Solved Gable Tostee - Tinder death

[_Mike_]

Best to refer to it as Web Sob Sisters, I reckon. I guess you too have fallen foul of the Mods there.

Talk about it,

Just do not post links to the site, people are capable of google searching for themselves

 

[Purlin]

Police lay charges on a case of evidence
A committal hearing is held for a charge of murder determines whether or not there is sufficient evidence against the accused for them to stand trial.
Trial then goes to the Supreme Court based on the severity of the charge as per the Crimes ACT.
The committal hearing is where the Magistrate must decide if there is enough evidence to support the charges. The case at the Supreme Court can only determine guilt or innocence of the charges based on the evidence submitted in support of the case.

Yes that's all correct, but not sure what you meant by the bolded part?

Realise that police are supposed to be trained at Plod Academy to understand sections of the law that they enforce. They are supposed to do their job diligently, ethically, and to the best of their ability, as you and I do our jobs, but even more so with the high standards of accountability that they are held to because of the gravity of their position.

For Qpol to determine that in the absence of witnesses, or forensic evidence, that they had a window into Warriena's state of mind to determine that she went over because she was frightened of an imminent life-threatening act, is an enormous stretch of credibility. For that theory to fly, I would have expected at least a psychiatrist (or whatever profession applies) to give an interpretation of the recording to support that line of thinking, however I beleive that would not be accepted as evidence. Too bad our cunstabulary are not trained to think laterally , and consider there could be various reasons as to why things happen. Of course only intelligent people are capable of critical depth of analysis, and lateral thinking. Bogans are predisposed to tunnel-vision thinking.

The verdict has been reached, and the case is over, but there are many other lingering questions about the conduct of Qpol in this matter. As has been said before, many innocent people have found themselves in hot water with Qpol where they were just trying to help, but were subsequently treated with suspicion, and wrongly jailed. The amount of bumbling investigations and coverups in this state, and no doubt all states, as always casts a poor light on state police, these are not people from the most intelligent sections of the community. You only have to read about the Leahy Arnold double murder to see how lazy and incompetent they are. You get what you pay for and their wages are floor sweeper level. The so called degree they get a Plod Academy is dumbed down so they all pass.

I'll say it again, charges should never have been brought. Proper detective work was not done, they charged Tostee on a whim. I wouldn't trust Qpol if my life depended on it.

 

[_Mike_]

Yes that's all correct, but not sure what you meant by the bolded part

Detectives build a case gathering evidence and recommend prosecution in court to the crown prosecutor or better known as the Dept of Public Prosecution

The crown prosecutor will assess the basis of the case and evidentiary materials to decide whether they want to take a serious charge of murder to a magistrate for a committal hearing. The magistrate needs to determine whether the DPP has met a minimum standard required to convince the court that there is enough evidence to support bringing charges to the accused in the Supreme Court.

That's what I meant in a round about way

 

[Elde Fruit]

Detectives build a case gathering evidence and recommend prosecution in court to the crown prosecutor or better known as the Dept of Public Prosecution

I am referring to the situation in Queensland in this reply. It may be different in other States.

That is not technically correct. The Police investigate, may arrest and may lay the charges without any reference to the DPP. If the charges are for indictable offences, there is a Preliminary Hearing aka Committal Hearing conducted in the Magistrates Court. In almost all cases, even the Preliminary Hearing is conducted by a Police Prosecutor, not the DPP.

The crown prosecutor will assess the basis of the case and evidentiary materials to decide whether they want to take a serious charge of murder to a magistrate for a committal hearing. The magistrate needs to determine whether the DPP has met a minimum standard required to convince the court that there is enough evidence to support bringing charges to the accused in the Supreme Court.

That's what I meant in a round about way

The sole purpose of the Preliminary Hearing is so the Magistrate can determine whether a prima facie case exists against the person charged. A prima facie case exists if there is sufficient admissible evidence upon which a properly instructed Jury could convict, not must, be merely could. If the Magistrate determines there is a prima facie case, he will commit the person charged to be tried to the relevant higher Court. The further prosecution of the case in then given over to the hands of the DPP.

 

[Donners]

In almost all cases, even the Preliminary Hearing is conducted by a Police Prosecutor, not the DPP.

Funny how it differs between states. In Vic, indictable offences go to the OPP after the filing hearing (or before if advice on charges is sought); police prosecutors only do summary offences.

I hope they have a fair gap between committal and trial in Queensland. If it's anything like Vic, the charges often require an overhaul and additional evidence may be required. Doing that on a tight timeframe is not ideal.

The sole purpose of the Preliminary Hearing is so the Magistrate can determine whether a prima facie case exists against the person charged.

