Current Claremont Murders Discussion & Edwards trial updates pt2

[Kurve]

Here is Claremont Murders - Part One
- Media
- The Bunker
- Hey Bret ...? Unexplained trial mysteries & CSK Supreme Court cliffhangers

 

[kingswood71]

He'd left the marital home with the dog inside to the point where one of the neighbours rang the RSPCA to claim it had been abandoned. It's my understanding he was living/staying at his parents house with Troy and Troy's girlfriend at the time was also staying over on weekends?

One of the earlier witnesses whose husband actually drove BRE to work in his own car on a Sunday morning iirc suggested BRE had either walked to her house or his brother Troy dropped him off. (The day Sarah disappeared I THINK and iirc) That's a potential alibi right there.

"In par 31 Ms Chrystal states that she stayed at the Huntingdale house (owned by the parents of the accused) with the accused's brother on two occasions. At that time the accused was also residing there."....Although the defense objected to this statement and it was ruled in-admissible.

 

[Kurve]

"In par 31 Ms Chrystal states that she stayed at the Huntingdale house (owned by the parents of the accused) with the accused's brother on two occasions. At that time the accused was also residing there."....Although the defense objected to this statement and it was ruled in-admissible.

That's interesting, do you know on what grounds the defense objected? To knock her out from saying she didn't see BRE on the relevant nights or to save her for later as a defense witness?

Still leaves his brother either way.

 

[BonzaRam]

The relevant document 2019WASC419 says of Ms. Chrystal "Earlier in her statement she states that she dated the accused's brother for a short time in the mid-1990s. That does not provide any precise time frame. The defence also notes that an alibi notice has been filed in which the accused has stated that his recollection is that he was living in the Huntingdale house at the time that the offences that are the subject of counts 7 and 8 occurred. There was some discussion at the hearing of the possibility of an admission in this regard"
I think that is referring to an alibi in regards his residence at the time, but why an "alibi notice"?
Sec 96 of the Criminal procedures states "(a) if the accused intends to give or adduce any alibi evidence, written notice of — (i) the accused’s intention to doing so and (ii) the details of the nature of the evidence; and (iii) the name of each person who the accused intends to call to give any such evidence and the person’s address or other information sufficient to enable the person to be located"

Section 150 of the Criminal Procedures Act

(2) An accused person may not, without the leave of the court, adduce evidence in support of an alibi unless, before the end of the prescribed period, he or she gives notice of particulars of the alibi to the Director of Public Prosecutions and files a copy of the notice with the court.

"prescribed period" means the period commencing at the time of the accused person's committal for trial and ending 42 days before the trial is listed for hearing.

I suggest the notice was for the alibi we already know about and the prosecution has proved false.

 

[kingswood71]

That's interesting, do you know on what grounds the defense objected? To knock her out from saying she didn't see BRE on the relevant nights or to save her for later as a defense witness?

Still leaves his brother either way.

"The defence submits that this evidence does not assist in determining the time frame in which the accused was residing at the Huntingdale house".

 

[kingswood71]

Section 150 of the Criminal Procedures Act

(2) An accused person may not, without the leave of the court, adduce evidence in support of an alibi unless, before the end of the prescribed period, he or she gives notice of particulars of the alibi to the Director of Public Prosecutions and files a copy of the notice with the court.

"prescribed period" means the period commencing at the time of the accused person's committal for trial and ending 42 days before the trial is listed for hearing.

I suggest the notice was for the alibi we already know about and the prosecution has proved false.

The alibi notice referred to in 2019WASC419 was in specific relation to the Huntingdale house.
"The defence submits that this evidence does not assist in determining the time frame in which the accused was residing at the Huntingdale house. Ms Chrystal states that she stayed at the house on two occasions and that the accused was also living there, but she does not provide dates for those occasions. Earlier in her statement she states that she dated the accused's brother for a short time in the mid-1990s. That does not provide any precise time frame. The defence also notes that an alibi notice has been filed in which the accused has stated that his recollection is that he was living in the Huntingdale house at the time that the offences that are the subject of counts 7 and 8 occurred. There was some discussion at the hearing of the possibility of an admission in this regard".

