Current Claremont Murders Discussion & Edwards trial updates pt3 - The Verdict

[Kurve]

Here is
- Claremont Murders - Part One and Part Two
- Media
- The Bunker
- Hey Bret? Stalking Claremont the book.
- Justice Hall's Decision 619 pgs

 

[HAPPY BUDDHA]

Yes it is, that other opposing 50 of the 50/50 need to see reason...

The general public don’t think reasonably with things like this tho.

I guess 50% would give him a special condition for info.
50% will say NO! **** that dog.

We have already seen the difference in opinion on this page.

 

[JezzaPerth]

In the Police presser currently on the Police Comissioners says that at no time did anyone ever nominate BRE as a suspect!

There is the theory that the discovery of the Kimono wasn't an accident. Given the history of honesty and accountability set by multiple Police Commisioners that's not impossible.

Though it may also be a need to know thing where he doesn't need to know.

 

[BonzaRam]

He never gonna give her up. It’s of no use to him. He will be protected for the rest of his life in custody anyway.

Whilst i agree with you about him not giving it up the offer still has to be made, they may just get him at an unguarded moment.

 

[BFew]

In the Police presser currently on he says that at no time did anyone ever nominate BRE as a suspect!

To be more precise, does he mean that he has been told that someone or a group/committee/task force within WAPOL can currently find no evidence that at any time did anyone ever nominate BRE as a suspect?

 

[HAPPY BUDDHA]

Whilst i agree with you about him not giving it up the offer still has to be made, they may just get him at an unguarded moment.

Very possible. Don’t worry, they are gonna break him down on this over the entire period of what’s left of his life.
Look what happened with Bundy and he was trying to avoid execution.

 

[Kurve]

There is the theory that the discovery of the Kimono wasn't an accident. Given the history of honesty and accountability set by multiple Police Commisioners that's not impossible.

Though it may also be a need to know thing where he doesn't need to know.

There's a few of us on here (see Part 1), who never bought the 'we stumbled over the kimono' story.

 

[Deva]

Video of today’s verdict is up already on the Supreme Court site for those wanting to see it. Go in and register.

 

[BFew]

Off topic, You need to change you avatar to a large GUILTY and a small not guilty

The not guilty bit is all about moi .

 

[HAPPY BUDDHA]

Yes it is, that other opposing 50 of the 50/50 need to see reason...

Opposing what?

Opposing he is given privilege or opposing closure on Spiers?

 

[Pamcake1]

To be more precise, does he mean that he has been told that someone or a group/committee/task force within WAPOL can currently find no evidence that at any time did anyone ever nominate BRE as a suspect?

From the WA Today Coverage:
Edwards 'never nominated' as a suspect: WA Police Commissioner
WA Police Commissioner Chris Dawson said Bradley Edwards had not come onto investigators’ radar as a suspect, despite officers probing a connection to a Telstra worker.

Edwards worked as a Telstra technician his whole life, and witnesses in his trial recalled a car bearing a Telstra/Telecom logo cruising the streets of Claremont around the time of the murders.
Police alleged he used his work-issue car to abduct the women from the nightlife district.
“The Telstra connection was a very important part which resulted in further investigation opportunities,” Mr Dawson said.
“Telstra vehicles were part of it but taxis were an early part of the investigation.
“We never had Bradley Edwards nominated by anyone as a suspect. That’s a curious factor I can relay to you now.
“We are duty-bound to investigate the information that’s in front of us.”
Mr Dawson said police interviewed Lance Williams as a suspect a number of times, and it was “a matter of duty” for officers to investigate, despite turning up no evidence against him. He was eventually dismissed as a suspect.
Mr Williams died in 2018 after a battle with cancer.
“We appreciate that there is a lot of anguish ... but [Mr Williams] was part of the investigation,” Mr Dawson said.

 

[BonzaRam]

Opposing what?

Opposing he is given privilege or opposing closure on Spiers?

Closure on Spiers, considering his age, his soon to be accommodation, a nice lengthy sentence to endure, his likelihood of reaching the parole stage is very slim (and if the slim chance occurs he still has the AG to deal with) so in the event he did agree and reveals where SS is then not much in the way of justice has been lost but everything for closure for SS's family has been gained.

 

[ms finch]

Even worse, I'm pretty darned sure BRE confessed to the murders.

