Current Murder of Luke Davies & Jesse Baird AFL Goal Umpire & ex Ch 10 Presenter * Stalker Cop Charged

[Pamcake1]

TIMELINE

Thursday 16 February: Service revolver obtained for user pays event. Was stored at mother's as per regulations.

Sunday 19 February: User pays event.

Monday 20 February: The murders at Baird's Paddington rental.

Monday 19 February: Police have alleged gunshots were heard from a house in Paddington, Sydney in the morning. Four minutes after the first shots were fired there was a 000 call made from Jessie's phone around 9.45am, but it disconnected. Police said there was "no communication" during that call.

Monday evening: Police have alleged Lamarre-Condon hired a white Hiace van from Sydney Airport.

Tuesday 20 February: Police have alleged that partial admissions were made by Lamarre-Condon to an acquaintance of having been involved in the death of two individuals.

Service revolver was returned to Balmain & later transferred to original storage.

Wednesday 21 February: Bloodied clothing belonging to both victims and an $8000 watch were found in a skip bin in the southern Sydney suburb of Cronulla. Police launch a missing persons investigation and the homicide unit is notified

Later same Wednesday: Police have alleged Lamarre-Condon attended the Bungonia area with an acquaintance who police believed assisted him in purchasing an angle grinder and padlock from a local hardware store in that area, before driving to a rural property in Bungonia.

Police said the "small" angle grinder was used to sever a padlock from the gate of that particular rural property and then that padlock was replaced with a padlock purchased from the hardware store.

The acquaintance was left at the top of the property for 30 minutes. The accused disappeared for that period in the Hiace van, returning to pick up the acquaintance and then they returned to Sydney later that afternoon. Police said the acquaintance was assisting them in their inquiries, that she is not a suspect, and they believe she was an "innocent agent".

Wednesday 11pm: Police have said that evening, weights were purchased from a department store by the accused and it is believed that the accused returned to that rural property overnight and during that evening, having also acquired two torches from the acquaintance.

Thursday 22 February: Police have alleged they can place the accused leaving the Bungonia area again at 4.30am. "It would appear that the accused has remained in the city area, still in control of the white Hiace van, before attending a further acquaintance's premises in the Newcastle area and without fully disclosing any criminality, asked access to a hose to clean that van," Hudson said.

Friday 23 February: At 10.39am, Lamarre-Condon presents himself at Bondi Police Station where he was arrested and subsequently charged.

​

 

[BFew]

His ramblings after the crime are of someone sleep deprived and losing it because of 'shock' "guilt' or emotional overload.
I think his lawyer would advise that a plea of temporary insanity will not wash considering he has been working up to this since Augaust last year.

Totally agree.

Plus, the fallout for any NSW Court or Judge ruling anything/diverting under the NSW Mental Health Act in this case, would be another thing to be reckoned with, based on what we know so far.

 

[Kurve]

I’m not sure that all these conflicting details have much bearing on the actual nuts and bolts of what actually transpired. There’s no doubt BLC took the lives of two people. What I have noticed is comments such as “I’m floating in a dam. I’m me but I’m not me. I’ve got to sort this mess out.”

Is he going to plead diminished responsibility due to a mental episode?

Not a chance for diminished responsibility to now anyway imo, if his behaviour by romping around recruiting friends including an ex cop to borrow her hose after the shootings, is very odd behaviour for someone who planned to kill Jesse with his service weapon and dispose of his body, well in advance.

Perhaps he realised his plans went up in smoke when he had to shoot Luke, double the work, double the time, his surfboard covers aren't as water resistant and leak proof as promoted, he had to use three bullets, one shot missed leaving it under the floorboards and he couldn't find the third casing.

A mental episode might be a good idea in those circumstances.

 

[Pamcake1]

Not necessarily..

What is a brief episode of psychosis?
Brief psychotic disorder is triggered by extreme stress, such as a traumatic accident or loss of a loved one. It is followed by a return to the previous level of function. The person may or may not be aware of the strange behavior. This condition most often affects people in their 20s, 30s, and 40s.

And his predatory & stalking behaviour leading up to Jesse's murder was definitely not rational. Many have suggested his obsession with celebrities was also not rational behaviour.

As I said what might appear to the layperson as being not rational (stalking behaviour etc) would not appear to a mental health professional as the same thing.
There are degrees of mental illness...it is not a catch-all.

