PDA

View Full Version : Weekend Discussion Thread 04/27-30/2012


Pages : 1 2 [3]

robynhood
04-30-2012, 03:17 PM
Regarding the authenticity of signatures on the Tori's Law petition, it is possible for anyone to create false information on the internet. Any IP address, which may be recorded in order to prevent someone from signing twice, can be roundabout managed with ease by going through a proxy server or by signing from several different locations (eg: work, home, library). There is nothing to prevent people from anywhere in the world from pretending to be Canadian and signing the petition. If it were so easy to regulate online signatures, national voting would have an online component ... but it doesn't because there are no safeguards that can be put in place to ensure authenticity of the results. The Prime Minister has voiced his opinion of online polls in relation to the Northern Pipeline, and he is not going to modify that opinion for this proposed change to Canadian law.

....I am not going to debate authincity of Online Voting for PETITIONS ....You are missing my POINT....I am saying a HORRIBLE TRAGEDY HAS OCCURRED in OUR BEAUTIFUL Province of Ontario>>>>POOR TORI ..I want to see her RIP! ...now Ont. used to be a palace that used to be EXTREMELY SAFE FOR OUR CHILDREN ...I remeber it well...Yes IT HAS CHANGED WORLD WIDE!!!!....Crime among OUR YOUTHS has esculated ...as our population has ...way too many CRIMES among our YOUTH ...I see a HUGE Problem in the way TLM was not dealt with ...she was a time bomb ready to exploded at any time! .....

and MR behaviour after he did the " dirty deed IMO was NOT the way a poor DUPED ...who was tramatized by a MURDER !...I just cannot buy this at all ....NOT for one sec....

I feel we as a NATION need to PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT has occured here ....it just made me think HARD after I watched Rodney explain that he too NEVER PAID TOO CLOSE ATTENTION also to child abuction or murders ....until it hit his household ...I NEVER EVER thought I would beleive in capital Punishment either ....but this only applies to a crime when there is no DOUBT OF A CONVICTION...Yes we must wait and listen carefully next to the defense here ...as everyone is inncident and derserves their LEGAL RIGHTS IN COURT.....I shall most definitely be in London court especially IF MR....is going to take the stand ....somehow I too am VERY DOUBTFUL this shall occurr....WE SHALL ALL SEE TOMORROW ,....how they plan on PROCEEDING the defense ....again time shall tell....IMO again for whatever that is WORTH....robynhood ...so darn nervous...1 more sleep ...the end !

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 03:18 PM
My ex's mother would bail her son all the time no matter the crime of the offence. She never taught him to own up to responsibility and it is why he still does drugs, abuses women and is in and out of jail. We really dont know if that was the case with MTR. She could have obstructed justice a couple of times for various reasons in order to protect her son. JMO

Macright
04-30-2012, 03:19 PM
How many times have police pulled people over or have pulled up their supposed name in the police car only to find out there is no record. People lie and it depends on the offence, some police let people go without arresting them.

All in all I dont think it matters if he has a record at all. You could be someone with a record a mile long but never kill someone or you could be like PB no record and kill 3 people..... JMO


I agree but you did mention "Crimes" not being pulled over by a cop and a check run on plates etc. that is why I mentioned fingerprinting...not for a routine check by cops but for committing a crime...big difference IMO...

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 03:21 PM
maybe if a certain journalist (and I used that loosely) decides to write her take on this...I understand the publication ban in force now but at the start when all of this was transpiring we read a lot about TLM..but nothing about MR... I remember at the time when TLM was taking her daily airings in the chopper that TM at her daily news conference mentioned that TLM was only taking advantage of the nice weather and the chopper rides and maybe a MacDonalds thrown in on the side...it seems she did not believe TLM at that time....JMO

Well I don't read her columns so I wouldn't know. Do you believe that she was out taking advantage of the nice weather and chopper rides or do you think she truly wanted them to find the body?

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 03:23 PM
I agree but you did mention "Crimes" not being pulled over by a cop and a check run on plates etc. that is why I mentioned fingerprinting...not for a routine check by cops but for committing a crime...big difference IMO...

Maybe he was just never caught or maybe everything he wanted to do was coming to a head when he met TLM. Maybe it was time, he had someone he could confide in with his dark secrets and what he wanted to do and she was more than willing to comply. All it took was one person with the same mind frame and voila, we have his first crime.

Macright
04-30-2012, 03:25 PM
Well I don't read her columns so I wouldn't know. Do you believe that she was out taking advantage of the nice weather and chopper rides or do you think she truly wanted them to find the body?


I will be honest with you...I go with TM feeling on this at the time and still do...remember at that time TLM thought she had the LE by the "b*l*s ...JMO and she was in command.....

otto
04-30-2012, 03:25 PM
I think and this is only my opinion, that MTR's secretiveness (some of his female friends spoke of this) is one characteristic of a psychopath.

<snipped for space>

But these two acted together. JMO

I would put MR in the category of antisocial personality disorder. Given that the day after he participated in the violent abduction, sexual assault and murder of a young girl he was bed hopping with yet more women, he seems to completely lack empathy and an appreciation for the horror that he visit on others.

I don't believe that people are born sociopathic, or with antisocial personality disorder. I think it comes from an absence of bonding in the formative years (ages 0 - 6). I looked into this theory more extensively in the Casey Anthony case. I noticed a kind of vacancy in the child's eyes and a disconnect between the mother and infant/toddler. I think the same thing also happened with Scott Peterson. I think that these children were born normal and that, as young infants and toddlers, they did what normal children do to interact with their mothers (the centre of a child's universe). I think the mothers did not respond normally to the children. For example, a child cries when unhappy and smiles when happy. If that child's crying or smiling is continuously ignored, the child learns that his/her feelings to not elicit a normal, compassionate response; their feelings do not matter ... the child learns to suppress those emotions as a means to protect the self because there is no outward relief for them. That's a really short synopsis of what I think, but the bottom line is that I think children are born normally and that severe phychological neglect in the formative years results in those children suppressing normal emotional reactions until they more or less no longer exist.

MR did not have a normal reaction to the suffering he caused a young child, her family, or her friends. After the crimes, his only objective was to get high, hook up and cover his tracks. I think his interest in the case was related to two things: making sure that police weren't on his tail, and curiously observing emotional pain in others.

One question I have about MR is whether he also adapted his habits to reflect others. That is, if he dated a vegetarian, was he suddenly a vegetarian? If he dated a religious person, was he suddenly religious?

Macright
04-30-2012, 03:27 PM
Maybe he was just never caught or maybe everything he wanted to do was coming to a head when he met TLM. Maybe it was time, he had someone he could confide in with his dark secrets and what he wanted to do and she was more than willing to comply. All it took was one person with the same mind frame and voila, we have his first crime.


I don't think this was the first time MR committed an offence..the drug thingie is a big one IMO...but I don't think he committed a murder or a rape etc. and I still don't...

otto
04-30-2012, 03:27 PM
BBM

It is actually not up to his lawyer. MR has the final say on whether or not he will take the stand, his lawyer can advise against him taking the stand, though if MR wants to take the stand, there is nothing Derstine can do to stop it.

True ... it's up to MR whether he listens to the advice of his lawyer.

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 03:32 PM
I don't think this was the first time MR committed an offence..the drug thingie is a big one IMO...but I don't think he committed a murder etc. and I still don't...

Okay lets try this again. Voila now he was finally caught and arrested for his first real crime.

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 03:33 PM
I will be honest with you...I go with TM feeling on this at the time and still do...remember at that time TLM thought she had the LE by the "b*l*s ...JMO and she was in command.....

TM as in Tara? Sorry some people refer to TLM as TM I just want to make sure I know what you mean.

Macright
04-30-2012, 03:35 PM
Okay lets try this again. Voila now he was finally caught and arrested for his first real crime.


arrested..yes...first "real crime"..well it depends on what the crime is...murder and rape...no way....being an accessory to a crime...by all means...JMO

Macright
04-30-2012, 03:36 PM
TM as in Tara? Sorry some people refer to TLM as TM I just want to make sure I know what you mean.


yes TM as in TS's mother....I don't think TLM was giving daily news updates at 1PM....

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 03:37 PM
arrested..yes...first "real crime"..well it depends on what the crime is...murder and rape...no way....being an accessory to a crime...by all means...JMO

So what your saying is he wasnt responsible for the abduction, didnt rape Tori and didnt killer her and was just an accessory after the fact?

otto
04-30-2012, 03:38 PM
....I am not going to debate authincity of Online Voting for PETITIONS ....You are missing my POINT....I am saying a HORRIBLE TRAGEDY HAS OCCURRED in OUR BEAUTIFUL Province of Ontario>>>>POOR TORI ..I want to see her RIP! ...now Ont. used to be a palace that used to be EXTREMELY SAFE FOR OUR CHILDREN ...I remeber it well...Yes IT HAS CHANGED WORLD WIDE!!!!....Crime among OUR YOUTHS has esculated ...as our population has ...way too many CRIMES among our YOUTH ...I see a HUGE Problem in the way TLM was not dealt with ...she was a time bomb ready to exploded at any time! .....

and MR behaviour after he did the " dirty deed IMO was NOT the way a poor DUPED ...who was tramatized by a MURDER !...I just cannot buy this at all ....NOT for one sec....

I feel we as a NATION need to PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT has occured here ....it just made me think HARD after I watched Rodney explain that he too NEVER PAID TOO CLOSE ATTENTION also to child abuction or murders ....until it hit his household ...I NEVER EVER thought I would beleive in capital Punishment either ....but this only applies to a crime when there is no DOUBT OF A CONVICTION...Yes we must wait and listen carefully next to the defense here ...as everyone is inncident and derserves their LEGAL RIGHTS IN COURT.....I shall most definitely be in London court especially IF MR....is going to take the stand ....somehow I too am VERY DOUBTFUL this shall occurr....WE SHALL ALL SEE TOMORROW ,....how they plan on PROCEEDING the defense ....again time shall tell....IMO again for whatever that is WORTH....robynhood ...so darn nervous...1 more sleep ...the end !

