I dun know. The guy is a douche bag. Doesn’t necessarily make him a murderer. But multiple life insurance policies of which she wasn’t aware. Who does that.
Could be a murderer, but the fact that he was a licensed insurance salesman is VERY strong evidence that there exists reasonable doubt. I can easily imagine my partner shrugging, and saying.. "yeah that's ok.. so long as I don't have to do any paperwork, or understand the policies." These cases must hinge on the existence of reasonable doubt. Juries are known to convict on scarce evidence. And this is a life-destroying example.
@@damiendeecee I actually can’t remember but wasn’t it the case that he only told the victim about one policy? Also the inconsistencies in his evidence when he was first questioned.
@@christinesbetterknitting4533 And the jury should go strictly on reasonable doubt, but they usually convict on scant evidence.. so that's a major failing of juries.
I just feel like there should be a limit as to how many life insurance policies someone can take out. Can anybody tell me in what circumstance 5 life insurance policies would be necessary?
He was guilty AF! Im with the public and Cheney family and am appalled that he got $2.5 million! 🤬🤬🤬🤬 He forged millions of dollars of life insurance fraudulently! What do his supporters have to say about that?! The coroner is an embarrassment and probably is responsible for innocent people being convicted, however Keogh wasn’t one of them.
There's a probability that Henry did commit the crime. However it has to be proved in a court of law beyond reasonable doubt.. It is the prosecutions job to have a water tight case legally & procedurally so cases like this don't occur.. If there's ANY doubt about that there may have been procedural errors in the conviction. Them the prosecutions case is open to appeal/challenge.. .. In this case it may be appropriate that Henry was released because they couldn't prove (via evidence on the body) that he did do it. The competence of the pathologist/coroner should have been reviewed long ago..
@@ninedaysjane2466rolling your eyes doesn't help anybody. It just makes you look like a prick. I agree with him. Unless you have evidence all this means jackshit. After all, at first the public were against Johnny Depp when there was no evidence. So I could care less about public opinion on the matter.
🇬🇧 A few times, when ive snoozed off while in the bath but the second the water hit my face, i immediately woke up! Everyone does, its an automatic action. Youd have to be either very very drunk or on some narcotic which caused drowsiness, to drown in a bath! I do know the quickest way to drown someone is to grab their feet, while the person is lying down in the water, & pulling their feet & legs swiftly up towards the perpetrator. This causes the water to rapidly flow up into their nose, which will automatically cause the victim to open their mouth & with the water in the nose & mouth, unconsciousness & then De*th quickly follows. If the perpetrator wears thickish padded gloves, bruising on the ankles & lower legs is vertually nil. This man is not only abhorent hut his actions atrocious! Also stupid too! With no marks or injuries on Anna Janes body, then the above method is the obvious cause. Thanks Casefiles! Peace & Good Cheer to All 🇬🇧👧
I bet he did it. It reminds me of the James Hanratty case, where there was indeed questionable actions on the part of the prosecution (as if defence teams aren't nearly always guilty of dodgy uses of raising reasonable 'doubt'). Innocence projects are by their very nature going to be biased, so they should always be scrutinised extremely closely. Yes, they do often believe the convicted person is innocent as a course, because it's called human tribalism and how they fervently back their own little groups-- many of them most certainly are NOT dispassionately looking at the evidence as a whole. The difference with Hanratty is the guilt seems far more obvious with this case. No one is going to tell me there isn't a crusade-like mentality behind some, probably many, of these innocence projects members with the narrow vision to go to prisons and free people. The circumstancial evidence is overwhelmingly against the man in this case, and the bungled forensics are certainly unfortunate, but convictions should look at the whole range of evidence. Seems odd don't you think that all the latest movement was questioning ONLY the forensics. What I thought would've happened would be he'd be found not guilty of the murder, but then later nailed on the fraud charges.
