Current Trial The Teachers Pet Podcast & Chris Dawson's Murder Trial

Remove this Banner Ad

craffles

Brownlow Medallist
May 20, 2008
11,914
28,012
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Brooklyn Nets, New York Jets
I honestly can't see the judge doing anything else other than finding CD not guilty. There's nothing but circumstantial evidence and whilst the whole body of it is alarming I don't think under our legal system it's enough to convict.
 

craffles

Brownlow Medallist
May 20, 2008
11,914
28,012
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Brooklyn Nets, New York Jets
Also Hedley Thomas can get in the bin. Whilst his work brings a spotlight he needs to learn how to do it and not f**K court cases
 

jason_recliner

All Australian
Dec 9, 2020
632
845
AFL Club
West Coast
I honestly can't see the judge doing anything else other than finding CD not guilty. There's nothing but circumstantial evidence and whilst the whole body of it is alarming I don't think under our legal system it's enough to convict.
You're probably right, unfortunately :rage:
 

Log in to remove this ad.

PoopingHindi

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 27, 2012
7,009
11,817
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspur FC
I honestly can't see the judge doing anything else other than finding CD not guilty. There's nothing but circumstantial evidence and whilst the whole body of it is alarming I don't think under our legal system it's enough to convict.
to me it seems highly likely she was murdered but is highly likely enough to obtain a conviction?
the prosecution knew from the start that there was no smoking gun (or body) and that all the evidence is circumstantial. surely they wouldn’t even have bothered going to trial if this wasn’t enough to get a result?
 

Story

Senior List
Apr 17, 2022
219
446
AFL Club
Carlton
Like most of us here I don't know much about criminal law but there is a chance for conviction.
From what little I know the Crown is obviously relying on circumstantial evidence but that could be enough


Courts have consistently upheld the proposition that circumstantial evidence can be enough to convict, and there have been a number of recent cases where juries have convicted defendants without any direct evidence of their guilt.


In circumstantial cases, if there is evidence of a “reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence” then the defendant must be found “not guilty”. However, if there is no such reasonable explanation, the jury can infer guilt and find the defendant guilty.

Circumstantial evidence is not legally regarded as any less reliable than direct evidence in court – and, in some cases, it can even be considered to be more reliable...




Everson has made it clear that the Crown are presenting this as "A Strands in A Cable Case". Here's an explanation of what that means:



In this case, each piece of information is not particularly damning, but like a piece of cord, all the strands of evidence together make a strong case. In these cases, no single piece of evidence will conclusively prove the guilt of the accused, but juries are asked to accept that certain facts occurred, and from them to draw the conclusion of the existence of further facts.


In the often-cited case of Re Belhaven and Stenton Peerage, the judge described it as follows:


“You may have a ray of light so feeble that by itself it will do little… But on the other hand, you may have a number of rays, each of them insufficient, but all converging and brought to bear upon the same point, and, when united, producing a body of illumination which will clear away the darkness.”

Juries must only convict if they are convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the only reasonable inference or conclusion that can be made when considering the facts is the guilt of the accused person.




I think Justice Harrison is seeing if there are enough rays of light being presented by the Crown which he is saying he is searching for when he said "It's a long drive through a dark night" (in relation to the tea-towel flicking evidence).
Personally, I think there should be enough, but it depends on whether the defense has a plausible enough alternative to what happened to Lyn, other then CD murdering her. I'm not giving up hope just yet. I just have to hope that truth will out - That it's the final siren and the defense kick misses and the Crown brings home the flag for Lyn, her family, for what is right.

(the above quotes are from the following NSW Courts page: Circumstantial Evidence in the Courtroom | NSW Courts )
 
Last edited:

FTY1

Team Captain
Jul 14, 2018
382
1,110
AFL Club
GWS
Ms David, has stated during her closing for the defense, that CD did not have the motive of "in with the new" in regards to JC, and that he loved both Lyn and JC. She stated that JC did not move in until after CD claims to have had his last phone call from Lyn on the 16th..... Even if JC didn't move in to Lyn's home and bed until the 16th of Jan (I have checked CD's August 1982 Antecedent report which gives that date as the final phone call), I think one week is a pretty short time frame anyway. Ummmm a week!

