dingo is in the clear over baby azaria

I think they can't prove otherwise....what do the police in the case believe.



Was their proof that she was dragged and also why they saying 'dingos' when I thought there was only one dingo .

kitti wrote:I think they can't prove otherwise....what do the police in the case believe.



Was their proof that she was dragged and also why they saying 'dingos' when I thought there was only one dingo .

the NT police still think she was involved

Seems nowadays that if you can't prove a case then 'second best' or 'what could off' is an option.

Like with the McCann case, they can't prove without a shadow off doubt so they go for the 'could off' in the hope that it will satisfy the mass and go away...

That's what I mean carly, they can't prove the mother had anything to do with it so it must off been a dingo or now dingos.....for all we know the baby could off already been dead when it was taken to the outback and the dingos could off come by the body and that's it.

Pratt eamon on sky.....abducted by dingos....

kitti wrote:That's what I mean carly, they can't prove the mother had anything to do with it so it must off been a dingo or now dingos.....for all we know the baby could off already been dead when it was taken to the outback and the dingos could off come by the body and that's it.

there is the red herring with the folded clothes found at ayers rock a few weeks after azaria vanished who did that???

Lindy Chamberlain interview just been on BBC News.

At the very end she says - "Take responsiblity for your own children. Don't leave it to somebody else to do it for you".

Hope the McCanns are listening, but I won't hold my breath.

How can they prove a dingo took the baby?


Were the other coroners men?

I've been interested in this case for a while and I've never really doubted the Chamberlains. I am glad that they have been exonerated and the coroner has now ruled that a dingo took the baby.

Dingos have killed children since this case. What made this case so unusual at the time was it had never been heard of before. The clothes were found some time after the baby was taken outside a dingos den. Perhaps not the way you would expect to find clothes that had been ripped away from a baby by a pack of dingos but experts in this case have said it was definitely possible for clothes to be found the way they were.

They have fought for many years, they could have walked away but they kept going because they wanted it noted on the babys death certificate that she died from a dingo attack.

I do not know enough about this to comment on it specifically, all I have read over the years are the press reports.

What strikes me however is the difference between this family and team McCann. This family appear, to me anyway, to have taken on the authorities and fought through the legal system to have their side of the story believed.

The same cannot be said for the McCanns and that is what always bothers me. They shy away from seeking a re-opening of the case, they never demand anything from the PJ - i.e., come on PJ tell us all exactly what you think and we will show how it was not possible. They only challenge they make is for financial reward and then scurry back under their unturned stones.

In their minds everything about the investigation is wrong and everybody associated with the case before and since is wrong. Yet they do little to prove how they are wrong and how they themselves are right.

Quite simply they do nothing to drive this case forward. Talk is cheap and easy to do.

Taking the challenge the Chamberlain family has cannot have been easy. I have to admire their persistence though, 30+ years later.

.

lindy is on a current affair now

mossman wrote:I do not know enough about this to comment on it specifically, all I have read over the years are the press reports.

What strikes me however is the difference between this family and team McCann. This family appear, to me anyway, to have taken on the authorities and fought through the legal system to have their side of the story believed.

The same cannot be said for the McCanns and that is what always bothers me. They shy away from seeking a re-opening of the case, they never demand anything from the PJ - i.e., come on PJ tell us all exactly what you think and we will show how it was not possible. They only challenge they make is for financial reward and then scurry back under their unturned stones.

In their minds everything about the investigation is wrong and everybody associated with the case before and since is wrong. Yet they do little to prove how they are wrong and how they themselves are right.

Quite simply they do nothing to drive this case forward. Talk is cheap and easy to do.

Taking the challenge the Chamberlain family has cannot have been easy. I have to admire their persistence though, 30+ years later.

.

