Friends, them experts are talking about how the High Court may even allow this to go ahead and such, but I don't know. Them jury members heard all them evidences and such and even from the mouth of the man hisself, Mr Clay.

All I gots to say is that Yes he deserves to spend life in prison and I hope he burns in Hell.

Why? My reasons are in true Queensland spirit, that Fair's Fair and Fair's Fair.

That's the spirit of Queensland right there friends.

God bless the memory of dear young Allison and God bless Billy J. Jack.

Friends, them experts are talking about how the High Court may even allow this to go ahead and such, but I don't know. Them jury members heard all them evidences and such and even from the mouth of the man hisself, Mr Clay.

All I gots to say is that Yes he deserves to spend life in prison and I hope he burns in Hell.

Why? My reasons are in true Queensland spirit, that Fair's Fair and Fair's Fair.

That's the spirit of Queensland right there friends.

God bless the memory of dear young Allison and God bless Billy J. Jack.

Thought I'd post this up for a read. Given that the three wise monkeys who sat on the Gerard Baden-CLay Appeal now have found him guilty of the lesser charge of Manslaughter, thought it might be handy to read the definition: Source CriminalLawyers.com.au

Manslaughter in Australia

Manslaughter is homicide or the killing of a human being by another person. Unlike premeditated murder, manslaughter is not a planned crime and includes some condition or circumstance that makes the crime less culpable than murder.

In Australia, the offense of manslaughter is categorized as either voluntary manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter.

Involuntary Manslaughter

Involuntary manslaughter does not include any malice or intent to kill, although the conduct is unlawful. There is constructive manslaughter and criminally negligent manslaughter.

Constructive manslaughter: An unreasonable or unlawful conduct or a dangerous act that exposed another person to a high risk of serious injury or death. It is not an accidental act but must have been intended.

Elements of this offense include the existence of a duty of care to the victim, a breach of that duty which causes or substantially causes death, and which conduct or breach is gross negligence but not a criminal act. The duty of care need not be a statutory one and could include any activity engaged in between two people.

Criminally negligent manslaughter: A more serious offense that involves some degree of malice, criminally negligent conduct, or criminal activity.

It exposes the person to a high risk of very serious injury by an act or omission. It is the standard of care that falls far short of what a reasonable person would exercise under the circumstances.

Voluntary Manslaughter

If the killing of a human being satisfies the elements of murder, such as intent to kill, but there are certain mitigating circumstances such as diminished responsibility or provocation, then the offense might be considered voluntary manslaughter.

Mitigating circumstances might include excessive self-defense, intoxication, or a mental defect or abnormality that reduces the person’s culpability.

Penalties

Manslaughter carries a maximum sentence of 25-years imprisonment and is always an indictable offense. You could face only community service and a suspended prison sentence, home detention, or prison if the offense is involuntary manslaughter. You are more likely to face prison (gaol) for a voluntary manslaughter offense. The average incarceration time for a first-time offender is 6-years.


*** Note the kicker at the end of this, the average incarceration time is 6 years

PS I am not responsible for the atrocious spelling (American) in the preceding article

Fair enough Aussie, it looked like a kosher site. Perhaps you might grace this thread with the Qld version.

Incidentally I've just been reading a post you put up some time ago,  from a Qld News Paper, certain things in it grabbed me. :

Updated 9 Dec 2015, 12:42am


Allison Baden-Clay and Gerard Baden-Clay
Photo: Allison Baden-Clay was reported missing by her husband Gerard in April 2012. (Supplied)

Related Story: Timeline of Baden-Clay trial



Map:  Brookfield 4069



So far today police in Australia would have dealt with on average

420
domestic violence matters


Learn more about these numbers. Share

Former Brisbane real estate agent Gerard Baden-Clay's murder conviction for killing his wife Allison has been downgraded to manslaughter.

The Court of Appeal set aside the murder finding, saying there was not enough evidence to prove he intended to kill the mother-of-three in 2012.

During Baden-Clay's appeal four months ago, his lawyers argued it was possible he could have unintentionally killed his wife during an argument at their home in Brookfield, in Brisbane's west.

His lawyers then suggested a hypothesis that he covered up the death out of "panic".

During the 2014 trial, Baden-Clay denied killing Allison and said scratches on his face were caused by shaving.

In response to the appeal court's ruling, Acting Attorney-General Cameron Dick said he was seeking legal advice on whether the Court of Appeal ruling could be challenged.

"I have requested legal advice about the prospects of success on an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal involving Gerard Baden-Clay," he said in a statement.

"Once that advice has been received and considered, a decision will be made as to whether an appeal should be lodged.

"The Attorney-General must make a decision on any possible appeal within 28 days."

In the judgement handed down on Tuesday, the Court of Appeal said while Baden-Clay lied about the cause of scratches on his face and tried to hide his wife's body, there was a reasonable hypothesis he was innocent of murder.

