PDA

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



Pages : [1] 2 3

SoSueMe
04-21-2012, 06:06 AM
Weekend Discussion Thread:

reposting a few of the warnings:

Salem's warning from last week:

Okay everybody - LISTEN UP! We are not bashing, accusing or blaming Tori's family here. It won't be allowed.

Children walk home from school every day without incident. Parents are not perfect, it's just not possible. Tori's parents DID NOT do this to her. TLM and an accomplice DID. That is where the blame goes.

We had a lot of family bashing in the early parts of this investigation after Tori went missing and a lot of baseless accusations - NONE OF WHICH PROVED TO BE TRUE. Victim and family bashing will not be allowed during this trial.

Thank you,
Salem

---------------------------------


As some of you may have noticed, the members following this case are dropping in numbers. It's disheartening to us because we need and welcome discussion of both sides of every issue on Websleuths.

Zero tolerance means ZERO tolerance. Please discuss this case with respect to your fellow members. Subtle and veiled harassment and/or talking in code about other members will not be tolerated.

A word of caution on the Alerts in this forum. If you alert a post, make sure it is a clear violation of our Terms of Service. A difference of opinion is not a violation of TOS.

Please note that everything discussed in court and printed/tweeted is now within the realm of discussion. WS has never and does not now have a policy of "innocent until proven guilty." That is for the court room. Here, we discuss, speculate, theorize and judge according to the opinions we develop from following the case.

Keeping that in mind, abuse of our alert system is a good way to find yourself in timeout or worse. Abuse of the alert systems includes, but is not limited to:

Alerting repeatedly on the same poster;
Demanding a specific outcome;
Alerting on the same post more than once.

Once you have alerted a post, move on and don't question the decisions of our Administrators, Moderators or Owners.

Following this trial is very important to our members and we're going to see that they have their day in court. The "zero tolerance" policy in this forum will continue and it will be enforced.

Thank you and please carry on.
Sue aka SoSueMe
Websleuths Co-Owner

------

Please keep discussion focused on what has been presented in testimony and remember to link up as the partial publication ban is still in place

Salem
04-23-2012, 12:51 PM
And it's Friday again!

Salem

~n/t~
04-27-2012, 06:28 AM
Good Morning,

http://pagansagainstchildabuse.spruz.com/user/371556/images/ToriStafford2.png

~n/t~
04-27-2012, 06:31 AM
Some have suggested that the defense will use EOA or whatever the acronym is for that gang, as a possible defense.

Can you please explain how? I must be missing something because I find it totally irrelevant to this trial. Even if the accused child killer is a gang member, how does that justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defenseless little girl?

flipflop
04-27-2012, 06:55 AM
Some have suggested that the defense will use EOA or whatever the acronym is for that gang, as a possible defense.

Can you please explain how? I must be missing something because I find it totally irrelevant to this trial. Even if the accused child killer is a gang member, how does that justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defenseless little girl?

JMO Nothing will justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defeseless little girl.

The term EOA was first brought up in TLM's journal. Defence has brought up EOA in his cross 2 times....I feel there is more to come. JMO

flipflop
04-27-2012, 06:58 AM
Otto, here is the link you requested in the last thread regarding the letter that TLM wrote to Mike. pic 64

http://www.am980.ca/Other/McClintic.pdf

~n/t~
04-27-2012, 07:12 AM
JMO Nothing will justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defeseless little girl.

The term EOA was first brought up in TLM's journal. Defence has brought up EOA in his cross 2 times....I feel there is more to come. JMO

I realize that but wondering what possible defense could there be involving a gang? Are they going to say MR wasn't there and it was a gang member? OR it was gang initiation week and TLM was the ring master and MR had to prove himself?

I honestly don't see where he could go with this theory, if that's what he plans on doing. That is why I asked what people thought his strategy could possibly be.

matou
04-27-2012, 07:27 AM
I realize that but wondering what possible defense could there be involving a gang? Are they going to say MR wasn't there and it was a gang member? OR it was gang initiation week and TLM was the ring master and MR had to prove himself?

I honestly don't see where he could go with this theory, if that's what he plans on doing. That is why I asked what people thought his strategy could possibly be.

Well, someone in the previous thread alluded to Shipway possibly being in one of the shots at the Gallery Cinemas. I'm not sure if either Shipway or TLM were actually EOA members at all. They were friends. They both wore the colors/bandanas in some profile photos online. If TLM was an associate of EOA, Derstine didn't ask her about that. Shipway was headed for trouble and she was involved in a major crime, along with two other people. This is spin. JMO

~n/t~
04-27-2012, 08:32 AM
Well, someone in the previous thread alluded to Shipway possibly being in one of the shots at the Gallery Cinemas. I'm not sure if either Shipway or TLM were actually EOA members at all. They were friends. They both wore the colors/bandanas in some profile photos online. If TLM was an associate of EOA, Derstine didn't ask her about that. Shipway was headed for trouble and she was involved in a major crime, along with two other people. This is spin. JMO

Thanks matou. I figured it was a spin. I don't see how it relates to this trial and if Derstine will be allowed to bring that in without evidence as it relates to his client, I'll be p'd off - yet again! TLM is not the one on trial. His client is.

snoofer
04-27-2012, 08:42 AM
<modsnip>. Since I am not from that province and it is the general area of that crime it could be likely related to someone on this site due to my own lack of diligence in keeping private info...private. I post this to remind people to be diligent. JMO It is a common sense deduction to me as I use the internet for rarely other programs but this one, rarely fb and weather type stuff. MOO

tmhco
04-27-2012, 09:23 AM
JMO Nothing will justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defeseless little girl.