Suggests the alibi notice that i am talking about was different to the CG Dawesville alibi.

 

[BonzaRam]

The alibi notice referred to in 2019WASC419 was in specific relation to the Huntingdale house.
"The defence submits that this evidence does not assist in determining the time frame in which the accused was residing at the Huntingdale house. Ms Chrystal states that she stayed at the house on two occasions and that the accused was also living there, but she does not provide dates for those occasions. Earlier in her statement she states that she dated the accused's brother for a short time in the mid-1990s. That does not provide any precise time frame. The defence also notes that an alibi notice has been filed in which the accused has stated that his recollection is that he was living in the Huntingdale house at the time that the offences that are the subject of counts 7 and 8 occurred. There was some discussion at the hearing of the possibility of an admission in this regard".

Suggests the alibi notice that i am talking about was different to the CG Dawesville alibi.

I stand corrected

 

[kingswood71]

I stand corrected

No worries
I still cant work out though if it means "Alibi" in the strict sense of the word, like someone will say he was there. or just means alibi in that he admits that he was living there...Dunno. The way its worded with "The defence also notes that an alibi notice has been filed in which the accused has stated that his recollection is that he was living in the Huntingdale house at the time that the offences that are the subject of counts 7 and 8 occurred. There was some discussion at the hearing of the possibility of an admission in this regard", it kinda sounds like just something to do with "Yeah I was living there, I admit that", rather than "I was living there and my brother will state that on the nights in question we were playing Scrabble until 5am".

 

[Kurve]

No worries
I still cant work out though if it means "Alibi" in the strict sense of the word, like someone will say he was there. or just means alibi in that he admits that he was living there...Dunno. The way its worded with "The defence also notes that an alibi notice has been filed in which the accused has stated that his recollection is that he was living in the Huntingdale house at the time that the offences that are the subject of counts 7 and 8 occurred. There was some discussion at the hearing of the possibility of an admission in this regard", it kinda sounds like just something to do with "Yeah I was living there, I admit that", rather than "I was living there and my brother will state that on the nights in question we were playing Scrabble until 5am".

I didn't see a CG Dawesville alibi notice, would we know exactly how many alibi notices have been filed?

 

[Countessa]

ABC article 24 June 2019


"It was further alleged that on the night of Ms Glennon's disappearance in March 1995, Mr Edwards was meant to have been at friend's house in Dawseville, south of Perth, but he did not turn up until the next morning and told a lie to explain his absence.

Another revelation today was that the defence may be filing "notices of alibis" relating to the alleged murder of Ms Spiers.

Ms Barbagallo said it was understood they related to where Mr Edwards was on Australia Day in 1996, when Ms Spiers was last seen alive."

 

[kingswood71]

ABC article 24 June 2019


"It was further alleged that on the night of Ms Glennon's disappearance in March 1995, Mr Edwards was meant to have been at friend's house in Dawseville, south of Perth, but he did not turn up until the next morning and told a lie to explain his absence.

Another revelation today was that the defence may be filing "notices of alibis" relating to the alleged murder of Ms Spiers.

Ms Barbagallo said it was understood they related to where Mr Edwards was on Australia Day in 1996, when Ms Spiers was last seen alive."

View attachment 827217

The SS alibi may relate to him been at work at 0730am.

 

[Countessa]

Edwards was living alone each time the crimes were committed...Will be interesting to hear what is said in Court when the time comes.

 

[Kurve]

The SS alibi may relate to him been at work at 0730am.

I'm not sure that's an alibi kingswood, if SS was picked up after 2.00am he still has plenty of time to murder and dump imo?

 

[Countessa]

I'm not sure that's an alibi kingswood, if SS was picked up after 2.00am he still has plenty of time to murder and dump imo?

Do we know how long he spent with KK victim? I don't think he hangs around for very long after doing what he does.

 

[dmorris30]

I'm not sure that's an alibi kingswood, if SS was picked up after 2.00am he still has plenty of time to murder and dump imo?

I hope his brother isn't going to lie for him

 

[JezzaPerth]

Do we know how long he spent with KK victim? I don't think he hangs around for very long after doing what he does.

I got the impression he drove around the area looking for her?

