Current Shooting Murder of Chloe Mason * Two arrests with claims of self defence

[Wallace52]

Mr Beavon said his client Codye Ian Thomson was “holding up alright” while in custody, despite being in an “unfamiliar environment”.

“He won’t be engaging in any formal records of interview with the police,” he said.

“There’s CCTV footage as part of the brief so we don’t even know who or what that reveals at this stage.”


https://www.news.com.au/national/qu...ws-story/8953c9cf79b3e3fd9885a256b8c0c340?amp


I would say the CCTV footage might reveal, you know, what happened….and it’s after that Mr Thomson will turn to developing his defence with his legal team.

 

[Bjchan13]

Criminalised women deserve justice, not victim-blaming headlines

An article published by the Daily Mail refused to see two women as victims of horrendous acts of violence. Instead, it centred their criminal histories.

womensagenda.com.au

The article exposing alleged victims Linley and Chloe’s criminal histories is nothing original or new. Portraying criminalised women as disposable is a tired and unoriginal trope. The article has detailed Linley and Chloe’s criminal histories in order to suggest that their past actions somehow justify or diminish the severity of the violence inflicted upon them. This then perpetuates the harmful narrative that these two women were asking for it or deserved it.

Live by the gun die by the gun. Not like some random innocent civilian was murdered for no reason. Both dealers that carried guns. There's no rules in that world. DM article was relevant and provided info that anyone following the stories would want to know.

 

[Wallace52]

Live by the gun die by the gun. Not like some random innocent civilian was murdered for no reason.

Chloe was innocent in that she’d been in
Jail, she had done her time, she was out in the community and was getting her life together. She had a new job and had recently purchased football boots, getting ready to play.

How innocent do you have to be to be a good victim?

Both dealers that carried guns.

I didn’t know that. That’s really interesting.

There's no rules in that world. DM article was relevant and provided info that anyone following the stories would want to know.

I like the DM in general, but I also liked the article by women’s agenda, so I thought I would share it.

I like to read a range of opinions and angles on a story.

IMO

 

[Bjchan13]

Chloe was innocent in that she’d been in
Jail, she had done her time, she was out in the community and was getting her life together. She had a new job and had recently purchased football boots, getting ready to play.

How innocent do you have to be to be a good victim?


I didn’t know that. That’s really interesting.

I like the DM in general, but I also liked the article by women’s agenda, so I thought I would share it.

I like to read a range of opinions and angles on a story.

IMO

Chloe showed up at her killers house with a gun of her own?

 

[Wallace52]

Chloe showed up at her killers house with a gun of her own?

The lawyer for one of the accused says she did. It’s a bit hard for her to defend that comment, isn’t it.

 

[jason_recliner]

Criminalised women deserve justice, not victim-blaming headlines

An article published by the Daily Mail refused to see two women as victims of horrendous acts of violence. Instead, it centred their criminal histories.

womensagenda.com.au

The article exposing alleged victims Linley and Chloe’s criminal histories is nothing original or new. Portraying criminalised women as disposable is a tired and unoriginal trope. The article has detailed Linley and Chloe’s criminal histories in order to suggest that their past actions somehow justify or diminish the severity of the violence inflicted upon them. This then perpetuates the harmful narrative that these two women were asking for it or deserved it.

Drug dealer trash gets shot dead. I'll lose precisely zero seconds of sleep.

 

[Bjchan13]

The lawyer for one of the accused says she did. It’s a bit hard for her to defend that comment, isn’t it.

So you think the gun was planted? What was she doing going to their house in the first place?

 

[Cataholic]

Criminalised women deserve justice, not victim-blaming headlines

An article published by the Daily Mail refused to see two women as victims of horrendous acts of violence. Instead, it centred their criminal histories.

womensagenda.com.au

The article exposing alleged victims Linley and Chloe’s criminal histories is nothing original or new. Portraying criminalised women as disposable is a tired and unoriginal trope. The article has detailed Linley and Chloe’s criminal histories in order to suggest that their past actions somehow justify or diminish the severity of the violence inflicted upon them. This then perpetuates the harmful narrative that these two women were asking for it or deserved it.

I agree that criminal history shouldn't justify or diminish the violence inflicted on somebody, but it does offer an insight into how and why a person was exposed to the possibility of that violence.

I also don't believe that gender has anything to do with the choice and risk.

It doesn't matter, imo, whether you're male, female, or a 3 hoofed yellowtail parrot.....you live and play in the drug world you automatically accept a much higher risk of harm, and the need to comply with a totally different set of rules to regular society.

I agree that she didn't 'ask for it' or 'deserve it' but then violence isn't a foreign concept or at all surprising when drugs are involved.

