Current Trial The Teachers Pet Podcast & Chris Dawson's Murder Trial * New Carnal Knowledge Trial

Remove this Banner Ad

BFew said:
To add to the above: IMO, staying in jail whilst awaiting sentencing, and not on bail, can also further demonstrate the level of constant threats to Chris Dawson, and provide an opportunity to demonstrate a further deterioration in his health, from being in jail (where he faces constant threats from other prisoners, to his well-being and life).

www.abc.net.au

Chris Dawson prosecutors deny being influenced by Teacher's Pet podcast

NSW prosecutors deny being influenced by a popular podcast in the decision to prosecute former Sydney teacher Chris Dawson over the murder of his wife Lynette amid national and international media attention.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
'Chris Dawson subject of 'constant threats' in prison since murder verdict, court told'

'He today appeared in the NSW Supreme Court wearing a prison-issued green tracksuit before Justice Ian Harrison.
His lawyer Greg Walsh told the judge Dawson has been subjected to "constant threats" including against his life, by a large number of people.'
Click to expand...

Why would someone convicted of murder but awaiting sentence get bail? They wouldn't just by virtue of the seriousness of the crime. I suspect it was dropped because it was a waste of time. What it would do though is tacitly demonstrate to Harrison that Dawson doesn't recognize the seriousness of what he's been convicted of which may affect Harrison's view about sentencing
 
Angry Red Bull said:
Why would someone convicted of murder but awaiting sentence get bail? They wouldn't just by virtue of the seriousness of the crime. I suspect it was dropped because it was a waste of time. What it would do though is tacitly demonstrate to Harrison that Dawson doesn't recognize the seriousness of what he's been convicted of which may affect Harrison's view about sentencing
Click to expand...
Maybe this not recognising the seriousness bit will be used in getting any psych assessment of Dawson to be used by his legal team for sentencing.
In an attempt to assist demonstrate that Dawson had some form of long-standing mental health issue that affected his behavior from an early age, that was likely related to (in part of whole) to a football playing brain injury.

Might his legal team even attempt to sheet some of the blame for his behavior that led to the crimes he has been charged/convicted of (pending appeal), on the NSW Government/Department of Education, from when he was a NSW Government High School student playing Rugby for his school, and that the brain injury causes, likely started from his High School Rugby playing?
 
BFew said:
2. About Justice Harrison having JC's name in full throughout the judgement document. The conversation referred to what appeared to be some legal requirement not to disclose the name of an child. There was a quick agreement to hold back on publishing Justice Harrison's verdict document until something had been reviewed today? (I think they said Wednesday?), after Justice Harrison appeared to put forward some reason (I can't recall the details of) why he wanted JC's name to be made public in the Judgement document
Click to expand...
From someone else who recalls the last minute of the live stream, a revised printed Justice Harrison document was to be available today (Thursday).
So we might see the electronic public version of this up before the weekend.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It was intriguing to listen to Harrison. Of most interest was the fact that of about 40+ witnesses he believed about 6. In his view there was never any conversations about contract killers. There was never any DV. CD was though of good character. There were no sightings. There was never any phone calls either. But didn't Loone say there was with the Kiosk worker but he just never took a statement because it wasn't in his mind relevant? Well Damian apparently it was relevant. But doesn't matter anyway because there wasn't a call at all. Maybe the Kiosk worker would just say she doesn't remember? We will never know will we

Apparently the only thing he did believe was veracity of motive. He then filled in the blanks with deductive reasoning to concoct a story for conviction. I realize I'm a minority thinking this is a weak conviction. I don't support CD though many seem convinced I do......think I'm up to about 20 disagree feedbacks at this stage lol. Meh. I think he groomed a child for sex, is definitely emotionally abusive and probably physically abusive too. Have zero doubt on those. I wanted more to convict because I happen to think It's diabolical to send someone to jail if there is any prospect they didn't commit the offence. Take no pleasure in an innocent woman being killed OR an innocent man being convicted.
 
BFew said:
From someone else who recalls the last minute of the live stream, a revised printed Justice Harrison document was to be available today (Thursday).
So we might see the electronic public version of this up before the weekend.
Click to expand...
Or not until the Friday Nov 11, 2022 sentencing day, according to someone else's recollection (rightly or wrongly) of the live stream.
 
Angry Red Bull said:
Why would someone convicted of murder but awaiting sentence get bail? They wouldn't just by virtue of the seriousness of the crime. I suspect it was dropped because it was a waste of time.
Click to expand...

'Outside court, Mr Walsh said there was “no point” to a bail application because it was “doomed to fail”.'
 