Each horrifying act results in those closest to the tragedy wanting to see laws changed. The Latimer case saw people wanting to see euthanasia and "compassionate homicide" as a legal option for extreme illness. The Homolka/Bernardo case probably led to some wanting to see capital punishment reinstated. When there are horrible traffic accidents on the same stretch of highway, people close to the victims want to see the road re-designed. Those most deeply impacted by tragedy want to see change such that there is a different result in the future.

Capital punishment is not a deterrent and Canadian law is not exclusively based on penal law, so implementing capital punishment would do nothing to change the results when another young girl is abducted, assaulted and murdered. Personally, I like the idea of monsters like Russell Williams, Paul Bernardo, Clifford Olsen and perhaps, one day soon, MR, sitting in a concrete broom closet with nothing to do until they drop dead of old age.

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 03:40 PM
yes TM as in TS's mother....I don't think TLM was giving daily news updates at 1PM....

Sorry I just wanted to make sure I heard you correctly because you said that you didnt agree with what the "journalist" was writing about but you did agree that she was on a joy ride just like the journalist said.

Macright
04-30-2012, 03:42 PM
So what your saying is he wasnt responsible for the abduction, didnt rape Tori and didnt killer her and was just an accessory after the fact?


I think if you have read any of my posts you will find that is how I perceive this...JMO have seen nothing so far in the trial that changes my gut feelings...I know I am just an "armchair detective" and my stance on this means nothing in the court of law...JMO but as I have also stated...if the jury finds him guilty of ALL charges then I will accept their decision...I have nothing to gain or lose in this...

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 03:44 PM
I think if you have read any of my posts you will find that is how I perceive this...JMO have seen nothing so far in the trial that changes my gut feelings...I know I am just an "armchair detective" and my stance on this means nothing in the court of law...JMO but as I have also stated...if the jury finds him guilty of ALL charges then I will accept their decision...I have nothing to gain or lose in this...

All good I just wanted to be clear as all the posts I have read it wasnt clear. Thanks now I know.

snoofer
04-30-2012, 03:46 PM
I think we agree...
TLM had planned to take someone's life, chances were that it would have been someone weaker then her ... She may not have thought VS was going to die but sub-Consciencely I believe she did... What could TLM believe was going to happen?

Would TLM have planned a kidnapping, murder, rape without MTR knowledge ...and what...used him for his car???? Why not plan a murder not include him and do it on foot? Or why not with a gang member with a car. Does it really make sense that she had to bum a drive so she could commit a murder, rape, kidnapping. OR...does it makes sense they both knew and planned the kidnapping and the rest followed. MOO

THIS would be one for the murder history books I think. Kidnapper, murder, rapist lady bums a drive to the murder scene with the victim...unbeknownst to the innocent driver. MOO

So the ticker headline would read:

KIDNAPPER/RAPIST/MURDERER BUMS A DRIVE WITH VICTIM FROM UNSUSPECTING FRIEND TO THE MURDER SCENE-FRIEND IN SHOCK BUT STILL ABLE TO SPEED DATE

Macright
04-30-2012, 03:47 PM
Sorry I just wanted to make sure I heard you correctly because you said that you didnt agree with what the "journalist" was writing about but you did agree that she was on a joy ride just like the journalist said.


I didn't say I didn't agree with what the journalist was writing about...I just threw that in because we have no concrete info on MR before all of this and someone mentioned a publication ban in place, which I can understand..I just said that "someone" may be at this moment writing a book about all of this and we may know something about his previous life when the book is published...it could be anyone of those reporters...one was already being written (by a crime reporter) while the case of RW was still going on so nothing surprises me how people will do anything to make $$$ off of someone's tragedy... JMO

Macright
04-30-2012, 03:49 PM
All good I just wanted to be clear as all the posts I have read it wasnt clear. Thanks now I know.



I hope you are not taking notes etc. or making a list... ha...just joking...JMO


respectfully....

Macright
04-30-2012, 03:52 PM
Sorry I just wanted to make sure I heard you correctly because you said that you didnt agree with what the "journalist" was writing about but you did agree that she was on a joy ride just like the journalist said.


no I said TM,as in TS's mother said she was on a joy ride...didn't know that any reporters said the same...I watched those daily news briefs at the time and heard TM say that and I agree with her....then and now....JMO

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 03:53 PM
I hope you are not taking notes etc. or making a list... ha...just joking...JMO


respectfully....

No lol.. I just sometimes need people to say what it is that they believe happened, cut and dry is all. Sometimes its very confusing to know what people are saying, thinking and believing. Since so many people respond its hard to remember all the posts and since I have been on here for 3 yrs I really cant even remember the details from when this tragedy first happened.

I respect that everyone has a right to their opinion and if its not the same as mine I want to know why to see if there is something I missed.

jenniferleia
04-30-2012, 03:55 PM
I am so looking forward to tomorrow! I agree with a few on here that we need to hear both sides of the story, but if there is no other side of the story, I think his goose is cooked.

All of the evidence so far with the cell phone activity (or non-activity) does not paint a pretty picture for him.

I personally think MR WILL testify, there is no other way around it. It is going to be an interesting day regardless!

JMO!!!!!!

snoofer
04-30-2012, 03:58 PM
I am so looking forward to tomorrow! I agree with a few on here that we need to hear both sides of the story, but if there is no other side of the story, I think his goose is cooked.

All of the evidence so far with the cell phone activity (or non-activity) does not paint a pretty picture for him.

I personally think MR WILL testify, there is no other way around it. It is going to be an interesting day regardless!

JMO!!!!!!

I will be sure to have my popcorn, barf bag and dangit doll ready! MOO

Macright
04-30-2012, 03:58 PM
No lol.. I just sometimes need people to say what it is that they believe happened, cut and dry is all. Sometimes its very confusing to know what people are saying, thinking and believing. Since so many people respond its hard to remember all the posts and since I have been on here for 3 yrs I really cant even remember the details from when this tragedy first happened.

I respect that everyone has a right to their opinion and if its not the same as mine I want to know why to see if there is something I missed.


well I have been following this from the start...there was a lull after the initial arrests etc. but once the trial started I picked it up again...those daily news briefs are embedded in my mind because my heart always bled for the father...not so much for anyone else because I wasn't so sure just what was going on.. my posts are usually "cut & dry" because I don't feel the need to pad them ..JMO

swedie
04-30-2012, 03:59 PM
Has anyone ever thought that his lawyer might be trying to pull the insanity route? is this possible this late in the game??

Derstine cannot claim MR is insane. If that was the case it would've happened long ago and delayed the trial even longer. Derstine would have to argue that before any court proceeding got underway.

The thing is, if MR is innocent of any of these charges, he and his defense wouldn't have any issues putting him on the stand. If one is telling the truth it shouldn't be hard to explain away the evidence and any testimony against an innocent person. I know he does not have to take the stand, but if I was begin accused of some crime I did not commit, no one would stop me from taking the stand in my own defense. It's as simple as that. MOO

Tomorrow we will find out. I've wondered if Derstine would call TLM as a witness. Now wouldn't that be interesting?! Other then her I cannot imagine who Derstine will call to give "evidence". I do not think he can call anyone for character testimony alone. They have to give evidence, JMO though.

otto
04-30-2012, 03:59 PM
<snipped for emphasis>

THIS would be one for the murder history books I think. Kidnapper, murder, rapist lady bums a drive to the murder scene with the victim...unbeknownst to the innocent driver. MOO

So the ticker headline would read:

KIDNAPPER/RAPIST/MURDERER BUMS A DRIVE WITH VICTIM FROM UNSUSPECTING FRIEND TO THE MURDER SCENE-FRIEND IN SHOCK BUT STILL ABLE TO SPEED DATE

add to that ... asks unwitting driver to stop at the hardware store to pick up murder weapon and choose secluded location for murder ... but still, the innocent dupe should be considered innocent of all charges. He was clearly bewildered the following day, week and month - as evidenced by his simpe desires to get stoned and hook up.

snoofer
04-30-2012, 04:01 PM
Derstine cannot claim MR is insane. If that was the case it would've happened long ago and delayed the trial even longer. Derstine would have to argue that before any court proceeding got underway.

The thing is, if MR is innocent of any of these charges, he and his defense wouldn't have any issues putting him on the stand. If one is telling the truth it shouldn't be hard to explain away the evidence and any testimony against an innocent person. I know he does not have to take the stand, but if I was begin accused of some crime I did not commit, no one would stop me from taking the stand in my own defense. It's as simple as that. MOO

Tomorrow we will find out. I've wondered if Derstine would call TLM as a witness. Now wouldn't that be interesting?! Other then her I cannot imagine who Derstine will call to give "evidence". I do not think he can call anyone for character testimony alone. They have to give evidence, JMO though.

Good lord; what if TLM has a THIRD version! MOO

Tahorn
04-30-2012, 04:02 PM
Would TLM have planned a kidnapping, murder, rape without MTR knowledge ...and what...used him for his car???? Why not plan a murder not include him and do it on foot? Or why not with a gang member with a car. Does it really make sense that she had to bum a drive so she could commit a murder, rape, kidnapping. OR...does it makes sense they both knew and planned the kidnapping and the rest followed. MOO

THIS would be one for the murder history books I think. Kidnapper, murder, rapist lady bums a drive to the murder scene with the victim...unbeknownst to the innocent driver. MOO

It doesn't have to make sense to us ... It is what was going through a junkie mind at the time.

snoofer
04-30-2012, 04:03 PM
add to that ... asks unwitting driver to stop at the hardware store to pick up murder weapon and choose secluded location for murder ... but still, the innocent dupe should be considered innocent of all charges. He was clearly bewildered the following day, week and month - as evidenced by his simpe desires to get stoned and hook up.

lol MOO

otto
04-30-2012, 04:05 PM
I am so looking forward to tomorrow! I agree with a few on here that we need to hear both sides of the story, but if there is no other side of the story, I think his goose is cooked.

All of the evidence so far with the cell phone activity (or non-activity) does not paint a pretty picture for him.

I personally think MR WILL testify, there is no other way around it. It is going to be an interesting day regardless!

JMO!!!!!!