Talking of a week: According to Marilyn's 1999 police interview, she tells LE that her family went on holiday for one week to Lake Munmorah, and that it was while they were away that Lyn 'left'. She wasn't sure of the dates her family were away, but when they got back JC was with CD in his house and she never saw Lyn again. The way she put it sounded like she and Paul went up to see Chris (and Lyn) the day they returned. As questioning went on she wasn't sure about dates but thought it was the first half of January.

According to Paul in his 1999 interview, he also says that his family wouldn't have gone away for more then a week, and although he can't be exact he thought they would have gone for the holiday on the Wednesday before Lyn 'left' and returned the following Wednesday. After all that time he couldn't be sure, but Wednesday was what he though the day was.

So what about that trip to South West Rocks? It's interesting that neither Marilyn nor Paul had remembered CD leaving to head up to South West Rocks after they returned, and which there is no doubt happened after Lyn 'vanished'. So that tells us that CD definitely picked up JC before PD and MD got back - which would be Wednesday 13th Jan.... Not after the last made-up call (imo) of 16th Jan, as is now being claimed. To state the obvious: how would he have known at the time that would be the last phone call, anyway?

Aside from all that, in the closing defense statements, Ms David says that CD loved his wife (that he was in fact in love with two people). I think that if a husband were legitimately hoping to hear from or see his wife, that he loved, why would he drive to the Mid North Coast at all. In my mind you would either wait to hear from your wife or see if they returned to the house, or hope she called and asked you to come and pick her up (since she doesn't drive and might be stuck somewhere) because you wanted to save the marriage. If you went anywhere, why not look for her on the Central Coast if you think she is there - that's not South West Rocks.....South West Rocks was the only place he was interested in going to and that was to collect the peson he actually 'loved'. He didn't wait for Lyn because imo 1) He didn't love her and 2) he knew she was dead.

So CD brought JC into the family home and his wife's bed - "out with the old and in with the new" - on or before the 13th of Jan, according to the statements of CD's own family, and before the apparently 'adequate' time (according to CD's defense) of one week to move a new partner into the house.

Jeez, what a load of croc that CD was wanting to save that marriage - "In love with two people" my arse.
Hi Story

I am going to correct you on one thing here. BBM. I think the quote from Ms David was not that CD loved his wife. CD did not testify. He didn't say he loved her in any of the transcripts or any of the staged phone taps. Possibly said something like JC doesn't hear me crying in the night (probably because he didn't). Ms David said that CD could have loved 2 women at the same time.


The Australian description says the same under paywall.

There is no evidence that says that Chris Dawson is French, so the only assumption I make is that is a pretty long stretch.
 

Story

Senior List
Apr 17, 2022
219
446
AFL Club
Carlton
Hi Story

I am going to correct you on one thing here. BBM. I think the quote from Ms David was not that CD loved his wife. CD did not testify. He didn't say he loved her in any of the transcripts or any of the staged phone taps. Possibly said something like JC doesn't hear me crying in the night (probably because he didn't). Ms David said that CD could have loved 2 women at the same time.


The Australian description says the same under paywall.

There is no evidence that says that Chris Dawson is French, so the only assumption I make is that is a pretty long stretch.
Thanks, Yes I think it's a pretty long stretch, too.
I didn't however, state that CD said that he still loved his wife, only that Ms David claims that he did. She is said to have said this in her closing statements.

Ms David insisted Mr Dawson did love his wife, despite "issues and tensions" in their relationship.


Would be great to have a transcript of all of what Ms David says in her closing. But it is possible that she has mentioned the love aspect more than once.
Now that you mention it, I do think it's kind of interesting that CD never said he loved Lyn in that 1990 interview. As far as I know it hasn't been mentioned until the closing statement.
 