Also I am sure that there would be definitions in law as to under what a 'diminished responsibility because of a mental health episode plea' would be considered.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

As I said what might appear to the layperson as being not rational (stalking behaviour etc) would not appear to a mental health professional as the same thing.
There are degrees of mental illness...it is not a catch-all.

Also I am sure that there would be definitions in law as to under what a 'diminished responsibility because of a mental health episode plea' would be considered.

I understand there are degrees of mental illness.

I was pointing out that a psychotic episode can be brought on by a traumatic event.

 

[xFuzZBaLL]

 

[Pamcake1]

I understand there are degrees of mental illness.

I was pointing out that a psychotic episode can be brought on by a traumatic event.

Indeed they can be.
However actions after commiting the crime would not qualify to excuse culpability or dimished responsibility for the crime in the first place.

 

[BFew]

The following from a NSW Health perspective might be useful info for this case, depending on which way it goes from hereon.

Resources - Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020

The Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (the Act) deals with people who have mental health or cognitive impairments who are in contact with the criminal justice system.

www.health.nsw.gov.au

Fitness for trial and criminal responsibility​

The below applies only to those who have been charged with serious offences that go before the district or supreme courts.

A person may receive a special verdict of "act proven but not criminally responsible" where they had a mental health and/or cognitive impairment such that they could not understand what they were doing, or that it was wrong. The court relies on evidence from experts in reaching its decision. Generally, only persons with severe mental health or cognitive impairment would meet such a threshold.

A person may be deemed "unfit for trial" if they have significant difficulty understanding and participating in court proceedings due to a mental health or cognitive impairment. A modified trial called a "special hearing" may be held instead.

At a special hearing, a person may receive one of the following verdicts:

• Committed the offence on the limited evidence available (a qualified finding of guilt)
• Act proven but not criminally responsible (due to mental health or cognitive impairment)
• Not guilty/acquitted.

If a person receives a qualified finding of guilt, the court can impose a penalty, including a limiting term. A limiting term is the equivalent of a custodial (prison) sentence the person would have received if they had been convicted at a usual trial.

Who are forensic patients?​

The following group of people are regarded as 'forensic patients':

1. Those found unfit to be tried and refused bail
2. Those given a limiting term
3. Those who received the special verdict of "act proven but not criminally responsible" due to mental health or cognitive impairment

Most forensic patients belong in the third group. While not all forensic patients in this group will have the same pathway in the system, the most common pathway for those who experience a mental health impairment is as follows:

• After their verdict they will usually be detained in a correctional facility until a bed becomes available in the high secure Forensic Hospital (located in Malabar).
• At the Forensic Hospital, they will receive treatment to reduce the severity of their symptoms.
• When they have stabilised, they may be transferred to a medium secure forensic facility where they can focus on rehabilitation and begin gradually accessing leave in the community.
• When their risk can be managed, they may be conditionally released to the community.
• If they demonstrate safe community living, they could be unconditionally released. This means they will no longer be a forensic patient.

This pathway is not set to any specific time periods, and the person will move to lesser or more restrictive care dependent on their mental state and level of risk to themselves and others.

People with limiting terms will serve at least part of their term in a correctional facility. They can be granted conditional release into the community once they have served sufficient time in custody and if their risk can be appropriately managed in the community. A limiting term can be extended by the Supreme Court if the person continues to pose an unacceptable risk of harm to the public. Once a limiting term finishes, the person is no longer a forensic patient.

The Mental Health Review Tribunal (the Tribunal) makes orders relating to the care, treatment and control of forensic patients. Forensic patients must be reviewed regularly by the Tribunal. See further information below in the section regarding the Tribunal.

Correctional patients and Forensic CTOs​

There are dedicated mental health areas in the correctional setting that provide mental health care on a voluntary basis. When a prisoner requires involuntary inpatient treatment, they must be transferred to a declared mental health facility. This group is referred to as "correctional patients".

In NSW, male correctional patients are usually sent to Long Bay Hospital (located within the Long Bay Correctional Complex); but they may sometimes be sent to the Forensic Hospital or other mental health facility. Female and adolescent correctional patients requiring involuntary treatment are transferred to the Forensic Hospital. When the person improves, they are discharged back to the correctional facility.

Some persons may be placed on a Forensic Community Treatment Order (FCTO) to continue their care. FCTOs operate similarly to CTOs, requiring that the person adhere to a certain treatment plan.