I agree 100%

i have to give credit to lindy she just said on natinal tv that she doesnt want to sue anyone or the nt goverment she said she just wanted the people who were there that night not be called liars i have never really thought she did it i admit sometimes i have wondered but itsa hard thing to now what to think she also said tonight that the police put the clothes back folded

I'm sorry but I don't believe a dingo took the baby. If this is what happened, her clothing wouldn't have been found outside the dingo's lair, the dingo wouldn't know that the baby was wearing clothes. As far as the dingo was concerned, every bit of his prey would be food, the dingo would have spat out anything he didn't want to swallow. So if any remnants of the baby's clothing was found, it would be mixed with the dingo's saliva.

Also why would the dingo leave the clothing outside of his lair? Surely he would have taken the baby, complete with her clothing, inside his lair.

The baby's mother didn't want anyone to point the finger at her, without proof, but she is quite happy pointing the finger at the police without proof.

By the way I'm not pointing my finger at the baby's mother either, because I don't have proof that she was involved in the baby's disappearance. It's only my opinion, that a dingo didn't take the baby and that is because I have seen photographs of her clothing.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/coroner-rules-dingo-took-away-australian-baby-033549303.html

The comment "finally removing any lasting doubt about the mother's involvement" could not be farther from the mark. I'm sure that this case will still be hotly debated even when there's nobody alive who actually remembers it.

Not Born Yesterday wrote:http://uk.news.yahoo.com/coroner-rules-dingo-took-away-australian-baby-033549303.html

The comment "finally removing any lasting doubt about the mother's involvement" could not be farther from the mark. I'm sure that this case will still be hotly debated even when there's nobody alive who actually remembers it.

This is the lingering problem when no body has been found. At least, in this case, it's pretty clear that baby Azaria is dead. That much is clear. What happened to her will remain a mystery if her remains are never found. I have read that there have been four inquests in this case and I think the best decision has been reached, based on the information and evidence that's available. Baby Azaria was most likely taken by a dingo and I hope she died quickly. However, there will always be lingering doubt. Lack of a body does not prove guilt, but it does not prove innocence either beyond all reasonable doubt.

Azaria's mother has consistently cooperated with police investigations and for me that leads me to believe that she is a mother whose child was taken in truly awful and heartbreaking circumstances. Kate McCann cannot say that she has cooperated because she and her holiday friends had the opportunity to go back to Portugal and take part in a reconstruction of the events surrounding Madeleine's disappearance. Kate and Gerry have shown, in my opinion, that they are not willing to do whatever it takes to help find what happened to their daughter. As long as Madeleine's body is not found, there is no ultimate proof of guilt, but neither is there proof of innocence and the McCanns could have done more to encourage belief in their innocence.

How can you prove a dingo took your baby, you can't , only your word.


3 coroners said....unknown and 1 said a dingo....if she saw a dingo take the baby then why didn't she follow the screams off the baby as she was being dragged by the dingo.....I didn't realize the size off the child till i saw the picture off her.......it is very strange that the clothes were quite intact as I watched a fox the other night when it found something from the rubbish, it tore the outside covering off and left the bits all over the place.


And to leave the clothes in a pile outside the lair seems very odd, like they were placed there to make it look like a dingo had taken her....I think i heard once that years ago an aboriginal person found the clothes and neatly folded them there.

I just hope the poor little mite didn't suffer .

She says that she's not going to sue anyone but lets not forget she and Michael got neally 1.3m dollars compensation for wrongful arrest ....

kitti wrote:How can you prove a dingo took your baby, you can't , only your word.


3 coroners said....unknown and 1 said a dingo....if she saw a dingo take the baby then why didn't she follow the screams off the baby as she was being dragged by the dingo.....I didn't realize the size off the child till i saw the picture off her.......it is very strange that the clothes were quite intact as I watched a fox the other night when it found something from the rubbish, it tore the outside covering off and left the bits all over the place.


And to leave the clothes in a pile outside the lair seems very odd, like they were placed there to make it look like a dingo had taken her....I think i heard once that years ago an aboriginal person found the clothes and neatly folded them there.