Last edited:

BFew

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 5, 2017
8,425
26,827
AFL Club
West Coast
There is no evidence that says that Chris Dawson is French, so the only assumption I make is that is a pretty long stretch
I’m surprised the defence didn’t produce any witnesses to the accused’s French Connections, to back up their ménage au disgusting suggestion, that his love for his wife was more than just his love of her ironing, cooking and cleaning prowess (just before she disappeared), and that he’d outsourced the romance part of their marriage to a schoolgirl babysitter victim of his.
 

FTY1

Team Captain
Jul 14, 2018
382
1,110
AFL Club
GWS
I’m surprised the defence didn’t produce any witnesses to the accused’s French Connections, to back up their ménage au disgusting suggestion, that his love for his wife was more than just his love of her ironing, cooking and cleaning prowess (just before she disappeared), and that he’d outsourced the romance part of their marriage to a schoolgirl babysitter victim of his.
There is still time. I suspect why they stretched their closing out to Monday was they can scan the message boards to see what they can add to their closing. I think you have said too much.
 

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
Like most of us here I don't know much about criminal law but there is a chance for conviction.
From what little I know the Crown is obviously relying on circumstantial evidence but that could be enough


Courts have consistently upheld the proposition that circumstantial evidence can be enough to convict, and there have been a number of recent cases where juries have convicted defendants without any direct evidence of their guilt.


In circumstantial cases, if there is evidence of a “reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence” then the defendant must be found “not guilty”. However, if there is no such reasonable explanation, the jury can infer guilt and find the defendant guilty.

Circumstantial evidence is not legally regarded as any less reliable than direct evidence in court – and, in some cases, it can even be considered to be more reliable...




Everson has made it clear that the Crown are presenting this as "A Strands in A Cable Case". Here's an explanation of what that means:



In this case, each piece of information is not particularly damning, but like a piece of cord, all the strands of evidence together make a strong case. In these cases, no single piece of evidence will conclusively prove the guilt of the accused, but juries are asked to accept that certain facts occurred, and from them to draw the conclusion of the existence of further facts.


In the often-cited case of Re Belhaven and Stenton Peerage, the judge described it as follows:


“You may have a ray of light so feeble that by itself it will do little… But on the other hand, you may have a number of rays, each of them insufficient, but all converging and brought to bear upon the same point, and, when united, producing a body of illumination which will clear away the darkness.”

Juries must only convict if they are convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the only reasonable inference or conclusion that can be made when considering the facts is the guilt of the accused person.




I think Justice Harrison is seeing if there are enough rays of light being presented by the Crown which he is saying he is searching for when he said "It's a long drive through a dark night" (in relation to the tea-towel flicking evidence).
Personally, I think there should be enough, but it depends on whether the defense has a plausible enough alternative to what happened to Lyn, other then CD murdering her. I'm not giving up hope just yet. I just have to hope that truth will out - That it's the final siren and the defense kick misses and the Crown brings home the flag for Lyn, her family, for what is right.

(the above quotes are from the following NSW Courts page: Circumstantial Evidence in the Courtroom | NSW Courts )

Good analysis Story.

For me this is the most difficult of cases for some of the very same reasoning. We have no shining beam illuminating guilt but if it didn't happen on the 8th and at CDs hand then when, how and why did it? If you are to believe CD then she left without shelter food clothing a means of earning money on the 9th. No evidence to prove it didn't happen that way apart from sheer logistics of how could she? Throw in she was walking away from children and family it makes it more difficult. I grapple heavily with a choice to send someone away absent that beam being shone. it was put to me some time ago that Kelli Lane case had no body found but that case involved a new born that couldn't survive. Not as though it would crawl off and find a new home and you wouldn't give the baby away to someone can't be found. So I can distinguish the case with CD. LD was an adult and could find a new life.

Questions which to me remain unanswered even now.

Did she have money squirreled away taken intermittently from her account? To give her means? If there was evidence I didn't see it.

If there was a hitman it must have been paid for by CD. What evidence of financial drawings? If there was evidence I didn't see it.