The Innocence Project and a bunch of smug journalism students and their professor at Northwestern University got a guilty man off and terrorized an innocent man into confessing. He ended up spending something like 10-15 years of life in prison for a crime he didn't commit while the real killer will always remain free because a bunch of high-minded, holier-than-thou faux intellectuals decided they knew what was right and best for everyone. Those obnoxious j-school grads went on to prestigious, well-paying, and powerful careers and still insist they got it right. There's a whole documentary about the case. It's infuriating.
I think the only thing the circumstantial evidence overwhelming shows is that he was dodgy, but none of it 'proves' he's a murderer, where he is or he isn't. The point is the evidence doesn't show him to be guilty.
Plus there's also the statement that she too had a sore back and/or muscle soreness, so she'd of had something like Radox in the bath to help relieve that. I don't believe I've ever been in the situation where a woman I know has had a bath and not had anything else added to the water, but I'm not sure that the lack of additives means murder. But that is definitely something one would want to bring up with the durers.
The guy committed insurance fraud. The prison sentence was punishment for that. I didn't hear if evidence was submitted as to whether he did have a back injury that precluded him from being able to lift hee our of the bath, and whether when the paramedics got there he was wet and actually looked like he'd performed CPR.
@@damiendeecee I don't know how much fraudulent activities he was involved in but I'm not sure if he'd have served 20 years? BUT...THAT PATHOLOGIST (QUACK DOC) He didn't even sit the the diploma or degree which was needed in order to be a SENIOR PATHOLOGIST!! 😳🤯😔
The question that should be asked here is: who takes out five life insurances worth 1.5 million on his partner one year before they “tragically” drown in a bathtub. He falsified her signature. What more evidence do they need? Courts of law are ridiculous. And he wants to appear as a victim. Bastard
Why don’t you do your research. He was exonerated. The pathologist was unqualified, he got it all wrong. It’s all been proven, he got compensation, not guilty.
2 million is egregious. He knows he did it even though the state didn't prove it. How evil. He figured if he couldn't get her insurance money, he'd do this. Disgusting cheater-murderer-frauder
What's the evidence that he did it? We don't even know a murder took place. Investigators demonstrated that a murder couldn't have taken place without - at the very least - leaving more physical evidence.
The question that should be asked here is: who takes out five life insurances worth 1.5 million on his partner one year before they “tragically” drown in a bathtub. He falsified her signature. What more evidence do they need? Courts of law are ridiculous. And he wants to appear as a victim. Bastard
Without evidence of intent from the body it is difficult for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt... This would also throw the multiple life insurance policies as circumstantial evidence without tell talte signs of injury on the body.. .. The prosecutions case has to be water tight legally and procedurally.. In this case with a potential incompetent pathologist/coroner this can throw doubt into the evidence against the accused & could open up legal challenges.. .. Under the circumstances I believe it appropriate for Henry to be released, considering they couldn't prove any marks or injuries on the body were. Result of attempted murder... .. Courts are courts of law not of justice.. It's what can be proved in a court.
I mean to be fair he pretty much said that he did it to boost up companies he was tied to. And in court he did prove she knew he had at least three policies taken out. So while it is highly unusual it isn't really proof he did anything. And he would have to know that taking so many out would get attention if he was planning a murder so why wouldn't he just take out one extremely high policy out instead? He had the money and that would be a lot less suspicious.
I believe you meant to put _drown_ in quotations and not _tragically_ Additionally, I second the previous poster’s statement and hope you never serve on a jury.
Are the people who are convinced of his guilt aware or what “reasonable doubt” even is?! There’s a good reason we don’t allow public emotions to dictate court proceedings!
The question that should be asked here is: who takes out five life insurances worth 1.5 million on his partner one year before they “tragically” drown in a bathtub. He falsified her signature. What more evidence do they need? Courts of law are ridiculous. And he wants to appear as a victim. Bastard
Wow, what destruction a few incompetent “professionals” can bring down on a person. Very sad when people in the public attach themselves to the belief of someone’s guilt and refuse to consider a different possibility even when their noses are rubbed in evidence they don’t like. I’m glad Henry has found a new life. Why can’t people just let it go? Excellent presentation.