He would be a fool to testify, but I hope you are correct. I would really like to see him sit still, make eye contact with the jury and tell them that he genuinely thought that he was babysitting a child up until the moment the child was murdered and then he was so scared to report the crime that he indulged himself with his harem.

Macright
04-30-2012, 04:10 PM
He would be a fool to testify, but I hope you are correct. I would really like to see him sit still, make eye contact with the jury and tell them that he genuinely thought that he was babysitting a child up until the moment the child was murdered and then he was so scared to report the crime that he indulged himself with his harem.


if he did testify, I don't think he would claim that HE was babysitting a child...I think he might say TLM TOLD him she was babysitting a child...I don't see any reason why he should take the stand, I think his lawyer is quite capable of driving his side home to the jury...JMO

tmhco
04-30-2012, 04:13 PM
This is a list of things you must believe in order to find the defense theory plausible IMO. Feel free to add to the list as this is just off the top of my head.

MR car just happened to be driving by TS school on several occasions on the day of the abduction.
*
TLM convinced BOTH TS and MR that she was babysitting.*
*
MR just happened to park at a remote lot down the street, around the corner and past a side street with parking and the main CCRH parking lot, either by chance or by TLM direction(and THAT didn’t raise an alarm)
*
The backseat of MR car was removed prior to the abduction and yet he agreed to bring TS on a long road trip.
*
The seat fabric (with blood traces) was a remnant from another time.
*
TS after being in the car for hours with no seat) did not want to go into the gas station or Home Depot so one of them stayed with her.
*
ATM stop before Home Depot was just a coincidence.
*
MR did not ask and thought nothing of a Home Depot stop and popped the trunk for TLM to put the bag.
*
They accidentally ended up at a remote location known to him.
*
A prolific BB user suddenly abandoned his habit during the murder as he took a walk.
*
TS blood just happened to fall on a sperm faction.
*
TLM described the murder scene perfectly for LE so they would find TS with no clothing on her lower half to frame MR
*
Not enough DNA evidence or forenics to prove guilt even though TS was not found for 3 months.
*
TLM had some gang/drug debt and kidnapped TS even thought she couldn’t afford to keep her track phone going.
*
*

otto
04-30-2012, 04:13 PM
It doesn't have to make sense to us ... It is what was going through a junkie mind at the time.

Junkie mind or not, what happened has to make sense to the jury or it will not be considered credible. MR, the junkie, was not so stoned that he couldn't pre-arrange deposits into his account, pick up cash that was problably used to pick up a murder weapon in a location where he would not be easily recognized, go to a secluded location close to where he had previously worked, turn off his cell phone at crucial times, or lie to police ... so it would be hard to believe that he was so stoned he didn't know something was amiss in taking someone else's child off the street and leaving her murdered under a rock pile.

jenniferleia
04-30-2012, 04:14 PM
if he did testify, I don't think he would claim that HE was babysitting a child...I think he might say TLM TOLD him she was babysitting a child...I don't see any reason why he should take the stand, I think his lawyer is quite capable of driving his side home to the jury...JMO


Ya, you may be right. I just see him as the type to get on the stand and tell his side of the story. We will see tomorrow.

Salem
04-30-2012, 04:14 PM
BBM - Derstine cannot claim MR is insane. If that was the case it would've happened long ago and delayed the trial even longer. Derstine would have to argue that before any court proceeding got underway.

The thing is, if MR is innocent of any of these charges, he and his defense wouldn't have any issues putting him on the stand. If one is telling the truth it shouldn't be hard to explain away the evidence and any testimony against an innocent person. I know he does not have to take the stand, but if I was begin accused of some crime I did not commit, no one would stop me from taking the stand in my own defense. It's as simple as that. MOO

Tomorrow we will find out. I've wondered if Derstine would call TLM as a witness. Now wouldn't that be interesting?! Other then her I cannot imagine who Derstine will call to give "evidence". I do not think he can call anyone for character testimony alone. They have to give evidence, JMO though.

I sincerely doubt that Derstine will be calling anyone for character evidence because if he puts MR's character into question, the Crown can use everything they have to show MR does not have a good character. That means any evidence Derstine got thrown out before the jury saw it, that goes against MR's character, would be allowed in.

I believe that Derstine did win a few "suppress evidence" motions regarding character evidence because of the legal arguments that were called during the testimony of all those women. I DON'T know this for fact, I'm just making an educated guess.

Salem

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 04:17 PM
Well in a matter of hours we will know if he does or does not. Very intense indeed.

snoofer
04-30-2012, 04:17 PM
He would be a fool to testify, but I hope you are correct. I would really like to see him sit still, make eye contact with the jury and tell them that he genuinely thought that he was babysitting a child up until the moment the child was murdered and then he was so scared to report the crime that he indulged himself with his harem.

Being the dutiful 28 year old babysitter; did he take VS to Dairy Queen or for a burger? Maybe they stopped at the park to swing....shopping? Did she regale in his stories of dance? The murder was at what time? Did the child ever get out of the car before the murder; that is a long, long time in a car for an 8 year old who was supposed to have movie night with her girlfriends. Surely, what they offered as babysitters was much more exciting. Yes, I want to hear exactly how they entertained so well this 8 year old child all those hours in that car. MOO

swedie
04-30-2012, 04:24 PM
In view of the totality of the crimes and the horrific nature of them, could any jury member really believe that the 18 year old woman was calling all the shots and the 28 year old man was just tagging along without any control over anything ... even though he was driving the car, he had prior history with the location of the body, he withdrew money moments before the purchase of the murder weapon, he had a knife throughout the crime and the blade of the knife is now missing, the young girl was found half undressed and murdered, he did not report the crime, he attempted to get away with it through lies and manipulation, and so on?

What "nagging question" could the jury have regarding his complicity in the crimes.

I would love to see MR testify. He thinks he's a smart guy, too smart to need a formal education. In fact, he's so stupid he doesn't realize how stupid he is ... so I would really like to see him get on the stand and try to wiggle out of the questions the prosecution has for him. He will self-incriminate in no time. Unfortunately for us, I'm pretty sure his lawyer will not let that happen.

Great post Otto! And if he was so innocent, why hasn't he given up where he disposed of all the evidence? Surely LE would be able to find some of it. MR isn't telling because he knows right well that evidence has his guilt written all over it. Number one his backseat and number two TLM's white jacket would have his and Tori's DNA all over it. I don't buy it that he MAY have given that information up either. If LE was able to find all this other incriminating evidence, I'm sure they wouldn't spare the resources to locating the much needed evidence to prove MR's guilt or innocence. AND MR would give it up to prove TLM's testimony is full of lies. I bet MR got nervous with his car seat sitting out on the curb in front of his mother's house for so long for pick up, he took and disposed of it somewhere himself. Same with the other evidence. I can see him going back to that car wash and retrieving those garbage bags just in case TLM broke and told someone about the murder.

I agree, MR is stupid but not so stupid to try and cover his azz in someways. MOO

snoofer
04-30-2012, 04:26 PM
I would put MR in the category of antisocial personality disorder. Given that the day after he participated in the violent abduction, sexual assault and murder of a young girl he was bed hopping with yet more women, he seems to completely lack empathy and an appreciation for the horror that he visit on others.

I don't believe that people are born sociopathic, or with antisocial personality disorder. I think it comes from an absence of bonding in the formative years (ages 0 - 6). I looked into this theory more extensively in the Casey Anthony case. I noticed a kind of vacancy in the child's eyes and a disconnect between the mother and infant/toddler. I think the same thing also happened with Scott Peterson. I think that these children were born normal and that, as young infants and toddlers, they did what normal children do to interact with their mothers (the centre of a child's universe). I think the mothers did not respond normally to the children. For example, a child cries when unhappy and smiles when happy. If that child's crying or smiling is continuously ignored, the child learns that his/her feelings to not elicit a normal, compassionate response; their feelings do not matter ... the child learns to suppress those emotions as a means to protect the self because there is no outward relief for them. That's a really short synopsis of what I think, but the bottom line is that I think children are born normally and that severe phychological neglect in the formative years results in those children suppressing normal emotional reactions until they more or less no longer exist.

MR did not have a normal reaction to the suffering he caused a young child, her family, or her friends. After the crimes, his only objective was to get high, hook up and cover his tracks. I think his interest in the case was related to two things: making sure that police weren't on his tail, and curiously observing emotional pain in others.

One question I have about MR is whether he also adapted his habits to reflect others. That is, if he dated a vegetarian, was he suddenly a vegetarian? If he dated a religious person, was he suddenly religious?

Check one (X)

___ good man

___ average man

___ vile, nasty little man


MOO

crazyladi
04-30-2012, 04:30 PM
Check one (X)

___ good man

___ average man

_xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx__ vile, nasty little man


MOO


How is that?? LOL

Bravo
04-30-2012, 04:32 PM
Yes quite the stretch for Jurors to believe any child snatched off the street could be so calm,relaxed and free of fear they could be mistaken for a child merely being babysat. Please.......(eye roll)

JayFriend
04-30-2012, 04:35 PM
Tomorrow we will find out. I've wondered if Derstine would call TLM as a witness. Now wouldn't that be interesting?!

Is that even possible? Can she be a witness for the Crown and then a witness for the Defence as well?

LoyalSleuth
04-30-2012, 04:38 PM
Is that even possible? Can she be a witness for the Crown and then a witness for the Defence as well?
IMO, she can not.

snoofer
04-30-2012, 04:43 PM
IF it were true TLM and MTR were babysitting. And IF it were true that MTR got rid of his carseat before the 8th. I want to hear from MTR where exactly TS sat in his broke down dirty car. No seatbelt? What on the floor crossed legged??? For hours on end? In her winter coat and boots? At 28 would he have not thought that would be a problem for a parent of an 8 year old? To not have child belted in and in a seat while travelling out of town? WOW. MOO

Tahorn
04-30-2012, 04:49 PM
Junkie mind or not, what happened has to make sense to the jury or it will not be considered credible. MR, the junkie, was not so stoned that he couldn't pre-arrange deposits into his account, pick up cash that was problably used to pick up a murder weapon in a location where he would not be easily recognized, go to a secluded location close to where he had previously worked, turn off his cell phone at crucial times, or lie to police ... so it would be hard to believe that he was so stoned he didn't know something was amiss in taking someone else's child off the street and leaving her murdered under a rock pile.