What evidence is there to adduce she went away? Well there may have been some had the police taken a formal statement from the teenage worker at kiosk. They spoke 3 times but never took a statement. Perhaps it may not have been definitive but answers to the following would have been very helpful

  • was the call std?
  • was the call from a woman?
  • did the caller indicate who she was?
  • are you familiar with LD and did it sound like her?

On one level it's incompetent not to and on another down right obstructive to justice they didn't. It doesn't sit well with me

There were a number of witnesses that I couldn't believe. Some not at all......cooper. a joke Leary wasn't at work on 8th, wasn't there to hear from LD what happened on the 8th in lift to counselling nor the bruise which followed and when manifestations of bruises take days to appear so her saying she saw a bruise that day is just wrong and unbelievable. Contaminated witness account in my view....the belief engendered by teachers pet perhaps. Terrible. The other 3 workers saw no bruise. Can't believe her at all

JC was groomed and therefore an abuse victim no doubt. But to me her credibility about some aspects has a question mark. She has hatred for CD. Hatred breeds bias. Is her witness tainted by bias? Perhaps. But what and to what extent if at all. At the very least I don't willingly give 100% credence to her on CD matters 100%. I'm guarded with her. Some aspects are corroborated like Silkman account and jealousy account with fellow student so we can garner confidence in that way which the jealous outburst about CD reaction to JC wearing a thong and her evidence about a hitman. These do not prove a murder. Throw in the fact some woman likely acted as accomplice (the call; the BC purchase) and she must be under suspicion

JC moved into LD house. I don't think the time in which that happened has any substantial bearing on a murder. We already know he wanted a relationship with JC in preference. He may have being using the obvious relationship with her to push LD to brink of breaking. Manipulating her with obscene disregard to make her leave.
Shows he is a horrible human being and a vile husband but only marginal additional support that he is a murderer by way of motive. Motive absent concrete evidence proves nought. That's the problem. He can be horrible but still not a murderer

For something to be beyond reasonable doubt there must not be ANY alternative reasonable hypothesis consistent with their innocence.

Lets have a go. LD exhibits depression pre Xmas per her relatives diary comments. Clearly marriage to CD is extremely troubled. Arguments. LD cannot conceive Chris would do anything wrong but is increasingly becoming aware that CD is cheating with JC and threatening the marriage. She oscillates with unhappiness. She has already put aside some $ in addition to new BC to break CD control of her. With threat to marriage she pushes CD to undertake counselling as last effort before giving up on marriage They both exit the counselling and seemingly LD is convinced that they will save marriage. Walk hand in hand and are positive but CD wasn't being totally open.. CD tells LD the night of 8th that he wants to be with JC. Heartfelt troubled night after drinking a little more than usual finally tips her to realization marriage is over. Ephiphany. Next day absolutely devastated she leaves and rings CD to tell him she needs time to consider her future. Shame at walking out prevents her calling family or friends.Depression and unhappiness take hold of her in the days and weeks that follow and she suicides at the gap with the body swept away never to be found believing there to be no alternative path at her lowest point.

Perhaps not more likely than the alternative but most definitely a reasonable hypothesis that hasn't been disproved on the facts. There is no body. There is no evidence of DV on the 8th, nor defensive wounds but is some evidence a call was received from someone on the 9th CD purports was LD. No evidence refutes that. It was convincing because her family believed it for a considerable time. She hasn't lived to now but we don't need to say with certainty she did only that she lived past the point of departure as reasonable hypothesis.

He will imo be found not guilty. And that isn't a comment on whether I believe there was a crime of murder. Likelihood is strong but not sufficiently so to deny an alternative hypothesis or two
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Story

Senior List
Apr 17, 2022
219
446
AFL Club
Carlton
Good analysis Story.