Am I the only one that heard that Anna’s husband stated he removed the plug, but her body covered the drain? Well then I’m quite sure I heard that the EMS or police not sure which but no matter, saying the tub was 3/4 full? So he finally got Anna out to do CPR and calling 911. I cannot imagine her had decided to put the plug back in the tub. I’m only 14:35 minutes in but I sure hope police caught that ERR.
Wow what a complex and baffling alleged murder case I think the justice system in SA at the time was very flawed.. And those poor little babies that died due to severe injuries from Obvious bruises the cigarette burn omg and the autopsies done on all three babies death was not established by the autopsy results.. I got distracted and was more interested into the deaths of these 3 babies . No one was charged Unbelievable. As for Anna's death It was too squeaky clean dying in a bathtub she had no horrific injuries if she was trying to fight off her attacker . Extremely difficult case .. The only thing I can think of how she may have died is if she was a diabetiic an injection of high dose of insulin injection which I know cannot be detected under any autopsy . Only way of knowing is finding where the hole was located which is painstakingly difficult to find . No fingerprints can be found when a body is . under water. . So who was the recipient if Anna's life insurance policy proceeds???? I rest my case. Thankyou Casefile team. Perth Western Australia 😘
Reasonable doubt? Wow The question that should be asked here is: who takes out five life insurances worth 1.5 million on his partner one year before they “tragically” drown in a bathtub. He falsified her signature. What more evidence do they need? Courts of law are ridiculous. And he wants to appear as a victim. Bastard
I’d love to see the look anyone’s face after they found out their partner took out five life insurances on their behalf. 😂 would they say “Oh, darling! Why don’t you sign up for five more? This is the ultimate sign that you truly care about me!” I suppose that’s what people who think this greedy scummy excuse of a man take for proof of true love. Please
THIRTY sexual harassment claims in THE LAST FEW YEARS? They chose to put this person on the stand? THIRTY. She tried to ruin 21 different people's lives and you put HER on the stand?
If there were so many problems with the autopsy why didn't the defense team bring this up at trial? Surely competent lawyers would have a heyday with all the missing evidence? Yet, they didn't? Hindsight and all, how else can her death be explained except for murder? 1.3 MILLION dollars says he killed her. Although there is doubt, it's not enough to aquit, in my opinion. Just because innocent people who didn't have 1.3 million to gain couldnt reenact the drive of a killer is not reasonable. Tough one, and I'm glad I wasn't on the jury.
Holding someone's legs up with the wetness, the weight of the legs itself and the body, that's even before considering potential struggle and him holding onto the strongest part of the human body. And no evidence besides bruising that might not have even been there? Someone explain this to me. I dont get it.
Poor guy? He fraudulently falsified insurance documents and forged Anna’s signature. If she ‘knew all about it’ then why forge her signature? He obviously has no problem committing criminal acts. I think he is lucky to be out of prison. Poor Anna is the only victim here.
Henry and his loved ones can take the small comfort in the fact his trial took place in Australia rather than the United States. There is the very real chance that had he been tried in the U.S. he would have been sentenced to death and executed.
This wouldn't qualify as a death sentence case, I don't think. Not viscous enough, no children were murdered, only 1 victim. Cold blooded but not bloody enough for us. Think Jodi Arias. That's a death penalty case and even she ended up with just life in prison. The death sentence is reserved for the worst kind of murderer, we just happen to have a lot of them. Although Australia is no slouch in the heinous murders department.
I’ve listen to these videos for a while now and love them. However, the number of advertisements is making it impossible. I understand that you need to advertise to earn money and generally I don’t mind but they are now completely over the top. Won’t be listening anymore. Shame!
He's guilty....of insurance fraud...which the podcast explains. That's the (unfortunately very reasonable) explanation for the life insurance policies.
The question that should be asked here is: who takes out five life insurances worth 1.5 million on his partner one year before they “tragically” drown in a bathtub. He falsified her signature. What more evidence do they need? Courts of law are ridiculous. And he wants to appear as a victim. Bastard
I dun know. The guy is a douche bag. Doesn’t necessarily make him a murderer. But multiple life insurance policies of which she wasn’t aware. Who does that.