It's also a chance for both sides to assess their position in light of what transpired. It's not uncommon for a prosecution to be discontinued despite the accused being committed because the higher threshold of reasonable prospect of conviction is not met. It can also have a big impact on plea negotiations.

 

[Elde Fruit]

Funny how it differs between states. In Vic, indictable offences go to the OPP after the filing hearing (or before if advice on charges is sought); police prosecutors only do summary offences.

I hope they have a fair gap between committal and trial in Queensland. If it's anything like Vic, the charges often require an overhaul and additional evidence may be required. Doing that on a tight timeframe is not ideal.



It's also a chance for both sides to assess their position in light of what transpired. It's not uncommon for a prosecution to be discontinued despite the accused being committed because the higher threshold of reasonable prospect of conviction is not met. It can also have a big impact on plea negotiations.

What I posted was a basic explanation. There are quite a few additional nuances of a technical nature which really weren't necessary for me to post to adequately respond to Mike. If I went into all of them, it would bore the crap out of everyone.

 

[Orange Agent]

How wealthy are his parents? Watching tonight I'm certain his lawyer doesn't believe that he didnt cause her to go over, at no point did he say he wasn't guilty it was more along the lines of once he listened to the recording he was confident the criteria of finding guilt couldnt be met. What a ******* joke. Was her phone ever located?

 

[footy75]

How wealthy are his parents? Watching tonight I'm certain his lawyer doesn't believe that he didnt cause her to go over, at no point did he say he wasn't guilty it was more along the lines of once he listened to the recording he was confident the criteria of finding guilt couldnt be met. What a ******* joke. Was her phone ever located?

I'm sure his lawyer believes he didn't cause her to go over, anyone can see that. He was just saying the recording made the case clear cut in a court of law.

 

[Elde Fruit]

We don't know what the Lawyer was asked and how much of what he said was edited out of the Programme. The only thing which ever puzzled me was ~ what was it that Tostee disposed off after he came out of the lift at ground floor and before he went back into the lift to get to the underground car park. 60 Minutes showed vision of it twice but not one question about it. That is a mystery, but that there was no question strongly suggests it was innocuous.

 

[Elde Fruit]

How wealthy are his parents? Watching tonight I'm certain his lawyer doesn't believe that he didnt cause her to go over, at no point did he say he wasn't guilty it was more along the lines of once he listened to the recording he was confident the criteria of finding guilt couldnt be met. What a ******* joke. Was her phone ever located?

So, why did 60 Minutes not ask that most relevant question?

 

[Orange Agent]

So, why did 60 Minutes not ask that most relevant question?

You would have to ask Liam Bartlett. The face to face interview stuff was weird, looked like it was being managed, there was times when he nodded his head after answering questions which seemed quite odd to me.

 

[Arden]

We don't know what the Lawyer was asked and how much of what he said was edited out of the Programme. The only thing which ever puzzled me was ~ what was it that Tostee disposed off after he came out of the lift at ground floor and before he went back into the lift to get to the underground car park. 60 Minutes showed vision of it twice but not one question about it. That is a mystery, but that there was no question strongly suggests it was innocuous.

Didn't the jury seek clarification on that, with them then being instructed that it was irrelevant?

Looked like a decent sized implement though.

 

[Elde Fruit]

Didn't the jury seek clarification on that, with them then being instructed that it was irrelevant?

Looked like a decent sized implement though.

Not sure, (I don't think they did) but if they did, they were told his post-incident conduct was to be ignored by them.

 

[Elde Fruit]

You would have to ask Liam Bartlett. The face to face interview stuff was weird, looked like it was being managed, there was times when he nodded his head after answering questions which seemed quite odd to me.

I guess we all have to understand that 60 Minutes wanted bang for its buck. Part of that bang is this very discussion. "I feel used."

 

[Arden]

Not sure, (I don't think they did) but if they did, they were told his post-incident conduct was to be ignored by them.

I know it couldn't be used in the trial but it would still be interesting to know what it was that he felt the need to dispose of, moments after she fell from his balcony.

 

[Farm Boy]

Every man on tinder will be recording their encounters now.

 

[Drakescoffeecake]

Pathetic interview from Liam Bartlett. I cringed when he said something like "can you see why the public would see you as a cold-hearted bastard?" ... like seriously? * off. He was found not guilty. The reason she died is because she was completely off her face and stupidly fell to her death. Case closed.

 

[Orange Agent]

Give me back my phone. Let me go, let me go, in between being wrestled and pinned down by somebody twice her size. Yep what a gentleman.

 

[Drakescoffeecake]

Give me back my phone. Let me go, let me go, in between being wrestled and pinned down by somebody twice her size. Yep what a gentleman.

What does his size matter? If there was someone pelting rocks at me I would try and restrain them as well. Or should he have just been a "gentleman" and just let her assault him?