Angry Red Bull said:
Why would someone convicted of murder but awaiting sentence get bail? They wouldn't just by virtue of the seriousness of the crime. I suspect it was dropped because it was a waste of time. What it would do though is tacitly demonstrate to Harrison that Dawson doesn't recognize the seriousness of what he's been convicted of which may affect Harrison's view about sentencing
Click to expand...
Particularly with a twin brother. He could use Paul's passport to escape the country.
 
craffles said:
So if Dawson never made up the stories about Lyn calling him then the judge probably would have found him not guilty as suicide would still have a possible outcome?
Click to expand...

Suicide is not as convenient a solution because it is hard to hide your own body.


Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com
 
Zidane98 said:
Now that this is all over. How was this not thoroughly investigated at the time of the disappearance / death? It seems to me with the known facts and some simple research surely CD could have been charged at the time back in 1983?

Then phone records at the time could have been investigated etc etc to confirm that the claims of phone calls received were false. I am just failing to see how the case was dismissed at the time as just a "disappearance".
Click to expand...

I wondered that as well. Much of this seems to have been a well constructed scenario by CD, and the belief in his story was based on the way he was held in apparently high regard by Lyn’s mother. He must have had a Svengali like hold over her. I know that the mother came from a time when the patriarchy was dominant - but this was 1982 - not 1952.


Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

BFew said:
From someone else who recalls the last minute of the live stream, a revised printed Justice Harrison document was to be available today (Thursday).
So we might see the electronic public version of this up before the weekend.
Click to expand...
It’s out

R v Dawson - NSW Caselaw

www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au
 
Angry Red Bull said:
It was intriguing to listen to Harrison. Of most interest was the fact that of about 40+ witnesses he believed about 6. In his view there was never any conversations about contract killers. There was never any DV. CD was though of good character. There were no sightings. There was never any phone calls either. But didn't Loone say there was with the Kiosk worker but he just never took a statement because it wasn't in his mind relevant? Well Damian apparently it was relevant. But doesn't matter anyway because there wasn't a call at all. Maybe the Kiosk worker would just say she doesn't remember? We will never know will we

Apparently the only thing he did believe was veracity of motive. He then filled in the blanks with deductive reasoning to concoct a story for conviction. I realize I'm a minority thinking this is a weak conviction. I don't support CD though many seem convinced I do......think I'm up to about 20 disagree feedbacks at this stage lol. Meh. I think he groomed a child for sex, is definitely emotionally abusive and probably physically abusive too. Have zero doubt on those. I wanted more to convict because I happen to think It's diabolical to send someone to jail if there is any prospect they didn't commit the offence. Take no pleasure in an innocent woman being killed OR an innocent man being convicted.
Click to expand...
The judge didn't accept the evidence of the kiosk worker who had received the STD call occurring on 9 January 1982 because she said that Col the owner was there when the STD call was received for either Chris or Paul. The girl with the diary said that Chris worked on his own which meant she didn't get paid.

"32 Significantly, CB gave the following evidence in cross-examination:
"Q. Do you recall, on the day that this phone call was received by you, whether he had left the baths at a certain time, that's Col?

A. Col?

Q. Yes.

A. No, he hadn't left that day. He was there."

33 In re-examination, this was clarified:
"Q. [CB], you may have said this and if you did I apologise. In terms of Col and his whereabouts the day you took this phone call, did you say that your recollection is that Col was there?

A. Yes. I only recall one occasion where he was not going to be present at the baths when I was working, and that was when he said he had to go to the dentist."
 
Last edited:
FTY1 said:
The judge didn't accept the evidence of the kiosk worker who had received the STD call occurring on 9 January 1982 because she said that Col the owner was there when the STD call was received for either Chris or Paul. The girl with the diary said that Chris worked on his own which meant she didn't get paid.

"32 Significantly, CB gave the following evidence in cross-examination:
"Q. Do you recall, on the day that this phone call was received by you, whether he had left the baths at a certain time, that's Col?

A. Col?

Q. Yes.

A. No, he hadn't left that day. He was there."

33 In re-examination, this was clarified:
"Q. [CB], you may have said this and if you did I apologise. In terms of Col and his whereabouts the day you took this phone call, did you say that your recollection is that Col was there?

A. Yes. I only recall one occasion where he was not going to be present at the baths when I was working, and that was when he said he had to go to the dentist."
Click to expand...

Thank you. I'll have a closer look.
 
The first part of Section 7 of the Chris Dawson murder guilty verdict Judgement decision document, leaves things nicely open for someone else to also be charged (along with Chris Dawson) for both Lynette Dawson's murder, and/or disposal of her body.