TLM = junkie
MR = addict

I am not sure that the hammer and gargbage bags were purchased with the intent of killing VS. TLM house looked liked someone was trying to fix it up ... Besides even the LE asked TLM why they put VS in garbage bags if they planned to leave VS there ... And MR had a hammer in the trunk why another one

Macright
04-30-2012, 04:50 PM
Yes quite the stretch for Jurors to believe any child snatched off the street could be so calm,relaxed and free of fear they could be mistaken for a child merely being babysat. Please.......(eye roll)


not so much of a stretch when you look at that video of TLM & TS walking towards the car...she didn't seem full of fear to me..just walking off with someone who she knew and had told her she was sent to babysit her for awhile... it's strange to think that only a few hours before TM had been in that very same parking lot as she visited with her grandfather..also just wondering if a bottom seat is taken out of a car would the seat belts still be attached somehow...if so they could have been used even though the child had to sit on a blanket..also what would be under the bottom of a seat..would there be any padding or would it be a hard surface...just wondering..JMO

Bravo
04-30-2012, 05:30 PM
I'm sure many a child is cooperative during the lure. Once they realize they have been taken and have that funny tummy feeling they have been warned about I'm confident in saying sheer terror must set in. I'm sure Tori realized it once she was in that vehicle. If MTR was so innocent why dump the back seat? Heck why not produce it? Let LE test away. The one thing that could exonerate him he never fessed up as to where it was. Funny.

Bravo
04-30-2012, 05:36 PM
TLM = junkie
MR = addict

I am not sure that the hammer and gargbage bags were purchased with the intent of killing VS. TLM house looked liked someone was trying to fix it up ... Besides even the LE asked TLM why they put VS in garbage bags if they planned to leave VS there ... And MR had a hammer in the trunk why another one

Yet hours later Tori ended up in garbage bags and murdered with a hammer. Many Murderers bag their Victims. Not unheard of. Perhaps the hammer in the car was taken from Rafferty's Mothers home. I wouldn't want any trace with the weapon.

otto
04-30-2012, 05:38 PM
TLM = junkie
MR = addict

I am not sure that the hammer and gargbage bags were purchased with the intent of killing VS. TLM house looked liked someone was trying to fix it up ... Besides even the LE asked TLM why they put VS in garbage bags if they planned to leave VS there ... And MR had a hammer in the trunk why another one

He worked construction ... he had a hammer. If the hammer that was purchased at the hardware store was not explicitly purchased for the murder, where is it?

I think that MR's mothers' house looked like it needed some fixing up too ... but MR already had all the tools from his construction jobs to use for that purpose.

otto
04-30-2012, 05:42 PM
not so much of a stretch when you look at that video of TLM & TS walking towards the car...she didn't seem full of fear to me..just walking off with someone who she knew and had told her she was sent to babysit her for awhile... it's strange to think that only a few hours before TM had been in that very same parking lot as she visited with her grandfather..also just wondering if a bottom seat is taken out of a car would the seat belts still be attached somehow...if so they could have been used even though the child had to sit on a blanket..also what would be under the bottom of a seat..would there be any padding or would it be a hard surface...just wondering..JMO

Victoria did not know her kidnappers. She was abducted by two monsters that didn't care what child they got, just as long as it was a female child.

Tahorn
04-30-2012, 05:46 PM
Yet hours later Tori ended up in garbage bags and murdered with a hammer. Many Murderers bag their Victims. Not unheard of. Perhaps the hammer in the car was taken from Rafferty's Mothers home. I wouldn't want any trace with the weapon.

True, but it is possible.

Macright
04-30-2012, 05:50 PM
Victoria did not know her kidnappers. She was abducted by two monsters that didn't care what child they got, just as long as it was a female child.


respectfully...I gather you know that for a fact Otto... (that TS did not know her kidnappers) I believe IMO that she did in fact know one a..... that was the one who led her from her school and later decided to murder her...that I know as fact..the actual murderer because she (TLM) testified to that action in court...JMO but anything else is just my opinion and I would never state anything as fact without further knowledge..just my own opinion.... just saying.........

Macright
04-30-2012, 05:51 PM
He worked construction ... he had a hammer. If the hammer that was purchased at the hardware store was not explicitly purchased for the murder, where is it?

I think that MR's mothers' house looked like it needed some fixing up too ... but MR already had all the tools from his construction jobs to use for that purpose.


sorry off topic I know but all this talk about hammers now has that song.."If I had a hammer" going through my mind....

Bravo
04-30-2012, 05:52 PM
True, but it is possible.

Many things are possible. How likely are they to be possible? It is not any one thing in this case that hangs Rafferty in my opinion. It's the sum of it all. What is most likely and reasonable based on the evidence presented? Guilty of the charges. MOO

Bravo
04-30-2012, 05:53 PM
sorry off topic I know but all this talk about hammers now has that song.."If I had a hammer" going through my mind....

LOL Ya gotta find humor as we banter thru these horrible cases.

lightlady
04-30-2012, 05:54 PM
Thanks to all of you that have posted tweets and walked the path of this trial together so far. It is the first trial I have followed to this detail, and I have found the discussion to be helpful. As Antiquegirl said, some are waiting to make any judgement until the defense has their say, and others are willing to call it as they see it based on the info to date. Salem has helped us to see this is not an Innocent until Proven Guilty forum.
I look forward to tomorrow to see if there is some explanation that we all have been missing, although I have to say that I cannot in my wildest imagination come up with one that would satisfy me. We will see.
Thanks again to all of you for chiming in and voicing your opinions in polite ways.

Bravo
04-30-2012, 06:01 PM
We all have the right to an opinion and the right to reserve it as well based on the Defense presented. Some of us choose to voice our opinion based on what seems to be reasonable at this point. We are a message board and it's what we do. Not Jurors. They are the only one's required at this point to keep their minds open.

swedie
04-30-2012, 06:08 PM
TM and VS have different last names too ... So do many mothers and children especially after divorces ... Means nothing

Well one could only assume MR has a different father. He has brothers who I believe are older, who share their mother's last name <modsnip>. Then there's M. Rafferty. <modsnip>.

BTW Shasta, great post and I agree also 100%. Many of the thinks you spoke of I've also thought for some time. MR just didn't turn evil overnight; he's been growing horns for a long time. MOO

swedie
04-30-2012, 06:15 PM
BBM

It is actually not up to his lawyer. MR has the final say on whether or not he will take the stand, his lawyer can advise against him taking the stand, though if MR wants to take the stand, there is nothing Derstine can do to stop it.

AND if MR is innocent he WILL take the stand to declare and prove his innocence. Who in their right mind wouldn't? Respectfully I wouldn't care if my lawyer advised against it. If I was innocent I would be more than eager to share with the people who will determine my faith. MOO IF MR doesn't take the stand, we can pretty much assume he is guilt.

Wondergirl
04-30-2012, 06:18 PM
Will Rafferty Take the Stand?

The accused and his lawyers, lead by Dirk Derstine don't have to prove anything, but they may feel as though they have to disprove something.

Mainly the testimony of the Crown's key witness.

"On some critical areas Terri-Lynne McClintic didn't adopt the questions put forward by Dirk Dirstine, for example what happened at the Home Depot".

So, in the opinion of legal analyst, Steven Skurka,

"It would seem to me that Rafferty would need to get up and deal with those critical issues".

http://www.cjbk.com/LocalNews/Story.aspx?ID=1695865

swedie
04-30-2012, 06:25 PM
Maybe he was just never caught or maybe everything he wanted to do was coming to a head when he met TLM. Maybe it was time, he had someone he could confide in with his dark secrets and what he wanted to do and she was more than willing to comply. All it took was one person with the same mind frame and voila, we have his first crime.

First crime that we know of...

tmhco
04-30-2012, 06:38 PM
Will he testify? http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120430/skurkas-spin-rafferty-defence-trial-120430/

otto
04-30-2012, 06:39 PM
respectfully...I gather you know that for a fact Otto... (that TS did not know her kidnappers) I believe IMO that she did in fact know one and that was the one who led her from her school and later decided to murder her...that I know as fact..the actual murderer because she (TLM) testified to that action in court...JMO but anything else is just my opinion and I would never state anything as fact without further knowledge..just my own opinion.... just saying.........

That's what the testimony has revealed ... Victoria did not know her kidnappers. They all lived in Woodstock at the time of the abduction. TLM's mother had talked dog breeding with the victim's mother. It's possible that the victim's mother had also crossed paths with MR's mother ... maybe they once spoke in a grocery store line-up. It makes no difference. According to testimony, the victim did not know her kidnappers. Passing each other on the street does not qualify ... in fact, that sort of "knowing" is more like stalking than knowing.

snoofer
04-30-2012, 06:42 PM
Yet hours later Tori ended up in garbage bags and murdered with a hammer. Many Murderers bag their Victims. Not unheard of. Perhaps the hammer in the car was taken from Rafferty's Mothers home. I wouldn't want any trace with the weapon.

maybe they each needed a hammer for the murder???? MOO

Salem
04-30-2012, 06:43 PM
STOP with discussing the family please. They are not on trial and don't deserve to have their names spread all over the internet. I am sure they must be horrified at what is transpiring here. Let them have any peace they can find, please.

Salem

swedie
04-30-2012, 06:43 PM
arrested..yes...first "real crime"..well it depends on what the crime is...murder and rape...no way....being an accessory to a crime...by all means...JMO

How does one explain away Tori's blood mix with sperm in MR's car, driving way down a laneway to a secluded spot, Tori naked from the waist down, his missing back seat, throwing away the murder weapon and all the other incriminating evidence, ect. ect. ect. AND I don't believe we can assume the sperm is some other males sperm. I am by no means a forensic scientist but I believe any sperm prior to MR owning his car would have been long gone after that time lapse of what, three to four year thereabouts. Weather elements, rain, snow, heat and the multiple times MR was known to have cleaned his car over those years would have destroyed sperm. AND that sperm just so happened to be found with Tori's blood. That evidence alone is most damaging and does show rape. HTH and MOO.

