.
New Zealand allows 11 1 verdicts I believe, Aussie? No idea.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2016, 01:07 AM   #355
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 42,352
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
In the mother country Jeremy Bamber went down 10 2 after his sister killed the family then shot herself. He's done 30 of LWP so far.
New Zealand allows 11 1 verdicts I believe, Aussie? No idea.
Naturally. Yet you post in a thread about an Australian case. And you seem to expect to be treated seriously. Why?
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2016, 01:09 AM   #356
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 42,352
I'll put you out of your misery Samson. Unanimous verdicts are required for murder trials in Queensland.

You're welcome.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2016, 01:19 AM   #357
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,910
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
I'll put you out of your misery Samson. Unanimous verdicts are required for murder trials in Queensland.

You're welcome.
Thanks LK but what about manslaughter?
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2016, 01:21 AM   #358
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 42,352
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Thanks LK but what about manslaughter?
Your hero has been charged with and is being tried for murder.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2016, 01:22 AM   #359
Shiner
Motor Mouth
 
Shiner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,796
Originally Posted by Hard Cheese View Post
The balcony is part of the property under the law

However the law says he is permitted to remove someone from the property. Whether he is successful isn't relevant.

i.e if you threw an intruder out into your front garden and locked the door, technically they are still on your property - but you're permitted to eject them.
My only point of contention there is your last. If I threw the intruder onto my front lawn, they are free to leave my property. On a 14th floor balcony? Not so much.
Shiner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2016, 01:30 AM   #360
Hard Cheese
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 424
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Your hero has been charged with and is being tried for murder.
If the jury can't come to a unanimous decision on murder, then they can apply a majority verdict (11 of 12) to a lesser charge of manslaughter
Hard Cheese is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:54 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.