- Dec 27, 2016
- 27,128
- 57,234
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Current Claremont Murders Discussion & Edwards trial updates pt2
- Thread starter _Mike_
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Countessa
Cancelled
- Dec 11, 2019
- 583
- 1,600
- AFL Club
- West Coast
The old ones are on Netflix.
Coastie19
Senior List
- Apr 22, 2019
- 262
- 455
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
I hope not, he's been so lucky not to have been caught especially in the beginning. Perhaps the era of his crimes assisted him before technology and advances caught up with him.
The criminal has to get lucky every time, the police only have to get lucky once.
- Dec 14, 2019
- 1,537
- 6,361
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I think it's actually phrased. "The Police have to get lucky every time, but usually don't. For career criminals getting arrested is simply a business expense"
Last edited:
Or she’s listening to crime podcasts?
Coastie19
Senior List
- Apr 22, 2019
- 262
- 455
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Nah
Dustland_fairytale
Debutant
- Jul 24, 2018
- 64
- 263
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I was a “first timer” in court today - bland listening but by the end it was sort of making some sense that she was questioning every process and document that PathWest used with the evidence. A few times when she asked him questions that I am sure he didn’t get at first I wanted to yell the answer out myself - like what a swab is - anyway I restrained myself. Hopefully the log-winded process will show that the two specimens that proved to hold the DNA weren’t touched/contaminated or mislabelled.......that’s where I think she was headed......
On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app
On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app
- Dec 14, 2019
- 1,537
- 6,361
- AFL Club
- West Coast
There were a number of questions he didn't 'get'. That was a mix of imprecise questions and his preset mind-view and her preset mind view.
Prime example there was the question sequence about delivery of the hair samples. He was sure he delivered a bucket. She was sure he delivered a physical hair sample. It eventually worked out he delivered if a bucket containing a hair sample, but at at the start she didn't understand his answers and assumed he had delivered a hair sample. It took some minutes to work out.
Overall I assess the witness to have an age related fixture of his memory. That is his long term memory is fixed on some facts and interpretations and is not open to revisiting them. She on the other hand is struggling to keep up with any question/answer that deviates from her question script
Last edited:
Dustland_fairytale
Debutant
- Jul 24, 2018
- 64
- 263
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Man - I couldn’t even remember anything I did last week - he didn’t do too bad - I don’t think she was phrasing her questions to well either with the flitting back and forth with the pictures. Would love to know where the hair really ended up.....still in the nbilly bucket somewhere......
On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app
I'm sure DNA, fibre and other research is financially backed by the legal industry. We could probably cut out 4 months of testimony if we didn't have today's technology.
Prosecution: His DNA was found on the victim
Defence: Stick a fork in him, he's cooked
Prosecution: His DNA was found on the victim
Defence: Stick a fork in him, he's cooked
the dark knight
Team Captain
- Jul 5, 2012
- 443
- 1,013
- AFL Club
- Sydney
I can't see Hall allowing Yovich to "Grandstand" in the court. He seems like an intelligent and reasonable man who isn't in the mood to play games.
BFew
Don Pyke Fan Clubber
- Mar 5, 2017
- 13,430
- 36,261
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Socceroos - Matildas
p6 of today's Post Newspaper.
Was anyone in CSK court this week on Thursday and can assist make sense of the above revelation by Bret Christian today?
Possibly all Ciara's underwear (not from the night she was murdered) was sent off for testing in 2004.
Maybe to look for any non Ciara DNA on them.
Where this specific handed in 2003 underwear came from, and why it was reportedly only handed into WAPOL in 2003, is a mystery that will probably forever remain a mystery (for privacy reasons).
'....the exhibit was handed in and investigated as potentially providing a lead in the Claremont serial killings case, the Supreme Court was told. Ciara’s DNA and traces of possible male DNA were detected on the underpants...'
WOW I'm surprised no one picked that up!! But it doesn't make sense? 2003?? If they came from her home and had possible male DNA on them, how could that possibly be a lead to finding BRE??
BFew
Don Pyke Fan Clubber
- Mar 5, 2017
- 13,430
- 36,261
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Socceroos - Matildas
Maybe at the time it was just an attempt to see who the owner of the undies might have been having relationships with, that was not known to WAPOL at that point in time. To identify other possible POI.
the dark knight
Team Captain
- Jul 5, 2012
- 443
- 1,013
- AFL Club
- Sydney
Put your emotions aside (Me included), What do you think the verdict will be?
GreyCrow
TheBrownDog
- Mar 21, 2016
- 74,936
- 119,202
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Sturt, White Sox
Bradley Hollingsworth, a state prosecutor, objected to the inclusion of the underpants evidence. “It is highly irrelevant,” he said. No information was given about how the underpants came into police possession
Code for : It doesnt fit our narrative
Code for : It doesnt fit our narrative
- Dec 14, 2019
- 1,537
- 6,361
- AFL Club
- West Coast
These two are more or less permanent fixtures in the trial. They are Ricciardi (L) and Marripodi (R) who will give the final State evidence.
The usual ruile is that witnesses yet to come are not allowed to sit in court before they give their evidence. However, there is a list of witnesses on the courtroom door who are exempt to this rule. I'll check it next time I go in.
There is also a rule that witnesses under oath aren't allowed to talk to anyone outside court - e.g. if they go home for the night. They can talk to their family about domestic matters but nothing at all about the trial. Talking to other witnesses or counsel is verboten. That rule seems to not apply in this trial either.