Does anyone know the timeline at Hollwood in relation to the Tesltra van driving past with high beams, and when she first telephoned, and when she presented at the door?

I know 5am or 5:30 am figures there somewhere, which at that time of year was probably pretty light.

 

[kingswood71]

Edwards was living alone each time the crimes were committed...Will be interesting to hear what is said in Court when the time comes.

Thanks Thats a good find. I had not read that!
So it does seem he was living alone when JR and CG both were taken!

 

[Kurve]

I hope his brother isn't going to lie for him

I had it figured at one stage that was in the plan. He'd want to consider very carefully before doing that though and exposing himself to a cross that would probably suggest he's making it up. One alibi won't mean much at all anyway when BRE really needs three, priority would be one for Ciara where the best evidence is then Jane and Sarah. imo.

 

[JezzaPerth]

I had it figured at one stage that was in the plan. He'd want to consider very carefully before doing that though and exposing himself to a cross that would probably suggest he's making it up. One alibi won't mean much at all anyway when BRE really needs three, priority would be one for Ciara where the best evidence is then Jane and Sarah. imo.

If he's got a cast iron alibi for one it makes the others much less likely.

I don't think he has a cast iron alibi through his brother. The courts discount immediate family evidence without some other corroboration.

 

[kingswood71]

I got the impression he drove around the area looking for her?

Does anyone know the timeline at Hollwood in relation to the Tesltra van driving past with high beams, and when she first telephoned, and when she presented at the door?

I know 5am or 5:30 am figures there somewhere, which at that time of year was probably pretty light.

She was grabbed sometime not long after 2:30-3:00 am. Then she was driven for possibly 30 minutes. Likely shorter than this as her terror may have made it feel longer.
She rang the Salvo's phone at 5:23am. Then her dad at 5:34.
Wookey saw the car at around 4:40am. Then 45 minutes to an hour later got a call about the raped girl.
She mentioned that when she was in the cemetery "I didn't know what time it was. It was lighter some time just before."
So between abduction and Dad was somewhere between 2.5 to 3 hrs.
(Reading that stuff again...I hope he rots in hell).

EDIT: Correction to call time to dad...it was 5:34, not 5:24.....

 

[kingswood71]

Do we know how long he spent with KK victim? I don't think he hangs around for very long after doing what he does.

See my post above. Timeline suggests 2.5 to 3 hrs or so between abduction and her calling her dad.

 

[kingswood71]

If he's got a cast iron alibi for one it makes the others much less likely.

I don't think he has a cast iron alibi through his brother. The courts discount immediate family evidence without some other corroboration.

I tend to agree. I dont think he has any water tight alibi as (as you alluded to earlier) the defense would have mentioned this as part of its opening statement you'd think.

 

[zedx]

Edwards was living alone each time the crimes were committed...Will be interesting to hear what is said in Court when the time comes.

IMO he needs to firstly come clean about where he was on the night CG was murdered. He should remember because he purposely lied about where he was to his friend who was very ill at the time and the dinner would have been very important, so there must be a reason for this lie!

 

[zedx]

The appeal for the Dodd case has nothing to do with the prosecution.

Apparently it’s because the judge incorrectly rejected Warks alibi. The rest of the judgement including the earring was sound. So the prosecution did their part.

Agree that Wark's appeal doesn't have anything specifically to do with this case, but it is a timely reminder to all Judges regarding alibi's. And I am sure at some point this case will touch on BRE's alibi's. Which could be important to this case.

 

[Countessa]

I got the impression he drove around the area looking for her?

Does anyone know the timeline at Hollwood in relation to the Tesltra van driving past with high beams, and when she first telephoned, and when she presented at the door?

I know 5am or 5:30 am figures there somewhere, which at that time of year was probably pretty light.

It was stated in Court that Edwards grabbed KK victim between 2.30am - 4.30am. Am assuming that he had her in his presence between those times.
She made a reverse charge call to her father at 5.44am after walking from the cemetery and seeing the panel van with lights.

 

[Countessa]

Thanks Thats a good find. I had not read that!
So it does seem he was living alone when JR and CG both were taken!

And SS as well, when all three were taken.