For me this is the most difficult of cases for some of the very same reasoning. We have no shining beam illuminating guilt but if it didn't happen on the 8th and at CDs hand then when, how and why did it? If you are to believe CD then she left without shelter food clothing a means of earning money on the 9th. No evidence to prove it didn't happen that way apart from sheer logistics of how could she? Throw in she was walking away from children and family it makes it more difficult. I grapple heavily with a choice to send someone away absent that beam being shone. it was put to me some time ago that Kelli Lane case had no body found but that case involved a new born that couldn't survive. Not as though it would crawl off and find a new home and you wouldn't give the baby away to someone can't be found. So I can distinguish the case with CD. LD was an adult and could find a new life.

Questions which to me remain unanswered even now.

Did she have money squirreled away taken intermittently from her account? To give her means? If there was evidence I didn't see it.

If there was a hitman it must have been paid for by CD. What evidence of financial drawings? If there was evidence I didn't see it.

What evidence is there to adduce she went away? Well there may have been some had the police taken a formal statement from the teenage worker at kiosk. They spoke 3 times but never took a statement. Perhaps it may not have been definitive but answers to the following would have been very helpful

  • was the call std?
  • was the call from a woman?
  • did the caller indicate who she was?
  • are you familiar with LD and did it sound like her?

On one level it's incompetent not to and on another down right obstructive to justice they didn't. It doesn't sit well with me

There were a number of witnesses that I couldn't believe. Some not at all......cooper. a joke Leary wasn't at work on 8th, wasn't there to hear from LD what happened on the 8th in lift to counselling nor the bruise which followed and when manifestations of bruises take days to appear so her saying she saw a bruise that day is just wrong and unbelievable. Contaminated witness account in my view....the belief engendered by teachers pet perhaps. Terrible. The other 3 workers saw no bruise. Can't believe her at all

JC was groomed and therefore an abuse victim no doubt. But to me her credibility about some aspects has a question mark. She has hatred for CD. Hatred breeds bias. Is her witness tainted by bias? Perhaps. But what and to what extent if at all. At the very least I don't willingly give 100% credence to her on CD matters 100%. I'm guarded with her. Some aspects are corroborated like Silkman account and jealousy account with fellow student so we can garner confidence in that way which the jealous outburst about CD reaction to JC wearing a thong and her evidence about a hitman. These do not prove a murder. Throw in the fact some woman likely acted as accomplice (the call; the BC purchase) and she must be under suspicion

JC moved into LD house. I don't think the time in which that happened has any substantial bearing on a murder. We already know he wanted a relationship with JC in preference. He may have being using the obvious relationship with her to push LD to brink of breaking. Manipulating her with obscene disregard to make her leave.
Shows he is a horrible human being and a vile husband but only marginal additional support that he is a murderer by way of motive. Motive absent concrete evidence proves nought. That's the problem. He can be horrible but still not a murderer

For something to be beyond reasonable doubt there must not be ANY alternative reasonable hypothesis consistent with their innocence.

Lets have a go. LD exhibits depression pre Xmas per her relatives diary comments. Clearly marriage to CD is extremely troubled. Arguments. LD cannot conceive Chris would do anything wrong but is increasingly becoming aware that CD is cheating with JC and threatening the marriage. She oscillates with unhappiness. She has already put aside some $ in addition to new BC to break CD control of her. With threat to marriage she pushes CD to undertake counselling as last effort before giving up on marriage They both exit the counselling and seemingly LD is convinced that they will save marriage. Walk hand in hand and are positive but CD wasn't being totally open.. CD tells LD the night of 8th that he wants to be with JC. Heartfelt troubled night after drinking a little more than usual finally tips her to realization marriage is over. Ephiphany. Next day absolutely devastated she leaves and rings CD to tell him she needs time to consider her future. Shame at walking out prevents her calling family or friends.Depression and unhappiness take hold of her in the days and weeks that follow and she suicides at the gap with the body swept away never to be found believing there to be no alternative path at her lowest point.

Perhaps not more likely than the alternative but most definitely a reasonable hypothesis that hasn't been disproved on the facts. There is no body. There is no evidence of DV on the 8th, nor defensive wounds but is some evidence a call was received from someone on the 9th CD purports was LD. No evidence refutes that. It was convincing because her family believed it for a considerable time. She hasn't lived to now but we don't need to say with certainty she did only that she lived past the point of departure as reasonable hypothesis.