 

[Orange Agent]

What does his size matter? If there was someone pelting rocks at me I would try and restrain them as well. Or should he have just been a "gentleman" and just let her assault him?

Looked like small stones rather than rocks. If someone was pissing me off that much and i had the ability to restrain them I would probably throw them out the front door.

 

[Orange Agent]

We don't know what the Lawyer was asked and how much of what he said was edited out of the Programme. The only thing which ever puzzled me was ~ what was it that Tostee disposed off after he came out of the lift at ground floor and before he went back into the lift to get to the underground car park. 60 Minutes showed vision of it twice but not one question about it. That is a mystery, but that there was no question strongly suggests it was innocuous.

Looked like he chucked it down his pants at one point. Looked a bit like an external hard drive in size. My guess is somebody who feels the need to record the sounds of his tinder dates and brags that he thinks he has bed 180 women probably does more than record just voices. Its kinda strange that none of these 180 women have come fwd with their stories especially if they potentially have been recorded without their consent as well. But he comes across as a bit of macho, image concious loser who make up bullshit like most others on the bodybuilding forums.

 

[Drakescoffeecake]

Looked like small stones rather than rocks.

Alright they were stones then. It's still not acceptable behavior.

If someone was pissing me off that much and i had the ability to restrain them I would probably throw them out the front door.

It really is difficult to envisage what we would do in a situation that we have never faced before. It's easy to sit here and say I would've done this, I would've done that. Fact is, he didn't throw her off the balcony, her own drunken stupidity threw her off the balcony, and the evidence of this is clear as day.

 

[Purlin]

You would have to ask Liam Bartlett. The face to face interview stuff was weird, looked like it was being managed, there was times when he nodded his head after answering questions which seemed quite odd to me.

You do realise it is scripted? The interviewee is given a set of questions to prepare for, the interviewer is restricted to those questions. Tostee's media agent and 60 Mins work all that out prior. The interview is about ratings, not finding out the truth. People are interested in sensation, not the truth. As it was, it was fairly boring, it told us nothing new at all.

Didn't the jury seek clarification on that, with them then being instructed that it was irrelevant?Looked like a decent sized implement though.

Yes, a juror asked, and was told to ignore it, as it is a post fall event, which of course has nothing to do with alleged murderous intent.

Give me back my phone. Let me go, let me go, in between being wrestled and pinned down by somebody twice her size. Yep what a gentleman.

• "I'll f**king destroy your jaw".
• "I f**king rule in NZ"
  
• " I will go vampire on your ass"
  
• "I will s**t my pants for you."
  
• " 'UK men are funnier and have bigger dicks"

All taken form the recording. Yep what a lady.

Looked like small stones rather than rocks. If someone was pissing me off that much and i had the ability to restrain them I would probably throw them out the front door.

And thats exactly what he wanted, and told her to do, but she refused.

My guess is somebody who feels the need to record the sounds of his tinder dates and brags that he thinks he has bed 180 women probably does more than record just voices.

My guess is a female that carries on like Wright has probably caused a lot more ruckus in her past we haven't heard about.This event was probably the last carriage to derail in the train-wreck that was her life.

Its kinda strange that none of these 180 women have come fwd with their stories especially if they potentially have been recorded without their consent as well. But he comes across as a bit of macho, image concious loser who make up bullshit like most others on the bodybuilding forums.

Gen Y and millennials generally fit the social media fad of "bigging themselves up" , so Tostee is then fairly typical, right?
It is strange isnt it, that not one female ex date has come forward using her own name, and said anything disparaging about Tostee? Seems his behaviour is normal then? The only female to come out and slander him was that Stephanie "Peppered" An(g)us from Ch 9, and she never even met him! Wow some connection. Look what happened there, she got her ass slung into a lawsuit, the outcome of which we will never know as it was seemingly settled out of court quickly by Channel 9.

I just wonder if Tostee is sueing anyone else? "Websooky" people for example? Now that would make me laugh hysterically. Those simpleton grannies SillyTitty and OldPizza might have to start obliterating their IP logs. Run granny run! lol

 

[footy75]

Pathetic interview from Liam Bartlett. I cringed when he said something like "can you see why the public would see you as a cold-hearted bastard?" ... like seriously? **** off. He was found not guilty. The reason she died is because she was completely off her face and stupidly fell to her death. Case closed.

Have to agree...

the guy is/was a womeniser so everyone in this feminist country wants to see him go down.

I can't believe there are still lots of people that think he should be found guilty of murder....its laughable.

 

[Elde Fruit]

What does his size matter? If there was someone pelting rocks at me I would try and restrain them as well. Or should he have just been a "gentleman" and just let her assault him?

Not only that, she unlawfully assaulted him with with that metallic object he had to disarm her of, just before he forced (how is not known) her to the balcony.