Could be a murderer, but the fact that he was a licensed insurance salesman is VERY strong evidence that there exists reasonable doubt. I can easily imagine my partner shrugging, and saying.. "yeah that's ok.. so long as I don't have to do any paperwork, or understand the policies."
These cases must hinge on the existence of reasonable doubt. Juries are known to convict on scarce evidence. And this is a life-destroying example.
@@poopypantslover69420 It's not about what you believe.
@@damiendeecee I actually can’t remember but wasn’t it the case that he only told the victim about one policy? Also the inconsistencies in his evidence when he was first questioned.
@@damiendeeceeIt is about what the jury believes...
@@christinesbetterknitting4533 And the jury should go strictly on reasonable doubt, but they usually convict on scant evidence.. so that's a major failing of juries.
I love casefiles!
Makes two of us I've been on a Casefiles binge for the past couple of days.
Great job this! What a case ...
Wow.
I just feel like there should be a limit as to how many life insurance policies someone can take out. Can anybody tell me in what circumstance 5 life insurance policies would be necessary?
There is now, at least in Australia. Only one can pay out now
I agree 😢you listen to American murder cases and it is almost always for life insurance money it's terrible.
He was guilty AF! Im with the public and Cheney family and am appalled that he got $2.5 million! 🤬🤬🤬🤬 He forged millions of dollars of life insurance fraudulently! What do his supporters have to say about that?! The coroner is an embarrassment and probably is responsible for innocent people being convicted, however Keogh wasn’t one of them.
Do you have evidence? Or just "feels"... I agree he probably did it, but I'm sure you don't want people locked up over how we feel..
@@PoetofHateSpeech 🙄
There's a probability that Henry did commit the crime.
However it has to be proved in a court of law beyond reasonable doubt..
It is the prosecutions job to have a water tight case legally & procedurally so cases like this don't occur..
If there's ANY doubt about that there may have been procedural errors in the conviction.
Them the prosecutions case is open to appeal/challenge..
..
In this case it may be appropriate that Henry was released because they couldn't prove (via evidence on the body) that he did do it.
The competence of the pathologist/coroner should have been reviewed long ago..
@@ninedaysjane2466rolling your eyes doesn't help anybody. It just makes you look like a prick.
I agree with him. Unless you have evidence all this means jackshit.
After all, at first the public were against Johnny Depp when there was no evidence. So I could care less about public opinion on the matter.
Like did no one listen to the second half of the video? Lol.
Thank you Casefile ♡
🇬🇧 A few times, when ive snoozed off while in the bath but the second the water hit my face, i immediately woke up!
Everyone does, its an automatic action.
Youd have to be either very very drunk or on some narcotic which caused drowsiness, to drown in a bath!
I do know the quickest way to drown someone is to grab their feet, while the person is lying down in the water, & pulling their feet & legs swiftly up towards the perpetrator.
This causes the water to rapidly flow up into their nose, which will automatically cause the victim to open their mouth & with the water in the nose & mouth, unconsciousness & then
De*th quickly follows.
If the perpetrator wears thickish padded gloves, bruising on the ankles & lower legs is vertually nil.
This man is not only abhorent hut his actions atrocious!
Also stupid too! With no marks or injuries on Anna Janes body, then the above method is the obvious cause.
Thanks Casefiles!
Peace & Good Cheer to All
🇬🇧👧
Starts 3:25
I bet he did it. It reminds me of the James Hanratty case, where there was indeed questionable actions on the part of the prosecution (as if defence teams aren't nearly always guilty of dodgy uses of raising reasonable 'doubt'). Innocence projects are by their very nature going to be biased, so they should always be scrutinised extremely closely. Yes, they do often believe the convicted person is innocent as a course, because it's called human tribalism and how they fervently back their own little groups-- many of them most certainly are NOT dispassionately looking at the evidence as a whole.
The difference with Hanratty is the guilt seems far more obvious with this case.
No one is going to tell me there isn't a crusade-like mentality behind some, probably many, of these innocence projects members with the narrow vision to go to prisons and free people.