Salem
04-30-2012, 06:46 PM
RS&BBMTLM = junkie
MR = addict



What's the difference? I always thought they were one and the same.

Salem

Ardy
04-30-2012, 06:52 PM
There has been nothing entered into evidence in this trial, that shows MR had any previous tendency towards deviant sexual interests.

LE did a criminal record check and MR doesn't have one.

No witnesses indicated any deviant interests.

No cellphone or laptop records show any deviant interests.

From the jury viewpoint at least, MR has no previous deviant interests.

JMO.................

Salem
04-30-2012, 06:53 PM
IIRC stands for "if I remember correctly"

Salem

otto
04-30-2012, 06:59 PM
RS&BBM

What's the difference? I always thought they were one and the same.

Salem

Junkie v addict ... I thought so too ... slang v english. They both used the same drugs with as much frequency as they could afford.

tmhco
04-30-2012, 07:00 PM
There has been nothing entered into evidence in this trial, that shows MR had any previous tendency towards deviant sexual interests.

LE did a criminal record check and MR doesn't have one.

No witnesses indicated any deviant interests.

No cellphone or laptop records show any deviant interests.

From the jury viewpoint at least, MR has no previous deviant interests.

JMO.................

Maybe he just needed the right partner to send him over the edge. There is always a first time for everything. JMO

Ardy
04-30-2012, 07:05 PM
Maybe he just needed the right partner to send him over the edge. There is always a first time for everything. JMO

Maybe...it has happened before as it all starts with the first time.

But the jury won't be dealing with "maybe", the way we do.

It is more black and white for them.

Either the evidence is there.......or not.

JMO...............

SFB73
04-30-2012, 07:06 PM
I've lived in the Woodstock area all of my life, I know many people but really do not "know" them, Chances are I've crossed paths in some of my travels with some of the players in this case as my business puts me in the local 7/11 using the postal kiosk almost daily and I know both TLM and MR regularly were in there in the Late hours of the evening. This just proves most of us do not have perfect recall of people unless we interact with them, i can only say i somewhat know one person associated with the case as we both went to the same school at one point in time and he is a very good person who needs to see justice done for his relative in this case, I'm sure no justice dished out by the court will ever be enough for him, but it's all we can hope for right now. So yes, it could be possible that TS may have known of TLM through the dog connection, but really likely didn't "know" her, and if MR was the innocent dupe, would have easilly been able to see through any charade put up by TLM, it would have been obvious that there was no know babysitter relationship right from the get go, since TS was to head home that day for movies and a babysitter was never in the mix for the day. I don't buy it, most reasonable people here don't buy it so the jury surely won't either.

tmhco
04-30-2012, 07:07 PM
Maybe...it has happened before as it all starts with the first time.

But the jury won't be dealing with "maybe", the way we do.

It is more black and white for them.

Either the evidence is there.......or not.

JMO...............

I believe they have more than enough evidence! JMO

Bravo
04-30-2012, 07:08 PM
Maybe he just needed the right partner to send him over the edge. There is always a first time for everything. JMO

Agree. We of course were never privy as to why these women broke off relationships with Rafferty. I'm sure they just felt something wasn't quite right. He seemed to find the odd one who would fulfill some of his needs. With TLM I think she fulfilled his ultimate need. And her own as well. MOO

Wondergirl
04-30-2012, 07:09 PM
Court awaits Rafferty's Call



Kruse brings in other lawyers to act like Crowns, with different styles of questioning, to prepare his clients for the tough questioning on the stand.

"If they're not properly prepared, they will be destroyed by a good Crown. The Crowns do this for a living."

If a defence lawyer decides not to call his client, he's faced with another difficult choice. By calling any witness, the defence loses the right to give closing arguments after the Crown.

Some defence lawyers think it's important to have the last word before the judge charges the jury and sends them to make a decision.

"It gives you a chance to address what the Crown has said (in their closing)," Kruse said. "It's not an over-riding concern to me but it is important."

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/30/19698706.html (http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/30/19698706.html)

Ardy
04-30-2012, 07:10 PM
I would imagine that Derstine has also contemplated the order of events remaining in the trial.............and if that would impact on his decision.

If he rests his case, without presenting evidence.........he will present his closing arguments last before the jury goes into deliberations.

He can wait and let the Crown list all their evidence, and then go down the list and rebut each individual item.

He will know exactly what he has to rebut and will be addressing the jury last.

I am thinking of Johnny Cochrane's closing argument in the OJ trial, where he went down the list of evidence and challenged each piece.........concluding it all with the tag line.......If it doesn't fit..........you must acquit.

On the other hand, if Derstine has powerful evidence in support of MR.....he may wish to present his case and then go right into his summary.

It will be interesting to see what happens tomorrow morning.

JMO...........

Wondergirl
04-30-2012, 07:11 PM
Anyone having a trial sleepover?!

Ardy
04-30-2012, 07:13 PM
Wondergirl........great minds think alike.....

I was composing my post while you posted the same thing......lol.

Macright
04-30-2012, 07:14 PM
Maybe he just needed the right partner to send him over the edge. There is always a first time for everything. JMO


except most rapist don't take a partner along with them....the few I have read about that took them with the help of a partner kept them alive for years..... two cases that I could list in the US but I won't because they have been through enough JMO

Flowercb
04-30-2012, 07:25 PM
TLM = junkie
MR = addict

I am not sure that the hammer and gargbage bags were purchased with the intent of killing VS. TLM house looked liked someone was trying to fix it up ... Besides even the LE asked TLM why they put VS in garbage bags if they planned to leave VS there ... And MR had a hammer in the trunk why another one

So they decided to pick up a few home improvement items while kidnapping Tori?

SFB73
04-30-2012, 07:30 PM
So they decided to pick up a few home improvement items while kidnapping Tori?

Of course! Since home depot doesn't carry a wrecking ball and dumpster, TLM settled for a hammer and garbage bags.... i guess she could always pick up the nails and wood later....

Bravo
04-30-2012, 07:30 PM
Anyone having a trial sleepover?!

I have to ask (shrug) What is that?

Bravo
04-30-2012, 07:33 PM
Of course! Since home depot doesn't carry a wrecking ball and dumpster, TLM settled for a hammer and garbage bags.... i guess she could always pick up the nails and wood later....

Heck why didn't they all go in???? After all Tori was just being babysat. Why didn't they treat her at Tim Hortons? Babysitters do that kind of thing. Murderers do exactly what MJR and TLM did. Bouncing off your post.

Wondergirl
04-30-2012, 07:35 PM
Wondergirl........great minds think alike.....

I was composing my post while you posted the same thing......lol.

Maybe we can all get together after the trial tomorrow for a hot cup 'o tea?!

Do you prefer Earl Grey or Tetley?!

lol

Ardy
04-30-2012, 07:35 PM
except most rapist don't take a partner along with them....the few I have read about that took them with the help of a partner kept them alive for years..... two cases that I could list in the US but I won't because they have been through enough JMO

I can't recall any other case, where the rapist took along a witness either, especially one that they didn't particularly have an attachment for and didn't plan to be with for the rest of their life.

PB and KH were partners in their crimes, but they were married and thought they would live together forever. They also didn't drive around with the abductee in the car, visiting people to buy drugs and chat, and stopping at Tim Hortons for a tea.

This is one weird case...........and I don't think we know all the facts yet.

Perhaps Derstine busts it open tomorrow and things start to fall into place.

We shall see...........................

JMO..........

sillybilly
04-30-2012, 07:39 PM
except most rapist don't take a partner along with them....the few I have read about that took them with the help of a partner kept them alive for years..... two cases that I could list in the US but I won't because they have been through enough JMO

Sadists? Cannibals? Murderers? Rapists? Menendez brothers, Leopold and Loeb, Harris and Klebold, Bonnie and Clyde, Buono and Bianchi, etc, etc. IMO, pick any infamous duo and it basically comes down to the perfect storm:

from:
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1928&dat=19870327&id=d38jAAAAIBAJ&sjid=cGUFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1158,4912988

"... the insanity might be in their interaction together ther than their state of mind alone." <Jack Levin>

Hello_Kitty
04-30-2012, 07:39 PM
respectfully...I gather you know that for a fact Otto... (that TS did not know her kidnappers) I believe IMO that she did in fact know one and that was the one who led her from her school and later decided to murder her...that I know as fact..the actual murderer because she (TLM) testified to that action in court...JMO but anything else is just my opinion and I would never state anything as fact without further knowledge..just my own opinion.... just saying.........

Do YOU know for a fact that she did know her kidnappers? The evidence actually tells us she didn't. If you think you know that she did know her kidnappers, it'd be nice if you could produce the evidence. Respectfully.

sillybilly
04-30-2012, 07:41 PM
So they decided to pick up a few home improvement items while kidnapping Tori?

If TLM simply needed garbage bags for domestic use, she could have purchased them while at Foodland earlier that day.

Hello_Kitty
04-30-2012, 07:42 PM
I can't recall any other case, where the rapist took along a witness either, especially one that they didn't particularly have an attachment for and didn't plan to be with for the rest of their life.

PB and KH were partners in their crimes, but they were married and thought they would live together forever. They also didn't drive around with the abductee in the car, visiting people to buy drugs and chat, and stopping at Tim Hortons for a tea.

This is one weird case...........and I don't think we know all the facts yet.

Perhaps Derstine busts it open tomorrow and things start to fall into place.

We shall see...........................

JMO..........

How do we know that TLM and MR didn't know eachother more than we know about, maybe they had secret devil rituals in the woods or something :) Maybe they belonged to the same devil worship club.

flipflop
04-30-2012, 07:44 PM
respectfully...I gather you know that for a fact Otto... (that TS did not know her kidnappers) I believe IMO that she did in fact know one and that was the one who led her from her school and later decided to murder her...that I know as fact[/B]..the actual murderer because she (TLM) testified to that action in court...JMO but anything else is just my opinion and I would never state anything as fact without further knowledge..just my own opinion.... just saying.........

Do you have a link or proof that this is a fact?