He will imo be found not guilty. And that isn't a comment on whether I believe there was a crime of murder. Likelihood is strong but not sufficiently so to deny an alternative hypothesis or two

Thanks ARB, I know it's not out of reach that CD's team might be able to convince the judge that a hypothesis like yours is possible but is it "reasonable" and that's why Everson is putting the strands in the cable.

I think a lot will depend on the way that the prosecution has been able to succesfully portray Lyn's chararcter and her hopes. First we have the statements that she was feeling positive after the marriage counselling, and the conversation she had with her mother, on the last night she is knows to be alive, Lyn was still very hopeful. From what I can tell, Lyn was caring and loved her family, so I find the idea that she would trust her children to be raised by a teenager, who I am sure she would not have liked or respected, pretty bloody unlikely. To me Lyn comes across as a communicator and I cannot see her at least getting into contact with someone in her family or a friend if she were feeling troubled about something that happened that final night. Even without that Lyn had known plans for the future that spoke to her caring nature. There is the start of school in only a matter of a couple of weeks for her oldest child that she was excited about getting ready for; there is the major birthday party she had planned for her mum later in the month. She was organising this with hand-written invitations and was going to host the party at her own house at Bayview. I do not think that even if she were convinced that her marriage were at an end that she wouldn't at least wait until she had completed those life milestones for her daughter and her mother. She wouldn't want to let them down. Lyn would also have known that she was meeting her mum that day along with Philip Day, who was apparently a trusted friend and was coming to the pool too. CD says that Phil was coming to help them with their relationship issues - surely Lyn would have known this and would be desperate to talk to Phil as a last hope of saving the marriage, especially if she were in as much distress about it (as you and the defense suggest she could have been in on the night of the 8th, ARB).

I just don't see her suddenly leaving, and I think the prosecution have been clear about her near-future plans, and her positive mindset that night. So, for the court, the likelihood of Lyn leaving on the 9th of January without warning is not great imo, and on its own should be enough to demonstrate to the court that she didn't leave - That her leaving isn't a "reasonable explanation" for her disappearance, as would be required for a not guilty verdict.

Them's my hopeful thoughts.
 
Last edited:

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
The thing that will be of extra interest is that when Harrison ultimately hands down his verdict, there will be reasoning attached to it. We will see the legal reasoning that ordinarily sits in the mind of the jury and their deliberations. What weight he gives to what evidence and why.

Will he give weighting to the fact she was a loving mother who would not leave her family?

Will he be able to make the jump from bruises and intimidation to a deadly incident happening?

What will he make of sightings of LD by various parties?....dismiss it like HT as unconfirmed, dismiss it as refuted by other witnesses, or not conclude it to be persuasive enough?

How will he attack the very significant issue of proof of life. How did she have shelter food, clothing money after the 8th? is police's 18 year old interrogation of government institutions adequate and convincing she can't have been alive for any of the sightings?

How will he treat the issue of contamination of evidence by HT and prejudicial effect of the podcasts?

Will he allow the late introduction of nurse evidence refuting Breese testimony?

Most importantly what evidence he gives emphasis to to identify LD state of mind? If he is not guilty it can only happen if she left willingly and started a life or ultimately suicided.
 

BFew

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 5, 2017
8,425
26,827
AFL Club
West Coast
I just don't see her suddenly leaving
IMO, more likely that she'd tell one of Chris Dawson's teenage Harem victims parents that her school teacher Husband was having an inappropriate and/ or illegal relationship with their daughter, and fearing for her life, in desperation, as if they could do something to stop his behaviour, in the desperate hope that one of them might be a hit-person and take Dawson out. Or at least get him in the 'three card trick'.
 