Face of Gerard Baden-Clay, showing injuries (released March 20 2013)

The marks on the face of Gerard Baden-Clay after his wife's death. (Supplied: Queensland Courts.)
Image  1 of 4
Marks on face of Gerard Baden-Clay (photo released March 20, 2013)

The Supreme Court released the photos during the trial. (Supplied: Queensland Courts)
Image  2 of 4
Torso of Gerard Baden-Clay, showing chest marks (uploaded March 20, 2013)

Lawyers for Baden-Clay hypothesised he unintentionally killed Allison during an argument. (Supplied: Queensland Courts.)
Image  3 of 4
Gerard Baden-Clay's hands

Scratches on the hands of Gerard Baden-Clay. (AAP: Queensland Courts)
Image  4 of 4

Gallery: Gerard Baden-Clay's injuries



It could not be ruled out that there was a physical confrontation in which Allison fell and hit her head, the ruling by Chief Justice Catherine Holmes, Justice Hugh Fraser and Justice Robert Gotterson found.

"Smothering, the crown's thesis, was a reasonable possibility, but while there was also another reasonable possibility available on the evidence, the jury could not properly have been satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the element of intent to kill or do grievous bodily harm had been proved," Justice Fraser wrote in Tuesday's findings.

Baden-Clay, 45, reported his wife missing in April 2012 and her body was found 10 days later beside a creek.

He was convicted last year and jailed for life, with a non-parole period of 15 years.

New sentencing submissions for the manslaughter conviction will be heard in January.

From Red Baron: I did a double take at the hypothesising that has gone on by the Judges during their deliberations.

Gerard Baden-Clay 'could have done this and could have done that'

What were they thinking?????????

On the basis that they think he may have killed her accidentally, they have watered down his charges.

Baden-Clay has been as silent as a tomb, so on the whim of the Judges who think 'he may have done this or may have done that they have reduced a Murder finding to a Manslaughter charge, where he will most probably do 6 years.

Not bad for killing your wife.

If that is Justice we might as well just go grab a gun and take our own Justice out on anyone who murdered one of our loved ones, I'm sure we could get our charge watered down to Manslaughter. Particularly if it was in the deep north - (Qld).

The Judges hypothesized and the Defence Lawyers weakened the seams.

Then the decision by Jury was gutted and sent to the bottom of the ocean.

Then 'the three wise monkeys' hypothesized their way into believing that Gerard Baden-Clay 'accidentally killed his wife'.

Is this the Law at work? If so, then the Law is a bloody joke.

How can these three wise monkeys came to this decision is a bigger mystery than the Bermuda triangle. Where is the evidence that he 'accidentally killed her'. There isn't one shred.

So...they are saying there is sufficient evidence to say he accidentally killed her but not enough to say he murdered her.

You can't have it both ways wise monkeys.

He either did or he didn't murder her. The Jury have said he did.

Then  the three wise monkeys swept it aside for some convoluted crock of sh.t decision of Manslaughter...don't know what that is but it ain't Justice for Allison Baden-Clay.

red baron wrote on Jan 9^th, 2016 at 8:29am:




  no such thing as justice for a victim......thats the point they are dead gone. and as far as the law is concerned forgotten...

I am reading the Fall at the moment about that other...noice man! who threw his fiancee over the balcony or at least was found guilty of doing so...

and it never fails to make me wonder how come the victims. [dont care if its male or female] life and times is brought out... even to the point of trying to make them out to be mentally disturbed??? ....having all sort of so called troubles..... yet the accuseds life before the event they are charged with is is never to be mentioned....he/she can be the biggest bastard on this earth,...yet it is not out there until the case is finished.......the victim... well their character doesnt matter at all.....they are dead lets destroy or shred whats left... why not!

it all comes down to interpretation   the twist of a word....

BEYOND a SHADOW of a DOUBT .........


what is a SHADOW in LAW language?????....where does it begin and end...

like the line in the sand.....

where is it exactly???.....

has Baden Clay admitted he accidentally  killed her???.....which he didnt do throughout  the trial.....

or are his lawyers trying to split hairs...to get him early release...


for all we know... if the manslaughter charges remain.. whats to stop him appealing that?...

mitasol wrote on Jan 9^th, 2016 at 8:51am:



what makes him think he is MORE EQUIPPED to make JUDGEMENTS about the PUBLIC?..

$10.000 a day.. no wonder hes up himself...

well now I am more and more hoping this APPEAL GETS THROUGH>. just to rub it in his face..

what an arrogant zot....

as per usual   not a concern  for justice for the victim....someone gets murdered  and suddenly its has nothing to do with DYING...

just about what was in his mind... whilst she was inconveniently dying.....

I didnt see the HYSTERICAL MOB...... I did see a VERY CONCERNED MOB though..

concerned that every murder from now on can use this for an appeal.....against their murder conviction.....

why not go straight to the appeal court judges in the first place...

do you think that would upset Mr $10.000 a day????????

I am bloody sure it would.