The circumstancial evidence is overwhelmingly against the man in this case, and the bungled forensics are certainly unfortunate, but convictions should look at the whole range of evidence. Seems odd don't you think that all the latest movement was questioning ONLY the forensics.
What I thought would've happened would be he'd be found not guilty of the murder, but then later nailed on the fraud charges.
The Innocence Project and a bunch of smug journalism students and their professor at Northwestern University got a guilty man off and terrorized an innocent man into confessing. He ended up spending something like 10-15 years of life in prison for a crime he didn't commit while the real killer will always remain free because a bunch of high-minded, holier-than-thou faux intellectuals decided they knew what was right and best for everyone. Those obnoxious j-school grads went on to prestigious, well-paying, and powerful careers and still insist they got it right. There's a whole documentary about the case. It's infuriating.
I think the only thing the circumstantial evidence overwhelming shows is that he was dodgy, but none of it 'proves' he's a murderer, where he is or he isn't. The point is the evidence doesn't show him to be guilty.
If she's dead in plain water - no bubblebath, fancy soap - it's probably murder.
No, it’s not.
Plus there's also the statement that she too had a sore back and/or muscle soreness, so she'd of had something like Radox in the bath to help relieve that. I don't believe I've ever been in the situation where a woman I know has had a bath and not had anything else added to the water, but I'm not sure that the lack of additives means murder. But that is definitely something one would want to bring up with the durers.
As always, I know, I'm like a parrot haha...but, thank you for an outstanding stream x
The guy committed insurance fraud. The prison sentence was punishment for that. I didn't hear if evidence was submitted as to whether he did have a back injury that precluded him from being able to lift hee our of the bath, and whether when the paramedics got there he was wet and actually looked like he'd performed CPR.
Forcibly incarcerating someone for insurance fraud is immoral.
@@damiendeecee I don't know how much fraudulent activities he was involved in but I'm not sure if he'd have served 20 years? BUT...THAT PATHOLOGIST (QUACK DOC) He didn't even sit the the diploma or degree which was needed in order to be a SENIOR PATHOLOGIST!! 😳🤯😔
@damiendeecee Not true. Crime results in time.
The question that should be asked here is: who takes out five life insurances worth 1.5 million on his partner one year before they “tragically” drown in a bathtub. He falsified her signature. What more evidence do they need? Courts of law are ridiculous. And he wants to appear as a victim. Bastard
@@ivanfranco2363 Juries aren't always made up of the brightest people.
This guy is guilty. The comments defending him are crazy.
Why don’t you do your research. He was exonerated. The pathologist was unqualified, he got it all wrong. It’s all been proven, he got compensation, not guilty.
@@annegiorgio5602 Exactly.
Cases like this should never be brought to trial. The "evidence" is nonexistent.
2 million is egregious. He knows he did it even though the state didn't prove it. How evil. He figured if he couldn't get her insurance money, he'd do this. Disgusting cheater-murderer-frauder
What's the evidence that he did it? We don't even know a murder took place. Investigators demonstrated that a murder couldn't have taken place without - at the very least - leaving more physical evidence.
The question that should be asked here is: who takes out five life insurances worth 1.5 million on his partner one year before they “tragically” drown in a bathtub. He falsified her signature. What more evidence do they need? Courts of law are ridiculous. And he wants to appear as a victim. Bastard
Without evidence of intent from the body it is difficult for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt...
This would also throw the multiple life insurance policies as circumstantial evidence without tell talte signs of injury on the body..
..
The prosecutions case has to be water tight legally and procedurally..
In this case with a potential incompetent pathologist/coroner this can throw doubt into the evidence against the accused & could open up legal challenges..
..
Under the circumstances I believe it appropriate for Henry to be released, considering they couldn't prove any marks or injuries on the body were. Result of attempted murder...
..
Courts are courts of law not of justice..
It's what can be proved in a court.
Larry Silverstein?