MSB ROYS

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 23, 2001
10,274
7,691
Brisbane
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
I just don't see her suddenly leaving, and I think the prosecution have been clear about her near-future plans, and her positive mindset that night. So, for the court, the likelihood of Lyn leaving on the 9th of January without warning is not great imo, and on its own should be enough to demonstrate to the court that she didn't leave - That her leaving isn't a "reasonable explanation" for her disappearance, as would be required for a not guilty verdict.

Them's my hopeful thoughts.
Story Thanks for you thoughtful posts in this thread. I also believe that she didn't leave and there are three possibilities to me.

1. CD murdered her by himself or with an accomplice.
2. CD got someone to make her disappear (hence he can truthfully say that he didn't kill her)
3. LD was independently murdered and CD is very unlucky.

Personally, I am not sure that he can be found guilty as there is still too much doubt. One thing I am sure of is that he is not of 'good character'.
 

The King!

Chosen One
Aug 3, 2004
117,913
106,383
Backwater
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Bucks, Redsox, Patriots
Story Thanks for you thoughtful posts in this thread. I also believe that she didn't leave and there are three possibilities to me.

1. CD murdered her by himself or with an accomplice.
2. CD got someone to make her disappear (hence he can truthfully say that he didn't kill her)
3. LD was independently murdered and CD is very unlucky.

Personally, I am not sure that he can be found guilty as there is still too much doubt. One thing I am sure of is that he is not of 'good character'.


The thing with option 3 is then why's he basically faked talking to her on the STD calls.

Plus where's the panic , as he clearly has nothing to hide so may as well (being cold here presuming he is happy at this coincidence ) go pretend to be sad at the police and with family etc.

If she got murdered independently why that day? and still come back to why move JC straight in.

the only way he is innocent completely is really if you accept she left by choice imo, otherwise his actions still make no sense . But then where she is, she did leave , did call , then happened to end up dead somehow and not return . I mean what odds she is actually at a commune , would be a miracle .

I guess unless someone did it and he knows and is covering for them, so technically he is not the killer .
 

The King!

Chosen One
Aug 3, 2004
117,913
106,383
Backwater
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Bucks, Redsox, Patriots
Mind you still feels like it all comes back to beyond reasonable doubt , with no body or weapon.

I think he did it to be honest, but think i would say not guilty if on a jury because that little nagging part of me saying I cannot say with certainty he did it ,
 

BFew

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 5, 2017
8,425
26,827
AFL Club
West Coast
'July 11, 2022 — 2.19pm'

'“I hope to be able to provide my judgment relatively quickly. That doesn’t mean tomorrow, I can assure you,” Harrison said.'

'Dawson’s bail was varied, allowing him to report once a week to police rather than three times.'
 

BFew

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 5, 2017
8,425
26,827
AFL Club
West Coast
I hope to be able to provide my judgment relatively quickly. That doesn’t mean tomorrow, I can assure you,” Harrison said.'
Hopefully NSW under-resourced ICAC cases are not his benchmark, although I wouldn't rule that out!

Snail GIF by MotoGP
 

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
You understand that technically it would have been a poor choice for the defence to put CD on the stand. Heavy cross examination is designed to cast doubt where sometimes there is none.

Having said that if I were a genuinely innocent man I would probably insist in his circumstances to show in a positive fashion there is simply nothing to hide and you are prepared to give honest testimony because it can't hurt you. That's what I would do because it's honest

If the verdict comes back not guilty as I think it might the argument will always be that he didn't really show innocence but just escaped prosecution adequate enough proof of guilt. Big difference. With this hanging over his head for decades IF I were innocent I would want total exoneration and nothing less. Tell us what actually took place on the night of 8th. What conversations actually took place that motivated LD to leave of her own volition. Was she heartbroken at loss? If that's not true she simply wouldn't have walked away.....
 

FTY1

Team Captain
Jul 14, 2018
382
1,110
AFL Club
GWS
You understand that technically it would have been a poor choice for the defence to put CD on the stand. Heavy cross examination is designed to cast doubt where sometimes there is none.