However, it's possible to defend someone who has confessed, but you are extremely constrained in what you can do - e.g. no alibi, and no defendant giving evidence. This perhaps made the defence's life easier because they didn't have to go to extremes in the defence because they weren't allowed by law to do so.

The real job of the defence in those circumstances is to make sure the prosecution prove their case. They did that in the case of Sarah Spiers; the evidence was always insufficient and all Yovich had to do was point that out. (Though whether BRE confessed to Sarah Spiers' murder is another thing to confessing to Ciara Glennon's murder)

I’m really interested in why you think he confessed to Yovich.

I understand your logic about the strategy. Defence lawyers can not endorse evidence they know to be a lie. (Incidentally, Martin Bryant’s first lawyer had to resign because Bryant confessed to him and was then adamant he was going to plead not guilty and testify.)

However, I don’t think the strategy would have been different whether Edwards confessed or not. No defence lawyer in their right mind was putting him on the stand after he backflipped on KK and Huntingdale. There wasn’t much that could be done to refute the DNA, which was what it rested on, or the similarities between Jane and Ciara’s bodies. I can’t see how you’d get anyone other than a crackpot to challenge that. Sarah’s case was always a mountain to climb for the prosecution and putting up experts about that was unnecessary.

The prosecution didn’t open the door to some of the things that might have resulted in a tussle. They withdrew their “emotional trigger” theory; they didn’t offer any profiler or criminology experts to be examined; they couldn’t get the pornography and stories evidence admitted.

The only witness the defence might have called would have been someone who could present an alibi for Edwards. But that was unlikely after 20+ years regardless of what they knew.

 

[HAPPY BUDDHA]

I’m really interested in why you think he confessed to Yovich.

I understand your logic about the strategy. Defence lawyers can not endorse evidence they know to be a lie. (Incidentally, Martin Bryant’s first lawyer had to resign because Bryant confessed to him and was then adamant he was going to plead not guilty and testify.)

However, I don’t think the strategy would have been different whether Edwards confessed or not. No defence lawyer in their right mind was putting him on the stand after he backflipped on KK and Huntingdale. There wasn’t much that could be done to refute the DNA, which was what it rested on, or the similarities between Jane and Ciara’s bodies. I can’t see how you’d get anyone other than a crackpot to challenge that. Sarah’s case was always a mountain to climb for the prosecution and putting up experts about that was unnecessary.

The prosecution didn’t open the door to some of the things that might have resulted in a tussle. They withdrew their “emotional trigger” theory; they didn’t offer any profiler or criminology experts to be examined; they couldn’t get the pornography and stories evidence admitted.

The only witness the defence might have called would have been someone who could present an alibi for Edwards. But that was unlikely after 20+ years regardless of what they knew.

I don’t think he confessed but I’m sure Yovich knew his guilt hence saving himself the embarrassment in court. Maybe.

 

[BFew]

Edwards 'never nominated' as a suspect: WA Police Commissioner

He might not have been "nominated", but was he ever a POI, potential POI or suspect, or listed as maybe requiring to be interviewed or further investigated from appearing on a list, or actually interviewed for anything related to the CSK murders, where no "nomination" was required in the process.

 

[HAPPY BUDDHA]

He might not have been "nominated", but was he ever a POI, potential POI or suspect, or listed as maybe requiring to be interviewed or further investigated from appearing on a list, where no "nomination" was required to get on the list?

Are they playing word games with us now?

Surely he was only a POI after they matched the prints from HH and Huntingdale right? What year was that discovered?

Or maybe I’m confused on the details but when did they get a fingerprint match?

 

[ms finch]

Surely he was only a POI after they matched the prints from HH and Huntingdale right? What year was that discovered?

Or maybe I’m confused on the details but when did they get a fingerprint match?

You’re not confused. The official story is that they were re examining evidence from cold cases that could now be DNA tested. The kimono from the Huntingdale attack was one such item. They plugged it in to their database and it matched KK and CG (imagine that moment!). They then went back to the Huntingdale file and ran the fingerprints that were taken from the sliding door through their system. They matched the HH conviction, which had happened two years later (so wasn’t available at the time of the offence). This was in 2016 and they then set about surveilling Edwards’ and getting his DNA.

 

[JezzaPerth]

I’m really interested in why you think he confessed to Yovich.

I understand your logic about the strategy. Defence lawyers can not endorse evidence they know to be a lie. (Incidentally, Martin Bryant’s first lawyer had to resign because Bryant confessed to him and was then adamant he was going to plead not guilty and testify.)