FCTOs can also be made for any person (including a forensic patient) in a correctional facility that requires mandatory treatment, but does not necessarily need to be admitted as an inpatient. FCTOs are made by the Tribunal and reviewed regularly.

For more information on FCTOs, see the information kit from the Mental Health Review Tribunal.

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

As I said what might appear to the layperson as being not rational (stalking behaviour etc) would not appear to a mental health professional as the same thing.
There are degrees of mental illness...it is not a catch-all.

Also I am sure that there would be definitions in law as to under what a 'diminished responsibility because of a mental health episode plea' would be considered.

And there are many theories on stalking behaviour. Here are just a couple :

What type of personality disorder stalks?
Stalking could be viewed as an illogical or irrational preoccupation with another individual. Because of the unusual and intense attachment dynamics in borderline personality disorder, this diagnosis is particularly suggestive among stalkers.

Attachment theory has been linked to stalking by viewing the behaviours as relating to the degree of attachment pathology following the disruption of the formation of a secure attachment in childhood.

Indeed they can be.
However actions after commiting the crime would not qualify to excuse culpability or dimished responsibility for the crime in the first place.

I didn't suggest it would. I was talking about them separately. His predatory behaviour before the murders could be quite separate to having a psychotic episode after committing the murders. Particularly if it didn't go as he had planned.

 

[Pamcake1]

And there are many theories on stalking behaviour. Here are just a couple :

What type of personality disorder stalks?
Stalking could be viewed as an illogical or irrational preoccupation with another individual. Because of the unusual and intense attachment dynamics in borderline personality disorder, this diagnosis is particularly suggestive among stalkers.

Attachment theory has been linked to stalking by viewing the behaviours as relating to the degree of attachment pathology following the disruption of the formation of a secure attachment in childhood.


I didn't suggest it would. I was talking about them separately. His predatory behaviour before the murders could be quite separate to having a psychotic episode after committing the murders. Particularly if it didn't go as he had planned.

If he was diagnosed with a 'borderline personality disorder' then the Police are in deep trouble for employing him in the first place.
It also if he had 'mental' issues why wasn't it picked up in their candidate testing.
That is being looked into.

As is known, if there are approximately 8-10% of the population diagnosed with being 'psychopathic' why aren't there more murders.
That is not a question that needs answering it is just an example of a psychological diagnosis having little real world affect.

All in all before we get further into the weeds, on what mental health diagnosises BLC could possibly have ,none would qualify him for exemption of guilt if you read the criminal responsibility doc posted by BFew.

 

[Kurve]

His behaviour after the shootings doesn't seem consistent with his behaviour prior. Lamarre made semi confessions as to what he'd done, enlisted the help or 'company' of at least three people, one to buy an angle grinder and weights where she watched him break in to a property, one to go shopping for a surfboard cover and one to borrow a hose to wash blood out of the van.

Among his colleagues and friends over the months prior to the shootings and if his behaviour is consistent, did absolutely nobody have any idea of what he might be planning or what he might be capable of? If anybody sensed something was 'off' who do they talk to?

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

If he was diagnosed with a 'borderline personality disorder' then the Police are in deep trouble for employing him in the first place.
It also if he had 'mental' issues why wasn't it picked up in their candidate testing.
That is being looked into.

As is known, if there are approximately 8-10% of the population diagnosed with being 'psychopathic' why aren't there more murders.
That is not a question that needs answering it is just an example of a psychological diagnosis having little real world affect.

All in all before we get further into the weeds, on what mental health diagnosises BLC could possibly have ,none would qualify him for exemption of guilt if you read the criminal responsibility doc posted by BFew.

I didn't say any of these things are applicable to LC. They are simply theories on stalking amongst many other theories on this type of behaviour.

Just as psychotic episodes CAN be triggered by traumatic events. But not always. And not for everyone.

Every individual is different and respond to traumatic events and situations differently.

Not every person who is rejected goes on to become obsessed, stalking & murdering the person who has rejected them either.

Humans are complex beings.

I have no clue, as none of us do, whether LC has any mental illness, temporary or not. But we can safely assume if his lawyer thinks it will lessen his sentence or charges, they will use it if & where they can.

** If LC was to have had an undiagnosed mental illness, not sure how his employer could be held responsible for that. Besides, he may not have even suffered from that mental illness when he applied to become a police officer.