Bravo
04-30-2012, 07:45 PM
I'm not even sure i understand the debate as to whether Tori new her abductors or not. I dont believe she did. Ultimately she ended up dead while in the custody of MJR and TLM. End of story. MOO

tmhco
04-30-2012, 07:45 PM
except most rapist don't take a partner along with them....the few I have read about that took them with the help of a partner kept them alive for years..... two cases that I could list in the US but I won't because they have been through enough JMO

I would tend to disagree. Here is a link to several murderous duos. Male and female. Just the right combination of depravity that may have never acted on their fantasies without the encouragement from the other. JMO

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/partners/index.html

Tahorn
04-30-2012, 07:45 PM
So they decided to pick up a few home improvement items while kidnapping Tori?

Hey why not ... they picked drugs, chit chat with a friend, TH and HD.

matou
04-30-2012, 07:47 PM
Maybe we can all get together after the trial tomorrow for a hot cup 'o tea?!

Do you prefer Earl Grey or Tetley?!

lol

I would love to join in but I have to stay where I am. I would be too freaked out to be in the courtroom with him there. JMO

Hello_Kitty
04-30-2012, 07:49 PM
I'm not even sure i understand the debate as to whether Tori new her abductors or not. I dont believe she did. Ultimately she ended up dead while in the custody of MJR and TLM. End of story. MOO

Bravo, <modsnip>. However, if she did, that may point to a motive for murder, that of revenge or drug debt. IMO

Heliotrope
04-30-2012, 07:49 PM
I think that tomorrow we have to steel ourselves for a whole lot of "A lie repeated often enough will become the truth." (I can't take credit for that - thank Lenin.)

The defence doesn't have to produce any evidence of anything they suggest or postulate or imagine - they just have to take a line, any line, and repeat it frequently.

<modsnip>

Bravo
04-30-2012, 07:52 PM
I found watching their interactions quite telling (MJR and TLM) on video. There is a dance going on between them. Sick but a dance.

otto
04-30-2012, 07:55 PM
except most rapist don't take a partner along with them....the few I have read about that took them with the help of a partner kept them alive for years..... two cases that I could list in the US but I won't because they have been through enough JMO

This was the first time this murderous couple committed the crime they did. Neither had a location to hold a victim for 2 years, let alone 2 days. That doesn't mean that they are not a murderous couple.

Tahorn
04-30-2012, 07:58 PM
I would tend to disagree. Here is a link to several murderous duos. Male and female. Just the right combination of depravity that may have never acted on their fantasies without the encouragement from the other. JMO

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/partners/index.html

I do agree that there is a history of team killers ... but you have to admit that their relationships were far more established, nothing about TLM and MR remotely resembles team killers.


The male usually initiates the molestation and the female is usually sufficiently dependent on him to remain passive in the face of violence. She fears being abandoned or beaten. ..

Confusedashell
04-30-2012, 07:59 PM
Can we take a poll on who thinks MR will or will not testify ??

Hello_Kitty
04-30-2012, 08:01 PM
Connect with Mark Kelly, on CBC talks about if MR will take the stand.

Hello_Kitty
04-30-2012, 08:03 PM
I do agree that there is a history of team killers ... but you have to admit that their relationships were far more established, nothing about TLM and MR remotely resembles team killers.

Maybe they were just starting out. Given time, I'm sure they would have been as infamous as PB and KH, and all of that ilk.

Hello_Kitty
04-30-2012, 08:10 PM
Can we take a poll on who thinks MR will or will not testify ??

I hope he does, the crown will crucify him. I don't think he will tho because Derstine knows this. Judging from his police interview and facial antics at the trial, he isn't the brightest bulb in the pack. The crown would have a field day tripping him up in his lies.

roseofsharon
04-30-2012, 08:16 PM
Just MOO, but I think the green garbage bags were bought for three reasons:

1) Trying to prevent blood spatter.

2) To suppress the odour of decomposition, should the owner of the property be in the vicinity or anyone else.

3) To hasten the decomposition process.

All just MOO.

otto
04-30-2012, 08:20 PM
I do agree that there is a history of team killers ... but you have to admit that their relationships were far more established, nothing about TLM and MR remotely resembles team killers.

Bernardo and Homolka were not "established" when they murdered Karla's sister. They were a quick hookup shortly after meeting in a bar, and then a whirlwind obsession and murder by Christmas.

ETA: it was Christmas the following year that Tammy was murdered

Tahorn
04-30-2012, 08:21 PM
I'm not even sure i understand the debate as to whether Tori new her abductors or not. I dont believe she did. Ultimately she ended up dead while in the custody of MJR and TLM. End of story. MOO

I find it hard to believe that TLM lived a few blocks from the school, VS new home, her aunt lived near by VS old house and she never ever saw VS with her dog ... In my experience people acknowledge people with similar dogs.

TLM had TM address in her bedroom.

TLM met TM and JG a few times.

In her journal she writes that the "she asked were Precious my dog was..."

There is more to say that there is the possibility that TLM knew who VS was then not. JMO

Pic 47
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/04/19594746.html

robynhood
04-30-2012, 08:21 PM
Five years from now, when people think of Victoria Stafford they are going to think of the little girl that changed Canadian Laws and made it a safer nation for all children.
*
Rodney Stafford; Victoria's Dad..

......EXACTLY MY THOUGHTS EARIER TODAY ...MAY gOD GIVE TORI'S FAMILY STRENGTH TO ENDURE TOMORROW....i KNOW i AM CONCERNED ...AND i HAVE NEVER MET OUR ANGEL ...tORI...imo...LET US REMEBER WHO THIS IS ABOUT....tORI...may our angel start to see JUstice tomorrow...i hope your thoughts agree ...robynhood ...been an awfully long 3 years!

otto
04-30-2012, 08:22 PM
Connect with Mark Kelly, on CBC talks about if MR will take the stand.

Oh NO!!! Not a talking head! Don't pay attention ... that's the last thing Canadians need.

Flowercb
04-30-2012, 08:24 PM
Mark Kelly CBC is on now discussing MTR case!

Tahorn
04-30-2012, 08:26 PM
Bernardo and Homolka were not "established" when they murdered Karla's sister. They were a quick hookup shortly after meeting in a bar, and then a whirlwind obsession and murder by Christmas.

They met in 1987 ...
TH died December 1990 ...

otto
04-30-2012, 08:30 PM
Five years from now, when people think of Victoria Stafford they are going to think of the little girl that changed Canadian Laws and made it a safer nation for all children.
*
Rodney Stafford; Victoria's Dad..

......EXACTLY MY THOUGHTS EARIER TODAY ...MAY gOD GIVE TORI'S FAMILY STRENGTH TO ENDURE TOMORROW....i KNOW i AM CONCERNED ...AND i HAVE NEVER MET OUR ANGEL ...tORI...imo...LET US REMEBER WHO THIS IS ABOUT....tORI...may our angel start to see JUstice tomorrow...i hope your thoughts agree ...robynhood ...been an awfully long 3 years!

Does he elaborate on how Victoria's murder will result in Canada being safer for children?

Macright
04-30-2012, 08:30 PM
Do YOU know for a fact that she did know her kidnappers? The evidence actually tells us she didn't. If you think you know that she did know her kidnappers, it'd be nice if you could produce the evidence. Respectfully.


respectfully you will note that I inserted" IMO"...that is an opinion expressed not a fact I was quoting....JMO I think we are permitted to have opinions... just saying....

Bravo
04-30-2012, 08:31 PM
Bravo, <modsnip>. However, if she did, that may point to a motive for murder, that of revenge or drug debt. IMO

Thanks so much Kitty. I do get that some believe there is a drug connection and reason for motive. What i don't get is why some even feel a motive is relevant?

Flowercb
04-30-2012, 08:32 PM
A Defense attorney from L.A. was on CBC News with Mark Kelly. He said that in this particular case where a finger has been pointed at MTR from TLM, he needs to take the stand.

Hello_Kitty
04-30-2012, 08:33 PM
Oh NO!!! Not a talking head! Don't pay attention ... that's the last thing Canadians need.

Well he actually made sense :) Said that because TLM testified against MR, his defense team would find it really difficult to make their case without putting him on the stand to hear in his own words his side of the story. Hmmm.

otto
04-30-2012, 08:34 PM
Thanks so much Kitty. I do get that some believe there is a drug connection and reason for motive. What i don't get is why some even feel a motive is relevant?

I'm still waiting for a connect the dots explanation of how a drug connection directly relates to the sexual assault and murder of a young girl.

roseofsharon
04-30-2012, 08:34 PM
They met in 1997 ...
TH died December 1990 ...

Respectfully Tahorn, PB and KH met in October 1987.


Karla Homolka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Macright
04-30-2012, 08:37 PM
Bravo, <modsnip>. However, if she did, that may point to a motive for murder, that of revenge or drug debt. IMO


Hello Kitty... I wish you would not continue stating that I know as a fact anything about this case ...if you will take the trouble to reread my post I clearly stated and inserted "IMO"...that I believe is permitted on this site...if not then I am sure one of the mods will correct me... I choose not to argue this point any longer and I see no reason to get knickers in a knot over a case that I know none of the parties involved but to me is just general interest. thank you....respectfully...

Flowercb
04-30-2012, 08:38 PM
Respectfully Tahorn, PB and KH met in October 1987.


Karla Homolka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karla_Homolka)

So all three of you met in October 1987. The first time I read this that's what I understood, lol.

Tahorn
04-30-2012, 08:40 PM
Respectfully Tahorn, PB and KH met in October 1987.


Karla Homolka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karla_Homolka)

Meant 1987, would be amazing to met seven years after their first crime.

otto
04-30-2012, 08:40 PM
Well he actually made sense :) Said that because TLM testified against MR, his defense team would find it really difficult to make their case without putting him on the stand to hear in his own words his side of the story. Hmmm.

Of course ... because there was eye witness testimony regarding the crime, the suspect may benefit from taking the stand to explain himself ... or, as Greenspan said, he may do more damage than good. I think the defence team will have no difficulty defending their client with or without his testimony. It's apples and oranges, in my opinion.

Tahorn
04-30-2012, 08:42 PM
Respectfully Tahorn, PB and KH met in October 1987.