To her credit it appears Chloe was trying to straighten herself up but unfortunately got sucked back into that murky world one more time and paid the ultimate price, which is a real shame.

 

[Wallace52]

So you think the gun was planted? What was she doing going to their house in the first place?

I’ve not seen the brief of evidence. For all
I know she turned up to the house un-armed. Maybe she was invited for afternoon tea, or a potluck supper. IDK.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I’ve not seen the brief of evidence. For all
I know she turned up to the house un-armed. Maybe she was invited for afternoon tea, or a potluck supper. IDK.

What makes you say that?

Outside court, Mr Thomson-Gleeson's lawyer Ken Mackenzie said "it's a curious case".

"What is not in dispute … is that Chloe Mason came to the front of Kaine's house armed with a rifle," he said.

"Kaine explained to the police that he did not kill Chloe and what he did, he did to defend his home and family against a murderous attack."

I don’t know why he says it’s not in dispute and the last sentence is contradictory. He is saying there was a murderous attack - by Chloe? Kaine didn’t shoot her so how did she end up dead? What did K actually do to defend his home?

What about the other brother?

It will be intriguing to hear what details the police are alleging.

Brothers' cases in court over alleged shooting murder of 23-year-old woman

Chloe Jade Mason was found unconscious, suffering a gunshot wound, on the footpath of a suburban street in Caboolture just over two weeks ago.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Kurve]

What makes you say that?

Outside court, Mr Thomson-Gleeson's lawyer Ken Mackenzie said "it's a curious case".

"What is not in dispute … is that Chloe Mason came to the front of Kaine's house armed with a rifle," he said.

"Kaine explained to the police that he did not kill Chloe and what he did, he did to defend his home and family against a murderous attack."

I don’t know why he says it’s not in dispute and the last sentence is contradictory. He is saying there was a murderous attack - by Chloe? Kaine didn’t shoot her so how did she end up dead? What did K actually do to defend his home?

What about the other brother?

It will be intriguing to hear what details the police are alleging.

Brothers' cases in court over alleged shooting murder of 23-year-old woman

Chloe Jade Mason was found unconscious, suffering a gunshot wound, on the footpath of a suburban street in Caboolture just over two weeks ago.

www.abc.net.au

Do we know where she was shot and bullet entry?

 

[deck]

Criminalised women deserve justice, not victim-blaming headlines

An article published by the Daily Mail refused to see two women as victims of horrendous acts of violence. Instead, it centred their criminal histories.

womensagenda.com.au

The article exposing alleged victims Linley and Chloe’s criminal histories is nothing original or new. Portraying criminalised women as disposable is a tired and unoriginal trope. The article has detailed Linley and Chloe’s criminal histories in order to suggest that their past actions somehow justify or diminish the severity of the violence inflicted upon them. This then perpetuates the harmful narrative that these two women were asking for it or deserved it.

The problem with this article as it points to being something only woman have to deal with. It happens to all people who have a criminal background when they find themselves on the wrong end of violent criminal behavior.

Even the 2 guys who died of alleged overdoses in Vietnam last year have had there rap sheets and criminal connections listed in news articles.

 

[Kurve]

The problem with this article as it points to being something only woman have to deal with. It happens to all people who have a criminal background when they find themselves on the wrong end of violent criminal behavior.

Even the 2 guys who died of alleged overdoses in Vietnam last year have had there rap sheets and criminal connections listed in news articles.

Men and women with criminal records can be victims too and it doesn't make them any less a victim.

Once on a thread of a missing young woman, I mentioned that she'd souvenired a couple of champagne flutes from her work the night she went missing, which was an important detail. I got piled on as if I was besmirching her character and made to feel as if I shouldn't have said it. It wasn't just ridiculous, it smacked of bigotry, as if she actually might be judged for it when she was probably murdered.

She was a young girl just starting out, sharing a unit and she took a couple of glasses, big deal but it may have indicated she had plans to meet someone after work at the beach.

I don't know all the details of this case but if she showed up at someone's house with a loaded gun, she broke the first rule. It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[deck]

Men and women with criminal records can be victims too and it doesn't make them any less a victim.

Never said they weren't victims. The issue is the article paints the picture that this is only a woman issue. The fact is it is untrue.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

The initial reports depicted Chloe as a woman who was loved by many and this was a shocking and unexpected event. But subsequent reports have cast some doubt on her background, particularly as it’s been revealed she was previously jailed for drug offences. That of course in no way justifies her being shot, but there is a stratum of society in which risks are prevalent, for both men and women. It’s not a gender issue.

 

[Bjchan13]

I’ve not seen the brief of evidence. For all
I know she turned up to the house un-armed. Maybe she was invited for afternoon tea, or a potluck supper. IDK.