The exhibit contained extraction information of an iPhone owned by the accused, Gerard Baden-Clay, a man charged with the murder of his wife Allison Baden-Clay.
The following is the story of a Face Time phone call reportedly made at 00:30:25am on the 20th April, 2012. Gerard Baden Clay allegedly rang his father’s mobile phone with the call lasting 1:23 minutes.
A Face Time phone call requires Apple technology. It is a video link whereby callers can see each other while speaking. The technology doesn’t use the standard connection via a carrier such as Optus or Telstra. Both Gerard and his father Nigel had iPhones.
The particular significance of this call is because this night, the 19th/20th April 2012, was the night that Allison Baden-Clay was killed.
As the clock ticked forward from the date of that first bail hearing, I eventually wrote a post on this blog (linked below) in relation to the Face Time call. I was interested to see what would show up in the heavens if I were to use the time of the phone call as an ‘event’.
12:30am was just roughly a half an hour after what I considered was, the time of the crime. I thought it might have been a panic call to Nigelaine from their son and am sure I wasn’t alone imagining this scenario. So I set out to make a forensic astrology enquiry utilising Google Maps, astrology and a magic wand… Oh okay, I confess the magic wand bit is a red herring.
As I was unable to get a positive result from my initial enquiry of the heavens, i.e. there were no astrology indicators to confirm that father and son had spoken at that time, I continued to push the envelope by including the other two adults at Nigel Baden-Clay’s residence as comparisons with the ‘event’ time. I was looking for anyone who might have been in a position to answer the phone in the middle of the night.
If you read the post, you will note that I settled on the youngest of the three adults in the house as being the most likely person of the three to have spoken to the accused at that time. It’s there to read if anyone wants, but I digress. I have information to share.
At this juncture, I must applaud the boys-in-blue, the QPS for their transparency in presenting a new affidavit in relation to this Face Time phone-call at the second application for bail hearing in December 2012. Gone are the days of cover-ups, brown paper bags and crumbs thrown to the chooks.
The following information is on the public record. I am not revealing anything that anybody else could not gain access to, for a small outlay of money and a phone call.
I question, where has mainstream media reported the content of this second affidavit; a statement made public in December 2012?
I can’t find any evidence of it having been written about any more than a mention in passing, which just led to rumours amongst the online sleuthing community that there was perhaps a suppression order/family court matter involvement.
With this not being the case, I have to question whether there wasn’t a quick shuffling of feet in chambers early on in the piece?
Having the affidavit in my hands some two months later, I can share with you that the alleged Face Time call is not suppressed. In fact it did not exist. The phone call was never made. The extraction data of the iPhone was the result of a computer software error.
I’ll repeat myself – there was no Face Time phone call that night between Gerard Baden-Clay and any other member of the Baden-Clay family.
Hit delete in your memory bank, folks… erase, erase, erase.
Here’s how it went down.
Originally when the information was extracted by a QPS computer analyst using Israeli developed software, the Face Time call was listed as a ‘deleted’ entry.
My understanding is that apparently computer software is designed to over-write deleted items in an effort to conserve space in a computer/mobile phone. That makes sense to me; a non-techie person. The QPS male computer analyst was on the ball though. As a result of his thorough investigation, he found that the ‘deleted’ entry file had possibly been corrupted.
I suspect that this anomaly was not discovered until after the first bail hearing – there is no date in the affidavit as to when this software glitch was discovered.
A report to the software developer resulted in a newly updated version of the extraction software being supplied and an email reply to the computer analyst advising that the ‘deleted’ entry in question was considered a ‘false positive’ finding.
This software developer’s email is not included with the court documents however the computer analyst states that he can produce it for the courts, if required.
When I wrote at the bottom of my post on 5th September, 2012 … We shall return to this co-incidence another day…… little did I realise the circumstances under which I would be re-visiting the Face Time call Apples and Worms Pt.2.