Karla Homolka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karla_Homolka)

Meant 1987, would be amazing to met seven years after their first crime.

Replying to comment

Bernardo and Homolka were not "established" when they murdered Karla's sister. They were a quick hookup shortly after meeting in a bar, and then a whirlwind obsession and murder by Christmas.

roseofsharon
04-30-2012, 08:42 PM
So all three of you met in October 1987. The first time I read this that's what I understood, lol.

OM goodness, LOL, you are right!! Sorry Tahorn.

Let me rephrase that ...

PB and KH met in October 1987. With respect, Tahorn.

Hello_Kitty
04-30-2012, 08:44 PM
Hello Kitty... I wish you would not continue stating that I know as a fact anything about this case ...if you will take the trouble to reread my post I clearly stated and inserted "IMO"...that I believe is permitted on this site...if not then I am sure one of the mods will correct me... I choose not to argue this point any longer and I see no reason to get knickers in a knot over a case that I know none of the parties involved but to me is just general interest. thank you....respectfully...



I understand what you are saying, however there is evidence already that TS did not know TLM. I don't know how you can keep saying that she did (even if it is an opinion and of course you are entitled to) when it has been testified in court that she did not. That's all.

Bravo
04-30-2012, 08:45 PM
This was the first time this murderous couple committed the crime they did. Neither had a location to hold a victim for 2 years, let alone 2 days. That doesn't mean that they are not a murderous couple.

Yes and can you imagine had they had the means if that was even something they would entertain. I wondered had they not been caught what their spree would have been. It was such a heinous crime. Who does that to a child? Even if i was naive enough to believe MJR was so horrified by this and had to help cover up it is beyond comprehension. Who turns their back on an innocent child to die in such a horrific manner? Somebody who is an accomplice for their own sick gratification. MOO

otto
04-30-2012, 08:48 PM
Meant 1987, would be amazing to met seven years after their first crime.

Replying to comment:

Bernardo and Homolka were not "established" when they murdered Karla's sister. They were a quick hookup shortly after meeting in a bar, and then a whirlwind obsession and murder by Christmas.

Thanks. Yes, I started the confusion ... sorry. I got the years mixed up and thought that it was only a few months before their first murder, but I was completely wrong.

Hello_Kitty
04-30-2012, 08:51 PM
Did TLM know who VS was?

TS's own mother testified that TS did not know TLM. TLM herself testified she did not know TS. TLM testified she picked a random child.

Bravo
04-30-2012, 08:52 PM
I'm still waiting for a connect the dots explanation of how a drug connection directly relates to the sexual assault and murder of a young girl.

Yeah me too.

tmhco
04-30-2012, 08:53 PM
I do agree that there is a history of team killers ... but you have to admit that their relationships were far more established, nothing about TLM and MR remotely resembles team killers.

I think MR recognized TLM for the weak character she was. I am only speculating of course, but he knew she would do what he wanted. It is obvious from their interactions he was not smitten with her. She thought she had found her prince charming and like KH she would do anything to keep him. And she did. JMO

nettie_82
04-30-2012, 08:56 PM
Let's face it people, does it really matter if they did know each other? The fact remains that an innocent child was murdered by one or both of them, and IMO while BOTH were present. SO how does one knowing the other even matter? It doesn't make it any less brutal, it doesn't make one innocent, it doesn't change the ending of this story at all. Even if they did know each other, a little girl was murdered and someone is/has to pay for that! Really what does it matter, because it really doesn't change anything. Let's focus on Victoria and the end result.

Macright
04-30-2012, 08:57 PM
I think it is fact that one later murdered her ...



Thank you Tahorn for explaining this and for understanding what I meant...IMO

tmhco
04-30-2012, 09:05 PM
They met in 1987 ...
TH died December 1990 ...

And interesting enough, after TH died, KH finally got her wish. PB married her six months later.

Bravo
04-30-2012, 09:06 PM
I cant even wrap my head around anyone thinking MJR was an innocent bystander in all of this. The ME's report was beyond heartbreaking and sickening. Dear gawd if he was so innocent could he not hear the sickening cries of a child beaten so mercifully? Could he not stop the kicks and stomps that caused the sound of breaking of ribs? What is this world coming to that we can justify a man being present to such an act and justify it? I can justify it because he was an active participant. MOO

Bravo
04-30-2012, 09:23 PM
I would luv to see MJR take the stand. Do i think he will probably not. Statistic wise and surprisingly it does seem that Defense Lawyers are able to convince even the most Narcissistic sociopaths they should not.

tmhco
04-30-2012, 09:38 PM
I cant even wrap my head around anyone thinking MJR was an innocent bystander in all of this. The ME's report was beyond heartbreaking and sickening. Dear gawd if he was so innocent could he not hear the sickening cries of a child beaten so mercifully? Could he not stop the kicks and stomps that caused the sound of breaking of ribs? What is this world coming to that we can justify a man being present to such an act and justify it? I can justify it because he was an active participant. MOO

I couldn't agree with you more. That said, this site is a blessing because we witness that not everyone interperets evidence the same. A few of those may be on the jury. I learned that the hard way last summer. I will hope for the best and prepare for the worst. JMO

Bravo
04-30-2012, 09:48 PM
I couldn't agree with you more. That said, this site is a blessing because we witness that not everyone interperets evidence the same. A few of those may be on the jury. I learned that the hard way last summer. I will hope for the best and prepare for the worst. JMO

Yes we did witness the worst injustice last summer. It does shatter your confidence in the system. However we dont have the Sunshine Law and i cant help but believe it came into play. That's a whole other can of worms tho.

Salem
04-30-2012, 09:49 PM
As tomorrow looms before us, I want to remind everyone that ALL OPINIONS ARE WELCOME.

I will have little patience for any back biting or put downs and you may find you are on TO without warning, because I will not take the time to pm you.

I expect everyone treat everyone else respectfully. You can disagree, but if you can't do it without bashing another poster, then it is best not to post.

If you have questions or concerns, you can pm me or any other mod and we will address them.

Thanks,

Salem

Bravo
04-30-2012, 09:53 PM
Tomorrow will be tough. I cant imagine how tough for Tori's Family. Like it or not Rafferty is entitled to a Defense and those are the same rights we all are afforded and rightfully so.

Salem
04-30-2012, 10:37 PM
Court awaits Rafferty's Call

I had no idea that if the defense called witnesses they could not do a closing argument. That is very different from here in the States, where it is expected that the defense will call witnesses and present a closing argument.

Wow. That makes it hard for the defense, in my opinion.

Salem

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/30/19698706.html

Salem
04-30-2012, 10:43 PM
Do you have a link or proof that this is a fact?

Mac is stating his/her opinion. In his/her opinion, he/she believes for a fact......

That's okay. We all get to take the evidence and infer from it what it tells us, individually.

Salem

Bravo
04-30-2012, 10:45 PM
I had no idea that if the defense called witnesses they could not do a closing argument. That is very different from here in the States, where it is expected that the defense will call witnesses and present a closing argument.

Wow. That makes it hard for the defense, in my opinion.

Salem

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/30/19698706.html

Truly. It does make for a tough Defense. Especially when the Crown has presented a strong case. It will be interesting to see what hand they play tomorrow.

tmhco
04-30-2012, 10:48 PM
I had no idea that if the defense called witnesses they could not do a closing argument. That is very different from here in the States, where it is expected that the defense will call witnesses and present a closing argument.

Wow. That makes it hard for the defense, in my opinion.

Salem

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/30/19698706.html

I believe they still get to make closing arguments, only the crown will get the last word. If the defence does not present evidence, they go last.

LadyL
04-30-2012, 10:49 PM
I cant even wrap my head around anyone thinking MJR was an innocent bystander in all of this. The ME's report was beyond heartbreaking and sickening. Dear gawd if he was so innocent could he not hear the sickening cries of a child beaten so mercifully? Could he not stop the kicks and stomps that caused the sound of breaking of ribs? What is this world coming to that we can justify a man being present to such an act and justify it? I can justify it because he was an active participant. MOO

[bbm]

there is no justification, period

I don't think he was 'horrified' by any of TLM's actions but even if he was, he nullified his supposed innocence by not putting the battery back in his phone and calling 911

his goose is cooked IMO

Salem
04-30-2012, 10:54 PM
I do agree that there is a history of team killers ... but you have to admit that their relationships were far more established, nothing about TLM and MR remotely resembles team killers.

I would disagree with this, actually. They met, they were intimate that same night, when she didn't call him, he went to find her and the rest is history. Yes he was standoffish with her when it suited HIM and he was very loving with her when it suited HIM and, in my opinion it was all done to make sure she would do what HE wanted.

If he wanted nothing at all to do with her why did he hold hands with her? Why did he show off his muscles and crack her back? Why was he playful with her? I certainly can believe his behavior was all a lie, I guess it is the reason for the lie that I disagree with - I don't think it was because he didn't want anything to do with her, I think it was because he wanted to maintain control over her.

The difference, as I see it, between MR and TLM is that TLM's anger is honest. She is a very angry individual. She puts that out there and you can see it. She talks big and bad and she is pretty rough, in all honesty, but, in my opinion it is anger that drives her.

What about MR? In my opinion, he is sneaky, secretive, dishonest, a user and abuser and you can't tell what drives him - apparently it is not good old fashioned anger - his problem is deeper and he is clever in his attempts to hide it and play off it at the same time. In my opinion - he is not the kind of person I would ever want to meet. However, TLM doesn't scare me at all. I am horrified by her, but I'm not afraid of her, if that makes any sense......

Salem

otto
04-30-2012, 11:27 PM
I had no idea that if the defense called witnesses they could not do a closing argument. That is very different from here in the States, where it is expected that the defense will call witnesses and present a closing argument.

Wow. That makes it hard for the defense, in my opinion.

Salem

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/30/19698706.html

"If a defence lawyer decides not to call his client, he's faced with another difficult choice. By calling any witness, the defence loses the right to give closing arguments after the Crown"

I think that there's an advantage to having the last word. If the defence presents witnesses, then the crown has the last word.

"Closing arguments:

Prosecution closing argument. The prosecution makes its closing argument, summarizing the evidence as the prosecution sees it, and explaining why the jury should render a guilty verdict.