I mean to be fair he pretty much said that he did it to boost up companies he was tied to. And in court he did prove she knew he had at least three policies taken out. So while it is highly unusual it isn't really proof he did anything. And he would have to know that taking so many out would get attention if he was planning a murder so why wouldn't he just take out one extremely high policy out instead? He had the money and that would be a lot less suspicious.
_"What more evidence do they need?"_
I hope you never serve on a jury.
I believe you meant to put _drown_ in quotations and not _tragically_
Additionally, I second the previous poster’s statement and hope you never serve on a jury.
Are the people who are convinced of his guilt aware or what “reasonable doubt” even is?! There’s a good reason we don’t allow public emotions to dictate court proceedings!
The question that should be asked here is: who takes out five life insurances worth 1.5 million on his partner one year before they “tragically” drown in a bathtub. He falsified her signature. What more evidence do they need? Courts of law are ridiculous. And he wants to appear as a victim. Bastard
@@ivanfranco2363well said ..
Are you?
Reasonable doubt doesn't mean 99 .99percent
Wow, what destruction a few incompetent “professionals” can bring down on a person. Very sad when people in the public attach themselves to the belief of someone’s guilt and refuse to consider a different possibility even when their noses are rubbed in evidence they don’t like. I’m glad Henry has found a new life. Why can’t people just let it go? Excellent presentation.
You disgust me.
He did it but I'm surprised they said he was guilty. I don't think they proved that unfortunately
Awesome 👏 Saturday morning 😊
There were so many advertisements on this episode, I forgot what story was.
Am I the only one that heard that Anna’s husband stated he removed the plug, but her body covered the drain?
Well then I’m quite sure I heard that the EMS or police not sure which but no matter, saying the tub was 3/4 full?
So he finally got Anna out to do CPR and calling 911. I cannot imagine her had decided to put the plug back in the tub.
I’m only 14:35 minutes in but I sure hope police caught that ERR.
Justice hasn't been served here for Anna -Jane . Imo. R.I P Anna -Jane .
I think he probably is guilty, but really not proven. If he didn't kill her I think that was in his future plans.
Sydney Australia Listening 🙋♀️🦾💙🌟💯
Wow what a complex and baffling alleged murder case
I think the justice system in SA at the time was very flawed..
And those poor little babies that died due to severe injuries from
Obvious bruises the cigarette burn omg
and the autopsies done on all three babies death was not established by the autopsy results..
I got distracted and was more interested into the deaths of these 3 babies .
No one was charged
Unbelievable.
As for Anna's death
It was too squeaky clean dying in a bathtub she had no horrific injuries if she was trying to fight off her attacker .
Extremely difficult case ..
The only thing I can think of how she may have died is if she was a diabetiic
an injection of high dose of insulin injection which I know cannot be detected under any autopsy .
Only way of knowing is finding where the hole was located which is painstakingly difficult to find .
No fingerprints can be found when a body is . under water. .
So who was the recipient if Anna's life insurance policy proceeds????
I rest my case.
Thankyou Casefile team.
Perth Western Australia 😘
What's wrong with your text wrap?
Wait was Anna Jane paying for her life insurance policies? That was taken out 😢by Henry😢
I was legitimately shocked when you announced the jury returned guilty because there was absolutely reasonable doubt there
Thanks for the spoiler
@@EdgarStyles1234 yet you come to read the comments first before listening to the podcast?
Reasonable doubt? Wow
The question that should be asked here is: who takes out five life insurances worth 1.5 million on his partner one year before they “tragically” drown in a bathtub. He falsified her signature. What more evidence do they need? Courts of law are ridiculous. And he wants to appear as a victim. Bastard
I’d love to see the look anyone’s face after they found out their partner took out five life insurances on their behalf. 😂 would they say “Oh, darling! Why don’t you sign up for five more? This is the ultimate sign that you truly care about me!” I suppose that’s what people who think this greedy scummy excuse of a man take for proof of true love. Please
@@ivanfranco2363people are so gullible aren’t they ?
THIRTY sexual harassment claims in THE LAST FEW YEARS?
They chose to put this person on the stand?
THIRTY.