However, I don’t think the strategy would have been different whether Edwards confessed or not. No defence lawyer in their right mind was putting him on the stand after he backflipped on KK and Huntingdale. There wasn’t much that could be done to refute the DNA, which was what it rested on, or the similarities between Jane and Ciara’s bodies. I can’t see how you’d get anyone other than a crackpot to challenge that. Sarah’s case was always a mountain to climb for the prosecution and putting up experts about that was unnecessary.

The prosecution didn’t open the door to some of the things that might have resulted in a tussle. They withdrew their “emotional trigger” theory; they didn’t offer any profiler or criminology experts to be examined; they couldn’t get the pornography and stories evidence admitted.

The only witness the defence might have called would have been someone who could present an alibi for Edwards. But that was unlikely after 20+ years regardless of what they knew.

To reiterate what I've said before. The defence is entirely consistent with confession if you ignore the faint suggestion he may have been with a wife or girlfriend on one occasion. I can't go further than that because I don't know.

I should point out that 'consistent' is my favourite legal weasel-word. Consistency does not mean correlation, let alone causation, let alone is, but counsel love using the term in front of juries in the hope the jury will be fooled.

 

[Pacman Carney]

He might not have been "nominated", but was he ever a POI, potential POI or suspect, or listed as maybe requiring to be interviewed or further investigated from appearing on a list, or actually interviewed for anything related to the CSK murders, where no "nomination" was required in the process.

from what the Commissioner said No he wasn't. If he was "listed to be interviewed" he would have been interviewed.
I'm certain its been stated previously he was never on the radar. They got lucky.

 

[Pacman Carney]

Surely he was only a POI after they matched the prints from HH and Huntingdale right? What year was that discovered?

Or maybe I’m confused on the details but when did they get a fingerprint match?

sprite bottle he threw in the bin at the cinema

 

[Pacman Carney]

sprite bottle he threw in the bin at the cinema

or was that his DNA from the sprite bottle? either one.

 

[JezzaPerth]

sprite bottle he threw in the bin at the cinema

No. They got a partial palm print off a house in Huntingale in 1988. They also got his prints in 1991 but never matched them. The story is that after the kimono was tested they revisited all the crimes in Huntingdale from that period and found a palm print on file that matched BRE.

They then followed BRE and got his DNA on the bottle.

 

[Wombot]

He never gonna give her up. It’s of no use to him. He will be protected for the rest of his life in custody anyway.

He may trust someone who is in custody with him. He’s only human and cons make friendships, even in protective wings.

A problem is that he may only know the general vicinity of where the body is. He may have gone to a very isolated location during the night with no distinct landmarks. So even if he did confess then it may be difficult to find.

I presume that the authorities will try to make him confess. There are likely ways that they can make life even more difficult for him. It may take time. It may just depend on how long he maintains a facade of innocence to his family if that’s what he’s doing. The police may even approach them to encourage a confession.

 

[ms finch]

He may trust someone who is in custody with him. He’s only human and cons make friendships, even in protective wings.

A problem is that he may only know the general vicinity of where the body is. He may have gone to a very isolated location during the night with no distinct landmarks. So even if he did confess then it may be difficult to find.

I presume that the authorities will try to make him confess. There are likely ways that they can make life even more difficult for him. It may take time. It may just depend on how long he maintains a facade of innocence to his family if that’s what he’s doing. The police may even approach them to encourage a confession.

I agree that authorities will place a lot of pressure on him to confess and to provide the location of the body.

I’m not convinced he’d confess of his own volition. He has kept these vicious crimes to himself for 20+ years and shows absolutely no signs of acknowledging his guilt. Stranger things have happened, though.

 

[Kurve]

I agree that authorities will place a lot of pressure on him to confess and to provide the location of the body.

I’m not convinced he’d confess of his own volition. He has kept these vicious crimes to himself for 20+ years and shows absolutely no signs of acknowledging his guilt. Stranger things have happened, though.

I think he showed us in pleading guilty to the Huntingdale and KK charges, he is prepared to admit guilt if he believes it's to his advantage.

He might hold out though until his options for appeal are explored. Still a way to go though imo, we shall see.

 

[javaguice]

Anyone see the comment about the sex worker saying he was a regular?

WE KNEW IT!!