Defense closing argument. The defense makes its closing argument, summarizing the evidence as the defense sees it, and explaining why the jury should render a not guilty verdict--or at least a guilty verdict on a lesser charge.

Section 651 determines who closes first. If defense presents evidence or the defendant testifies, then defense closes first."

http://www.julianhermida.com/polnotesoverview.htm

Bravo
04-30-2012, 11:31 PM
Salem points out exactly why they made the perfect storm-again the Dance.

Salem
04-30-2012, 11:39 PM
"If a defence lawyer decides not to call his client, he's faced with another difficult choice. By calling any witness, the defence loses the right to give closing arguments after the Crown"

I think that there's an advantage to having the last word. If the defence presents witnesses, then the crown has the last word.

"Closing arguments:

Prosecution closing argument. The prosecution makes its closing argument, summarizing the evidence as the prosecution sees it, and explaining why the jury should render a guilty verdict.

Defense closing argument. The defense makes its closing argument, summarizing the evidence as the defense sees it, and explaining why the jury should render a not guilty verdict--or at least a guilty verdict on a lesser charge.

Section 651 determines who closes first. If defense presents evidence or the defendant testifies, then defense closes first."

http://www.julianhermida.com/polnotesoverview.htm

Thank you Otto! So the defense doesn't give up the ability to close - just the order in which it happens. Okay - got it! Thanks!

Salem

Macright
04-30-2012, 11:40 PM
I had no idea that if the defense called witnesses they could not do a closing argument. That is very different from here in the States, where it is expected that the defense will call witnesses and present a closing argument.

Wow. That makes it hard for the defense, in my opinion.

Salem

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/30/19698706.html
Salem I'm not sure if this is correct but I took that statement to mean that the defence can make a closing statement but just not last meaning the have to go first...could be wrong and I stand corrected if so... JMO

Macright
04-30-2012, 11:41 PM
Thank you Otto! So the defense doesn't give up the ability to close - just the order in which it happens. Okay - got it! Thanks!

Salem


oops sorry Salem...I should have continued reading before I jumped in there...sorry...

Jezbel
04-30-2012, 11:53 PM
Maybe we can all get together after the trial tomorrow for a hot cup 'o tea?!

Do you prefer Earl Grey or Tetley?!

lol

I'll bring Marks & Spencer's tea.... That is good tea!
Lol

Bravo
04-30-2012, 11:55 PM
Bouncing off Salem's post. It makes perfect sense. Sense of a something driven we struggle to comprehend. TLM confessed as she is the weaker of the pair. Yes driven by anger and intense anger. The weaker of a pr always confesses. No surprise she is female despite her level of violence. MJR yes far more to fear. No surprise or shock to me to see him in the Courtroom. He was truly bored and struggled at times to stay awake.

Macright
05-01-2012, 12:05 AM
Bouncing off Salem's post. It makes perfect sense. Sense of a something driven we struggle to comprehend. TLM confessed as she is the weaker of the pair. Yes driven by anger and intense anger. The weaker of a pr always confesses. No surprise she is female despite her level of violence. MJR yes far more to fear. No surprise or shock to me to see him in the Courtroom. He was truly bored and struggled at times to stay awake.
JMO:
well I am a female and after reading about TLM and her lifestyle and what she has done and is capable of... I know who I would be afraid of and that would even be in broad daylight... I don't equate her with "weaker sex" because I have never believed that a woman is the weaker sex (well maybe when it comes to putting out the garbage or changing a tire)..MR I have not heard anything about him being a violent person only somewhat of a con artist and yes a liar so I could handle that no problem at all because I don't think he could hurt me physically. and that would be my fear....JMO

Salem
05-01-2012, 12:14 AM
oops sorry Salem...I should have continued reading before I jumped in there...sorry...

No worries - THMCO also answered, but I didn't see his/her post right away. All three answered the same though, so I feel pretty confident I had it wrong and you guys are right. Defense will get to close, the only thing that will change is the order of the closing, depending on whether there are witnesses or not.

Thanks everybody :)!

Salem

Bravo
05-01-2012, 12:24 AM
JMO:
well I am a female and after reading about TLM and her lifestyle and what she has done and is capable of... I know who I would be afraid of and that would even be in broad daylight... I don't equate her with "weaker sex" because I have never believed that a woman is the weaker sex (well maybe when it comes to putting out the garbage or changing a tire)..MR I have not heard anything about him being a violent person only somewhat of a con artist and yes a liar so I could handle that no problem at all because I don't think he could hurt me physically. and that would be my fear....JMO

I am Female as well. I think u are missing the point that TLM is driven from a rage. A sick rage. I was not equating her to the weaker sex cuz she was Female. I was referencing her as the weaker since she was the one to confess. Yes TLM might be the one one should fear crossing a street or in a dark alley. Oh yes Rafferty with his clean record would just be one you need to worry about in a relationship or if he was to babysit your children correct?

swedie
05-01-2012, 12:43 AM
Is that even possible? Can she be a witness for the Crown and then a witness for the Defence as well?

I know that an expert witness can be called upon by both sides, but I'm not positive about other witnesses. I cannot see why not. It may not work out in the defense's best interest and it is a rarity. The witness could be classified as a hostile witness but they my shed light on further testimony. HTH and MOO.

Bravo
05-01-2012, 12:43 AM
As open minded as i can be at the end of the day I am to believe there might be a justifiable Defense for MJR???? I think not. There were 2 people in that car. That day. That day that ended up with 3. Miles away from home with an 8 year old girl. Horrific injuries and nude from the waist down. Dead and cast away. And some choose to believe only one involved???

otto
05-01-2012, 12:45 AM
JMO:
well I am a female and after reading about TLM and her lifestyle and what she has done and is capable of... I know who I would be afraid of and that would even be in broad daylight... I don't equate her with "weaker sex" because I have never believed that a woman is the weaker sex (well maybe when it comes to putting out the garbage or changing a tire)..MR I have not heard anything about him being a violent person only somewhat of a con artist and yes a liar so I could handle that no problem at all because I don't think he could hurt me physically. and that would be my fear....JMO

TLM strikes me as the type that you would see coming, whereas MR seems like the kind that would sneak up behind you.

Bravo
05-01-2012, 12:46 AM
TLM strikes me as the type that you would see coming, whereas MR seems like the kind that would sneak up behind you.

Absolutely!!!!

Bravo
05-01-2012, 12:58 AM
JMO:
well I am a female and after reading about TLM and her lifestyle and what she has done and is capable of... I know who I would be afraid of and that would even be in broad daylight... I don't equate her with "weaker sex" because I have never believed that a woman is the weaker sex (well maybe when it comes to putting out the garbage or changing a tire)..MR I have not heard anything about him being a violent person only somewhat of a con artist and yes a liar so I could handle that no problem at all because I don't think he could hurt me physically. and that would be my fear....JMO

Question. Your probably not 8 years old and trapped in a car with him/them to test your theory. Tori was. I am sure you read the ME's report. Yep just a stand up guy.

Macright
05-01-2012, 01:13 AM
Question. Your probably not 8 years old and trapped in a car with him/them to test your theory. Tori was. I am sure you read the ME's report. Yep just a stand up guy.



Bravo I can understand how you feel and how you are angry at MR & TLM but I can honestly say to you that I have not let my personal feelings govern how I see this event unfolding at the moment. When I first heard about TS I was appalled and saddened as I would be for any child who came to harm.. I also understand how frustrated you must feel because some of us don't feel the same way or show our anger.. but I am remaining impartial to this until the bitter end ..I am sorry I see things differently from you but that is just the way it is no matter what anyone throws out there at me. I will remain true to my feelings...if I am proven wrong then so be it.. I don't consider this a game...(not trying to infer that you do) I will wait until I hear what Dirk has to say .. I probably will never be able to see this as you do but that's okay too.. so rather than throw questions out to each other lets just accept what others have to say. It is their opinion and we should respect that....I would never question how you feel only if you posted something as factual without backup..so I think we should just agree to disagree on certain things...JMO

Respectfully....

Maple1
05-01-2012, 02:04 AM
I'm of the opinion that the premeditation happened in the days before the abduction. When I hear that he discussed abducting children with women, I think he was testing the water. I think that he tested the water with TLM and discovered that she was prepared to go along with the idea. I would like to see his computer records ... I'm curious about what he liked to read and if it related to other child abduction cases.

"Once, Ms. Hodge said, they had a little chat about “abducting kids,” surely a fascinating subject for a child worker and a man who would soon be charged with precisely that crime.

It was he who raised the topic, she said. “He said how people take kids, abduct them, and they [the kids] grow up thinking they’re [the kidnappers] like their real parents,” she said."


http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/04/12/christie-blatchford-michael-raffertys-rather-quick-recovery-from-witnessing-horrifying-tori-stafford-murder/

I had no idea that if the defense called witnesses they could not do a closing argument. That is very different from here in the States, where it is expected that the defense will call witnesses and present a closing argument.

Wow. That makes it hard for the defense, in my opinion.

Salem

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/30/19698706.html

IMO, Defense WILL get a closing but only after the crown if they do not call witnesses or submit evidence.

snoofer
05-01-2012, 06:14 AM
"If a defence lawyer decides not to call his client, he's faced with another difficult choice. By calling any witness, the defence loses the right to give closing arguments after the Crown"

I think that there's an advantage to having the last word. If the defence presents witnesses, then the crown has the last word.
"Closing arguments:

Prosecution closing argument. The prosecution makes its closing argument, summarizing the evidence as the prosecution sees it, and explaining why the jury should render a guilty verdict.

Defense closing argument. The defense makes its closing argument, summarizing the evidence as the defense sees it, and explaining why the jury should render a not guilty verdict--or at least a guilty verdict on a lesser charge.

Section 651 determines who closes first. If defense presents evidence or the defendant testifies, then defense closes first."

http://www.julianhermida.com/polnotesoverview.htm

.....and if the last few weeks is indication of what will come....defense will make sure that their closing arguement is last....will not be halfway through the day...will be after the weekend...so possibly on a tuesday....when they get the last word...to be freshest in minds or jurors. MOO