Well said Kitti, you have said what I was trying to say, in a much better way. I know that dna evidence wasn't available at the time the baby was taken, but I'm sure that samples of the baby's clothing would have been tested for saliva.

In my opinion, the coroner should not given the verdict that the baby was taken by a dingo, without absolute proof. I don't believe that the baby's death certificate, should be amended to contain the words killed by a dingo, without absolute proof that she was. Especially as none of her remains have been found.

Who knows, maybe someone stole the baby, for no other reason than they wanted a baby of their own. They could have dressed the baby in other clothing and left her original clothing outside a dingo's lair. I would like to think that is what happened to her.

kathybelle wrote:I'm sorry but I don't believe a dingo took the baby. If this is what happened, her clothing wouldn't have been found outside the dingo's lair, the dingo wouldn't know that the baby was wearing clothes. As far as the dingo was concerned, every bit of his prey would be food, the dingo would have spat out anything he didn't want to swallow. So if any remnants of the baby's clothing was found, it would be mixed with the dingo's saliva.

Also why would the dingo leave the clothing outside of his lair? Surely he would have taken the baby, complete with her clothing, inside his lair.

The baby's mother didn't want anyone to point the finger at her, without proof, but she is quite happy pointing the finger at the police without proof.

By the way I'm not pointing my finger at the baby's mother either, because I don't have proof that she was involved in the baby's disappearance. It's only my opinion, that a dingo didn't take the baby and that is because I have seen photographs of her clothing.

I don't believe it was found directly outside a lair. The jacket was found in an area full of dingo lairs.

kathybelle wrote:

kitti wrote:How can you prove a dingo took your baby, you can't , only your word.


3 coroners said....unknown and 1 said a dingo....if she saw a dingo take the baby then why didn't she follow the screams off the baby as she was being dragged by the dingo.....I didn't realize the size off the child till i saw the picture off her.......it is very strange that the clothes were quite intact as I watched a fox the other night when it found something from the rubbish, it tore the outside covering off and left the bits all over the place.


And to leave the clothes in a pile outside the lair seems very odd, like they were placed there to make it look like a dingo had taken her....I think i heard once that years ago an aboriginal person found the clothes and neatly folded them there.

Well said Kitti, you have said what I was trying to say, in a much better way. I know that dna evidence wasn't available at the time the baby was taken, but I'm sure that samples of the baby's clothing would have been tested for saliva.

In my opinion, the coroner should not given the verdict that the baby was taken by a dingo, without absolute proof. I don't believe that the baby's death certificate, should be amended to contain the words killed by a dingo, without absolute proof that she was. Especially as none of her remains have been found.

Who knows, maybe someone stole the baby, for no other reason than they wanted a baby of their own. They could have dressed the baby in other clothing and left her original clothing outside a dingo's lair. I would like to think that is what happened to her.

I don't know about other countries, but I do know that there are experts in the USA who specialise in animal DNA. Perhaps Azaria's clothing could have been/could be sent there. Even after many years, cold case investigators have managed to find trace DNA.

I don't know that finding dingo saliva on the jacket will prove anything as perhaps the dogs could off sniffed or picked up the jacket anyway and tossed it around....all I know is that I don't know that I believe the mother and I don't know whether the baby was taken by a dingo.....only the mother knows that.


I'm not 100% convinced by the coroners outcome and think perhaps the outcome was a means to an end off the matter.


After all, 3 times before the coroner said 'unknown'...it was the same evidence produced with a differrent coroner and the outcome was with what the mother wanted to hear.

Link to coroners report with all the evidence in the case, of which there IS evidence that a dingo did it.

http://resources.news.com.au/files/2012/06/12/1226392/701131-aus-nation-file-azaria-findings.pdf

a couple didnt kidnap her there was blood all over the babys clothes i believe a dingo did it