 

[Pamcake1]

I didn't say any of these things are applicable to LC. They are simply theories on stalking amongst many other theories on this type of behaviour.

Just as psychotic episodes CAN be triggered by traumatic events. But not always. And not for everyone.

Every individual is different and respond to traumatic events and situations differently.

Not every person who is rejected goes on to become obsessed, stalking & murdering the person who has rejected them either.

Humans are complex beings.

I have no clue, as none of us do, whether LC has any mental illness, temporary or not. But we can safely assume if his lawyer thinks it will lessen his sentence or charges, they will use it if & where they can.

** If LC was to have had an undiagnosed mental illness, not sure how his employer could be held responsible for that. Besides, he may not have even suffered from that mental illness when he applied to become a police officer.

Yes I know you didn't.
We are having a discussion here, so I am not being accusitory.
I am interested in peoples opinions and discussing them because you never know what you might learn if you don't engage.

As to the ** part.
Of course the PF can't be held to be responsible for a prior mental illness but they can be held responsible for not testing adequately enough inorder to weed out unsuitable candidates.
No doubt the 'tazer affair' would have caused BLC some mental angst but that would seem only for his own self interest.

As a side note I posted the outcome report of the Sarah Everhard Enquiry yesterday (posted in the below thread) which I read yesterday, it makes very interesting reading on what were considered the failings of the Met Pol in not weeding out an officer who did have both a history of sexual deviency and mental health stress markers.

Solved - The Murder of Sarah Everard - London UK

Sarah Everard's murder triggered a global outpouring of rage. Wayne Cozens, the (now former) policeman who kidnapped, r*ped and killed Sarah has been handed a whole life sentence for crimes that have been described within the force as cowardly and shameful. The judge said his crimes were as...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Pamcake1]

His behaviour after the shootings doesn't seem consistent with his behaviour prior. Lamarre made semi confessions as to what he'd done, enlisted the help or 'company' of at least three people, one to buy an angle grinder and weights where she watched him break in to a property, one to go shopping for a surfboard cover and one to borrow a hose to wash blood out of the van.

Among his colleagues and friends over the months prior to the shootings and if his behaviour is consistent, did absolutely nobody have any idea of what he might be planning or what he might be capable of? If anybody sensed something was 'off' who do they talk to?

That is what is interesting about the NSW Police Commissioner stating prosecuting people for aiding and abetting is not totally ruled out. Post #925
Was he talking to some people before the crime and they should have alerted the authorities?

 

[BFew]

Of course the PF can't be held to be responsible for a prior mental illness but they can be held responsible for not testing adequately enough inorder to weed out unsuitable candidates.

A formal counter claim by the accused blaming NSW Police for the below sorts of things related to tipping him blaming his employer might come out during any future sentencing.

• bullying him (it's reported he has already actioned this)
• allowing him to work for them in the first place what with what was publicly available on him when he was initially recruited and continued to some degree I public whilst he was employed by them
• providing him access to and training with weapons and skills useful for what he did to Jesse and Luke. Particularly in the period after the Taser incident which he (and his legal reps) might argue should have resulted in him no longer having access to employer issued weapons, and should have resulted in him getting a whole range of services by his employer thereafter (assuming he didn't get them, or they were no up to scratch)

IMO, going down this path probably won't get much of a sympathetic ear from the judge when it comes to his guilt, and the length of his sentence.

It might even have the opposite effect.

 

[Kurve]

That is what is interesting about the NSW Police Commissioner stating prosecuting people for aiding and abetting is not totally ruled out. Post #925
Was he talking to some people before the crime and they should have alerted the authorities?

She's referring to aiding and abetting after the crime and through the cover up in that post.

I was looking at comparing his behaviour prior to and after the shootings among colleagues and friends. If his behaviour was consistent both prior to and after, he'd have been 'leaking' clues all over the place of his intentions or desires well before he shot Jesse and Luke.

 

[BFew]

That is what is interesting about the NSW Police Commissioner stating prosecuting people for aiding and abetting is not totally ruled out. Post #925
Was he talking to some people before the crime and they should have alerted the authorities?

That came along with what I recall were public requests this week from NSW Police, for the people that interacted with the accused recently, including info from after the murders was the impression I recall I had, to come forwards to Police with what they might have heard or seen.

 

[Pamcake1]

She's referring to aiding and abetting after the crime and through the cover up in that post.