7 The Crown alleges that on the weekend after JC went away, Mr Dawson, either alone or with the assistance or involvement of another person or other persons, murdered his wife. The Crown also alleges that Mr Dawson then or later disposed of her body at an unknown location, once again possibly with assistance from another person or other persons.
 
Last edited:
FTY1 said:
The judge didn't accept the evidence of the kiosk worker who had received the STD call occurring on 9 January 1982 because she said that Col the owner was there when the STD call was received for either Chris or Paul. The girl with the diary said that Chris worked on his own which meant she didn't get paid.

"32 Significantly, CB gave the following evidence in cross-examination:
"Q. Do you recall, on the day that this phone call was received by you, whether he had left the baths at a certain time, that's Col?

A. Col?

Q. Yes.

A. No, he hadn't left that day. He was there."

33 In re-examination, this was clarified:
"Q. [CB], you may have said this and if you did I apologise. In terms of Col and his whereabouts the day you took this phone call, did you say that your recollection is that Col was there?

A. Yes. I only recall one occasion where he was not going to be present at the baths when I was working, and that was when he said he had to go to the dentist."
Click to expand...

I've had a look at the totality of evidence regarding the baths call. Philip Day gave statement in 1991 that CD was 'summoned' to the phone on 9th. In clarification in 2003 he then added summoned likely by an employee. In a letter dated Aug 82 Helena Simms wrote that CD took a call at 3 pm on the 9th and that he came back sat down and was visibly affected. Both of these are much more contemporaneous in timeline to the relevant date and have a bookmark motivation to remember. I therefore conclude there WAS a phone call on that day but from whom we don't know.

CB was a teenager who worked 3 shifts at the baths that Sumner. JM was a teenager who worked that Sumner too (probably more often). JM has no recollection whatsoever of working with CB let alone taking a call. That's not surprising, it's 40 years ago and uneventful in nature the importance only crystallizing much later. CB recalls that on the call she took 40 years ago that the kiosk owner was present. JM states in her diary of 9th that she didn't get paid because (as usual ) he wasn't there in the afternoon and CD doesn't pay. One of the teenage workers came forward at one point a decade or two later and put forward her recollections. I suspect that was CB. Unless there is a bookmark to memory because of important reminder of some nature you would not remember a call any call decades later. JM being honest doesn't. Indeed she doesn't even remember CB even though it was possible likely even she worked with her. CB may have witnessed another call for CD or PD but it may have been a different day and time in the morning when the owner was there.

The people who's account is both contemporaneous and bookmarked because of it's importance are both Day and Simms and they say a call was received and meets with CDs evidence it happened . In Simms case she even describes CDs emotional state afterwards. It's plain ludicrous for Harrison to suggest that a teenager could remember a call 40 years on and give critical evidence regarding it and by then cross referencing who was in attendance with a diary comment that he could conclude anything worthwhile. He simply can't. Memories don't work like that.

Harrison has used deductive reasoning which is substantially flawed on a number of fronts in error to conclude there was no call. Day and Simms (each of whom had much more urgent need for recall) contradicts that deduction

Harrison is in error. In fact I'd go so far as to say that if this is an example of his deductive reasoning then it's time he be put out to pasture because it's terrible. Let's check all his decisions while we are at it.

My opinion hasn't changed only being reinforced.. This verdict will be overturned on appeal.
 
Last edited:
In paragraphs 568 to 573 of his judgement Harrison discusses the necessary factors that must exist before he can treat a lie as a consciousness of guilt.

In particular the lie must on the evidence relate specifically to the crime for which he has been charged and not some other reason or crime.

He then elaborated on the specific lies

- he had contacted all her girlfriends when he hadn't

Answer: he wanted a relationship with JC not LD so as heartless as that fact may be her genuine disappearance may be lied about to somehow protect judgement of his character

- he had lied that he went away up north on his own when he went with JC

Answer: once again protect character and also protect from the separate crime of carnal knowledge

- lie in time of commencement of relationshiop with JC in family law

Answer: carnal knowledge charge and protect judgement of his character

-Lie in missing persons report by omitting he had a relationship with JC

Answer: Carnal knowledge and judgement on character

- $500 when she left

Answer: that cant be proven as a lie or the truth so totally erroneous to even characterise as a lie. Harrison would suggest that the fact LD was dead at 8th is that proof. But she could have died in the ensuing weeks by suicide

- lies about subsequent phone calls by LD.

Answer: there is no evidence to disprove there were no calls. So it can't be characterized as a lie. Harrisons conclusion that she was dead at 8th is unsupported and negates suicide possibility.