The usual ruile is that witnesses yet to come are not allowed to sit in court before they give their evidence. However, there is a list of witnesses on the courtroom door who are exempt to this rule. I'll check it next time I go in.
There is also a rule that witnesses under oath aren't allowed to talk to anyone outside court - e.g. if they go home for the night. They can talk to their family about domestic matters but nothing at all about the trial. Talking to other witnesses or counsel is verboten. That rule seems to not apply in this trial either.
Well it is highly irrelevant. No one knows who handed them in, who handled them, if they wore gloves, if they were male. No one knows when the underpants were worn. No ones knows who the DNA belongs to. No one knows how old it is. No one knows if its even male, just the possibility of been male. No one has suggested that its a semen stain. No one has mentioned who tested it.
Interesting that Yovich has mentioned that the defense would challenge the chain of custody of other exhibits.....They may continue it when the present their defense but did Hall allow it??? Cant see if he did or didnt
Last edited:
- Dec 14, 2019
- 1,537
- 6,361
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Did Hall allow it??? Cant see if he did or didnt
It may have been a line item in some inventory document that wasn't redacted? I don't think Yovich can tender documents at this stage? Of if he can I can't remember seeing him do it.
Thanks. That makes sense. It was probably a testing document that mentioned "possibly male DNA" on some other of her tested underpants and Yovich is imply that this may have been contamination too. That would make sense I guess.
GreyCrow
TheBrownDog
- Mar 21, 2016
- 74,936
- 119,202
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Sturt, White Sox
I find it odd then that witnesses were prevented from adding further yet this was allowed.Well it is highly irrelevant. No one knows who handed them in, who handled them, if they wore gloves, if they were male. No one knows when the underpants were worn. No ones knows who the DNA belongs to. No one knows how old it is. No one knows if its even male, just the possibility of been male. No one has suggested that its a semen stain. No one has mentioned who tested it.
Interesting that Yovich has mentioned that the defense would challenge the chain of custody of other exhibits.....They may continue it when the present their defense but did Hall allow it??? Cant see if he did or didnt
I agree there are many issues surrounding it - but why mention it in the first place
Odd
Yes agreed. My best guess is that some document mentioned testing of her other undies and one said possible male DNA and Yovich may have mentioned it in relation to ?contamination.
best guess is all I can come up with....Will see if he raises it again in defense case.
- Jan 21, 2019
- 1,021
- 2,857
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- East Perth
I think there are some wires crossed somewhere.
I cannot find anywhere in SallyAnn Harbison's 3 days of evidence stating they found any male DNA on underwear, she did say
"The court then heard that in 2004 ESR also tested all the other samples concerning Ciara Glennon, including her clothing and underwear."
Bu that does not mention any different clothing or underwear to those removed during the post mortem.
AJM42 is the only sample claimed to possibly have a trace of a male and that was in 2001 at Pathwest. Remember it was the UK lab that found the male DNA profile.
"When asked why, he said the last time it was tested on October 25, 2001 at PathWest there was an "indication of something", but it wasn't strong.
He said the amelogenin result says there was a possible trace of a male, but that he ultimately marked no male DNA."
This is the only reference to an objection on Thursday that i can find and it doesn't match what that article says.
"When asked by Mr Yovich what the results said about the quality of the lab which tested them, Dr Harbison said it was not unheard of, although it was uncommon for so many control samples to be contaminated.
Mr Hollingsworth objected to the line of questioning but Justice Stephen Hall allowed it."
The only other mention about pants on Thursday came from Mr Bagdonavicius and that was regards the the KK victim not Ciara.
"The court then heard Mr Bagdonavicius carried out testing on the hospital pants worn by the teenager after she managed to make her way to Hollywood Hospital following her terrifying ordeal.
He told the court the pants tested positive for blood and semen."
- Dec 14, 2019
- 1,537
- 6,361
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Yes. But I saw yesterday that they did their own version of unaccredited, not for court LCN testing. 24blog noted
He said as a result AJM 41 produced no male DNA present. AJM 42-45 remained the same as the last test while they found a partial trace of male DNA on AJM 46.
I have some vague memory more samples had potential male DNA, 48? 49? I'm not sure if that was yesterday or earlier.
- Jan 21, 2019
- 1,021
- 2,857
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- East Perth
All the AJM 40's and AJM50 are fingernail samples
Ciara's Fingernails
AJM 42 Ciara's left middle fingernail
AJM 43 left ring fingernail
AJM 44 left little fingernail (AJM R,)
AJM 45 right thumbnail
AJM 46 right index fingernail
AJM 47 right middle fingernail
AJM 48 right ring fingernail
AJM 49 right little fingernail
AJM50 is swab made from AJM49. It was not tested.
AJM 40 - Ciara's left thumbnail and
AJM 41 her left index fingernail were not selected for testing.
"When asked if further work was carried out by PathWest on AJM 46, he said no. AJM 47 remained the same, he said."
Last edited:
- Dec 14, 2019
- 1,537
- 6,361
- AFL Club
- West Coast
48 and 49 - if it were they - may have had traces of a second profile rather than specifically male DNA? The guy from 24blog wrote it all down on Friday but didn't report it all
In fact I'm starting to recall even another sample had traces of a second profile but too low to be useful.
There was also the knife that was mentioned to have more than one profile but I've heard nothing more about that.
- Status
Similar threads