I was looking at comparing his behaviour prior to and after the shootings among colleagues and friends. If his behaviour was consistent both prior to and after, he'd have been 'leaking' clues all over the place of his intentions or desires well before he shot Jesse and Luke.

I wonder whether these same people may be the people who he talked to before as well.

 

[Pamcake1]

That came along with what I recall were public requests this week from NSW Police, for the people that interacted with the accused recently, including info from after the murders was the impression I recall I had, to come forwards to Police with what they might have heard or seen.

You could be right but it was reported on today. Made to look fresh or reiterated again by her? I don't know.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Good article from the Weekend Australian. Apparently why the patrol car didn't go to the address after the 000 call was because Davies' phone was linked to his own address and the location of the call was approximate.

SAVAGE END TO BRIGHT LIVES

SAVAGE END TO BRIGHT LIVES

todayspaper.theaustralian.com.au

 

[Kurve]

I wonder whether these same people may be the people who he talked to before as well.

Problem now could be, getting anybody to admit they might have had a sense of what he was up to or they did know and thought he was talking chit, or they were too scared to say anything.

 

[Kurve]

I don't think he counted on there being so much blood he had to deal with. Typically when people's hearts stop beating, there's nothing to pump the blood out, it's seepage and not so much mess. So, unfortunately at least one of them probably didn't die straight away.

This is why I think he went out and hired the van with a metal easy-clean rear floor rather than use that other vehicle he had.

It has crossed my mind if anybody in his sphere has gone missing, if he's ever done this before and got away with it.

If there's anything positive to take out of this, it's that he totally botched it and it may appear that this was a first.

 

[BFew]

Good article from the Weekend Australian. Apparently why the patrol car didn't go to the address after the 000 call was because Davies' phone was linked to his own address and the location of the call was approximate.

SAVAGE END TO BRIGHT LIVES

SAVAGE END TO BRIGHT LIVES

todayspaper.theaustralian.com.au

Why doesn't the article report what happened (and the timing of) when/if NSW Police attempted to contact the family of the phone number from which the 000 call was actually made (Luke Davies phone)?

Without that info, the article is not what I would call "good".

Surely if Police had contacted someone in Davies family, they would have then informed Police of the relationship with Jesse Baird and Police would have been over to 60 Brown Street and knocked it's door down in a flash to make sure everything was ok inside if no one answered? Particularly because of both Jesse's media profile and it being fairly well known of his sexuality, the Gay Hate Crime inquiry, and on the cusp of this year's Mardi Gras.

'As soon as police went to Baird’s family in Victoria, the investigative direction took a dramatic turn. Family members offered up another name to investigate: Beau. According to Baird’s Channel 10 workmate, who is contractually prevented from speaking publicly to other media, friends did the same. “There’s a suggestion in some people’s minds that the police sought to protect him because he was one of their own. That was absolutely not my impression at all,” the staffer says.

“As soon as they got this credible information that there’s been this other potentially threatening figure in Jesse’s life, in his past, and that he was a copper, they acted absolutely with alacrity.”'

 

[BFew]

It has crossed my mind if anybody in his sphere has gone missing, if he's ever done this before and got away with it.

Including Rogerson style?

 

[Kurve]

Including Rogerson style?

Rogerson back in the day, probably would have got away with it

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

As to the ** part.
Of course the PF can't be held to be responsible for a prior mental illness but they can be held responsible for not testing adequately enough inorder to weed out unsuitable candidates.
No doubt the 'tazer affair' would have caused BLC some mental angst but that would seem only for his own self interest.

Perhaps my wording wasn't clear. I didn't mean the police would be held responsible for an undiagnosed mental illness per se, but rather should not be held responsible for not picking one up, for essentially not diagnosing it, during their recruitment processes.

I would think it's unreasonable for any recruitment process to essentially diagnose a mental illness when it can sometimes take a qualified psychiatrist weeks to years to determine an accurate diagnosis for many mental health disorders.

That's not to say that in LC's case there were not things in his behaviour, history etc which could have been seen as red flags, highlighted and needed further scrutiny. I'm sure, or at least I would hope, that is part of what the police will be investigating and will change going forward if something in their recruitment processes needs to be rectified.

We already know there are police officers in the force who are DV abusers, racists working with First Nations communities amongst many others. They seemingly didn't get picked up during the recruitment process or throughout their employment as an officer either.