- lie he lay in bed at night grieving her departure

Answer: can only be a lie if murder occurred. Circular reasoning

Each purported lie can be assigned a logical reason separate from the crime of murder. That is what that law review article was espousing. It is totally unsafe to presume there can be only one source of guilty mind when as shown above there can me many including the crime of carnal knowledge. Harrison must know this. His verdict is unsafe and will be overturned on appeal

No one likes CD. I personally think he is person of reprehensible character starting a sexual relationship with a 16 yo. That doesn't diminish that the law should apply. Harrison hasn't applied the law correctly. Not even close in my mind.

BASIS of APPEAL

Harrison failed to apply the rule of law properly in resolving there were no other possible crimes or reasons that motivated CD to make the lies he did. Those lies to the extent they are can't then be basis to form an opinion on consciousness of guilt
 
Last edited:
Angry Red Bull said:
In paragraphs 568 to 573 of his judgement Harrison discusses the necessary factors that must exist before he can treat a lie as a consciousness of guilt.

In particular the lie must on the evidence relate specifically to the crime for which he has been charged and not some other reason or crime.

He then elaborated on the specific lies

- he had contacted all her girlfriends when he hadn't

Answer: he wanted a relationship with JC not LD so as heartless as that fact may be her genuine disappearance may be lied about to somehow protect judgement of his character

- he had lied that he went away up north on his own when he went with JC

Answer: once again protect character and also protect from the separate crime of carnal knowledge

- lie in time of commencement of relationshiop with JC in family law

Answer: carnal knowledge charge and protect judgement of his character

-Lie in missing persons report by omitting he had a relationship with JC

Answer: Carnal knowledge and judgement on character

- $500 when she left

Answer: that cant be proven as a lie or the truth so totally erroneous to even characterise as a lie. Harrison would suggest that the fact LD was dead at 8th is that proof. But she could have died in the ensuing weeks by suicide

- lies about subsequent phone calls by LD.

Answer: there is no evidence to disprove there were no calls. So it can't be characterized as a lie. Harrisons conclusion that she was dead at 8th is unsupported and negates suicide possibility.

- lie he lay in bed at night grieving her departure

Answer: can only be a lie if murder occurred. Circular reasoning

Each purported lie can be assigned a logical reason separate from the crime of murder. That is what that law review article was espousing. It is totally unsafe to presume there can be only one source of guilty mind when as shown above there can me many including the crime of carnal knowledge. Harrison must know this. His verdict is unsafe and will be overturned on appeal

No one likes CD. I personally think he is person of reprehensible character starting a sexual relationship with a 16 yo. That doesn't diminish that the law should apply. Harrison hasn't applied the law correctly. Not even close in my mind.
Click to expand...
All the lies you dismiss as lies, due to them being in his interests to lie.
 
Lady O said:
All the lies you dismiss as lies, due to them being in his interests to lie.
Click to expand...

Lies are self servicing and can serve multiple goals. But to treat a lie as consciousness of guilt it must serve only one purpose....to hide a murder. I've pointed to self serving reasons separate from a murder and that there is, even though self serving, means there can't be consciousness of guilt.

If you think about it it makes logical sense. We can't send people away for acting in a guilty way unless the ONLY reason they are acting in a guilty way is to hide the crime of which they have been charged. Anything less fails causal connection
 
Last edited:
Angry Red Bull said:
Lies are self servicing and can serve multiple goals. But to treat a lie as consciousness of guilt it must serve only one purpose....to hide a murder. I've pointed to self serving reasons separate from a murder and that there is, even though self serving, means there can't be consciousness of guilt.

If you think about it it makes logical sense. We can't send people away for acting in a guilty way unless the ONLY reason they are acting in a guilty way is to hide the crime of which they have been charged. Anything less fails causal connection
Click to expand...

His willingness to lie, in order to cover his own wrongdoing, points to the character of the man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Redacted
Kerryn Tate unsolved murder Western Australia 1979
Replies
3
Views
317
stormbird
stormbird
PatsFitztrick
Cold Case: The murder of two soldiers at Queenscliff, Vic. 1942
Replies
4
Views
564
geoffjennings79
geoffjennings79
Kurve
Current Murder/suicide Rebecca Young - Ballarat
Replies
4
Views
461
Bostonian
Bostonian
Kurve
Unsolved Murder of teacher Lilie James at St Andrews school - Sydney CBD
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
144
Views
10K
Kurve
Kurve
Kurve
Current Mother & Son Murdered at Martial Arts Centre & Father Murdered at Another Location
Replies
15
Views
1K
Krusty Crab
K
Kurve
Current Murder of Mother & Infant - Perth
Replies
1
Views
669
jason_recliner
J
Kurve
Unsolved Cold Case - Baby's body parcel posted in the mail Melbourne to Darwin
Replies
12
Views
1K
FTY1
F

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top