She tried to ruin 21 different people's lives and you put HER on the stand?
If there were so many problems with the autopsy why didn't the defense team bring this up at trial? Surely competent lawyers would have a heyday with all the missing evidence? Yet, they didn't? Hindsight and all, how else can her death be explained except for murder? 1.3 MILLION dollars says he killed her. Although there is doubt, it's not enough to aquit, in my opinion. Just because innocent people who didn't have 1.3 million to gain couldnt reenact the drive of a killer is not reasonable. Tough one, and I'm glad I wasn't on the jury.
You just said yourself there is reasonable doubt, which means you cannot convict someone
@@MentokTheMindTaker
No, I said there was doubt, but NOT enough to aquit.
@@MentokTheMindTaker That's an oversimplification of the concept.
They didn’t know the pathologist was a fraud, that’s why the defence didn’t challenge it.
He didn't intend to marry her. Obvious. He killed her.
No he didn’t kill her. Do some research
Holding someone's legs up with the wetness, the weight of the legs itself and the body, that's even before considering potential struggle and him holding onto the strongest part of the human body. And no evidence besides bruising that might not have even been there? Someone explain this to me. I dont get it.
Easy for a man to do,rubber gloves give good grip.
The pathologist was a fraud
I live in Adelaide and remember this case so well... everybody believed the poor guy had done it thanks to the press ...such a sad case for poor Henry
Poor Anna Jane most
You ought to put the pipe down that crap has rendered you cognitively inept.
You ought to put the pipe down that crap has rendered you cognitively inept.
Poor guy? He fraudulently falsified insurance documents and forged Anna’s signature. If she ‘knew all about it’ then why forge her signature? He obviously has no problem committing criminal acts. I think he is lucky to be out of prison. Poor Anna is the only victim here.
@@jerrymarshall2095 wtf U talking about ..put the pipe down???
Henry and his loved ones can take the small comfort in the fact his trial took place in Australia rather than the United States. There is the very real chance that had he been tried in the U.S. he would have been sentenced to death and executed.
In Australia he'd be paroled and set free on u
Get over yourself.
This wouldn't qualify as a death sentence case, I don't think. Not viscous enough, no children were murdered, only 1 victim. Cold blooded but not bloody enough for us. Think Jodi Arias. That's a death penalty case and even she ended up with just life in prison. The death sentence is reserved for the worst kind of murderer, we just happen to have a lot of them. Although Australia is no slouch in the heinous murders department.
It had been a stressful day at work for Anna-Jane after she suffered a paper cut.
What do you mean by that ?
Why don’t you take a long walk off a short peir
5
I know why you do it but gosh I hate the promotion adds you do 🤦 takes so long and if I skip I end up skipping the story..
Well you can look at the transcript to determine when the ads end.
@@AngelsHandPrint how do you do that?
@@AngelsHandPrint doesn’t really matter when you get four 2+ minute youtube ads in under 14 minutes.
Ads vs adds
Too many ads. I'm outta here.
My favourite part is listening for your bogus voice change for ads and then never buying any of them because they're trash.
Troll much?
@@rashone2879 too bad you fall prey to such pitiful attempts at pedalling junk products. You must lack self-control.
Such a positive person, thank you for enlightening our lives with your comment
@@slyracoon good thing this ain't a dating site eh?
Sad little person.......
59:05
Such an interesting story, told well, but way too many ads. I had to give up as I had no more time.
I’ve listen to these videos for a while now and love them. However, the number of advertisements is making it impossible. I understand that you need to advertise to earn money and generally I don’t mind but they are now completely over the top. Won’t be listening anymore. Shame!
He forged the life insurance..he's guilty!
He's guilty....of insurance fraud...which the podcast explains. That's the (unfortunately very reasonable) explanation for the life insurance policies.
The question that should be asked here is: who takes out five life insurances worth 1.5 million on his partner one year before they “tragically” drown in a bathtub. He falsified her signature. What more evidence do they need? Courts of law are ridiculous. And he wants to appear as a victim. Bastard
I do...let's hook up 😂😂😂