Having said that if I were a genuinely innocent man I would probably insist in his circumstances to show in a positive fashion there is simply nothing to hide and you are prepared to give honest testimony because it can't hurt you. That's what I would do because it's honest

If the verdict comes back not guilty as I think it might the argument will always be that he didn't really show innocence but just escaped prosecution adequate enough proof of guilt. Big difference. With this hanging over his head for decades IF I were innocent I would want total exoneration and nothing less. Tell us what actually took place on the night of 8th. What conversations actually took place that motivated LD to leave of her own volition. Was she heartbroken at loss? If that's not true she simply wouldn't have walked away.....
Maybe if he was truly heartbroken he would have been the one following up with the police. Please investigate. Please check with Central Coast police. All long term missing people that I have heard have been advocates for their missing person. They have interviews with magazines with newspapers, TV etc. There has never been any calls from the public for information from Chris Dawson, other than that request to Lyn the day after her anniversary to come back. Seriously how many people read the personals.
 

Story

Senior List
Apr 17, 2022
219
446
AFL Club
Carlton
Maybe if he was truly heartbroken he would have been the one following up with the police. Please investigate. Please check with Central Coast police. All long term missing people that I have heard have been advocates for their missing person. They have interviews with magazines with newspapers, TV etc. There has never been any calls from the public for information from Chris Dawson, other than that request to Lyn the day after her anniversary to come back. Seriously how many people read the personals.
Agree on all of that.

I feel that the Personal Ads was a strange place to have put a notice for Lyn to read. That's the 'dating' ads, and I don't really feel that Lyn would be reading that section of the paper if she were alive. I can understand putting something in the Family Notices section - maybe under Anniversaries - seeing that it was meant to be an ad timed for their wedding anniversary. Anniversary section, yes - Dating section, no. That's if you were actually trying to find your missing wife IMO.

Also, from memory, didn't CD have Lyn declared DEAD so that he was able to sell their house at Bayview, keep all the money and move to Queensland? I might well be wrong, correct me if I am (It's a pretty big point to get clarity on. How did he get her share of the ppty into his name?). Before that he needed to be able to prove abandonment to be able to marry JC, too. For all this to happen I'm sure boxes had to be ticked to show that he had searched for Lyn. Wouldn't his missing persons report and advertisment in the personals have gone towards that? If that's right, he seemed happy to disregard the supposed sighting of Lyn on the Cenral Coast at that time and have her declared dead to get her financial assets. In reality he goes on to telling everyone that she had run off to a cult etc, and not mention that he had cashed in not all that long after she 'went missing'.
Did this get mentioned during the trial?
 
Last edited:

Angry Red Bull

Premiership Player
Aug 9, 2016
3,220
4,387
AFL Club
Sydney
Agree on all of that.

I feel that the Personal Ads was a strange place to have put a notice for Lyn to read. That's the 'dating' ads, and I don't really feel that Lyn would be reading that section of the paper if she were alive. I can understand putting something in the Family Notices section - maybe under Anniversaries - seeing that it was meant to be an ad timed for their wedding anniversary. Anniversary section, yes - Dating section, no. That's if you were actually trying to find your missing wife IMO.

Also, from memory, didn't CD have Lyn declared DEAD so that he was able to sell their house at Bayview, keep all the money and move to Queensland? I might well be wrong, correct me if I am (It's a pretty big point to get clarity on. How did he get her share of the ppty into his name?). Before that he needed to be able to prove abandonment to be able to marry JC, too. For all this to happen I'm sure boxes had to be ticked to show that he had searched for Lyn. Wouldn't his missing persons report and advertisment in the personals have gone towards that? If that's right, he seemed happy to disregard the supposed sighting of Lyn on the Cenral Coast at that time and have her declared dead to get her financial assets. In reality he goes on to telling everyone that she had run off to a cult etc, and not mention that he had cashed in not all that long after she 'went missing'.
Did this get mentioned during the trial?

Not so much declared dead....that is coroners responsibility. Rather court approved substituted service in being unable to be found.
 

Remove this Banner Ad