The term EOA was first brought up in TLM's journal. Defence has brought up EOA in his cross 2 times....I feel there is more to come. JMO

I believe the defence has put themselves in a position where they must present evidence. If I were a juror, throwing a ridiculous defence theory out there is not enough to create REASONABLE doubt. JMO

snoofer
04-27-2012, 09:30 AM
JMO Nothing will justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defeseless little girl.

The term EOA was first brought up in TLM's journal. Defence has brought up EOA in his cross 2 times....I feel there is more to come. JMO

I believe you are right; there will be more to come.

I do think though that the only defense that could remotely be successful is if defense could definatively refute crown evidence which i believe is iron clad. JMO

I don't think that smoke and mirrors and theories will sway the jury in the face of fact. MOO But I think defense will try!!

Wondergirl
04-27-2012, 09:59 AM
Some have suggested that the defense will use EOA or whatever the acronym is for that gang, as a possible defense.

Can you please explain how? I must be missing something because I find it totally irrelevant to this trial. Even if the accused child killer is a gang member, how does that justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defenseless little girl?

Gang initiation.

lightlady
04-27-2012, 10:03 AM
Wondergirl, I was thinking something like that too. Could the "drug debt" be to the gang, not TLM? And they will imply TLM was doing the dirty work of the gang by kidnapping and killing VS? If so, I wonder how they could prove this? And somehow that TLM was just using MR because he was a dumb sap for a ride, and implicating him for rape? I could see that being the strategy they use. But of course to me, I would have to wonder WHY he didn't react differently after the fact if this was the case.

Wondergirl
04-27-2012, 10:09 AM
I believe the defence has put themselves in a position where they must present evidence. If I were a juror, throwing a ridiculous defence theory out there is not enough to create REASONABLE doubt. JMO


I agree.

If the Defense does not call evidence, the jury will be left scratching their heads, and convict him on everything, IMO. Derstine can't just call it a wash, as if to say the Crown has nothing. Clearly the Crown has alot.

If the Defense does call evidence, I really don't see how they can get around not putting Rafferty on the stand, unless someone is stepping up for him with an alibi. He is the only one who can attest to all these suggestions about what really happened, and testify against TLM's credibility on her version of events.

The Crown has shown with all the hard, corroborating evidence, that TLM's version of events is exactly what happened that day, IMO.

The Crown has also shown with all the witnesses it presented, that not only was Rafferty NOT horrified by what he did, he clearly went out of his way to hide evidence of what he did.

I don't know if he will get up there or not, the odds show he will not, but, for some reason I just think that he will.

JMO

Wondergirl
04-27-2012, 10:16 AM
Wondergirl, I was thinking something like that too. Could the "drug debt" be to the gang, not TLM? And they will imply TLM was doing the dirty work of the gang by kidnapping and killing VS? If so, I wonder how they could prove this? And somehow that TLM was just using MR because he was a dumb sap for a ride, and implicating him for rape? I could see that being the strategy they use. But of course to me, I would have to wonder WHY he didn't react differently after the fact if this was the case.

Good point, maybe the "drug debt" theory is all about EOA, I don't know. Those online social media profiles that people have been discussing here for 3 years, pretty much indicate participation in that gang. Derstine could have dug up quite a bit.

Maybe Derstine found someone who would say that there was an initiation of murder etc. for that gang, I don't have a clue about it.

Pretty hard to argue with the fact that Tori was not seen inside the car, on any video or by witnesses that day. That is a strong indication she was hidden.

There is only 1 reason why she would be hidden.

It wouldn't have anything to do with a drug debt.

JMO

Oldsoul2
04-27-2012, 10:16 AM
Thanks matou. I figured it was a spin. I don't see how it relates to this trial and if Derstine will be allowed to bring that in without evidence as it relates to his client, I'll be p'd off - yet again! TLM is not the one on trial. His client is.

I'll take a crack at that. I think what he is going to say is this crime was an abduction planned by TLM and her "gang" for profiting purposes and that they set MR up without his knowledge to take the fall. Hey, why not use the exact reverse that the Crown has presented. As far as the rape, they will try to present that it was someone else who did it and not MR....problem here is Derstine was thrown for a loop when the jury heard he was a pimp IMO

snoofer
04-27-2012, 10:17 AM
I agree.

If the Defense does not call evidence, the jury will be left scratching their heads, and convict him on everything, IMO. Derstine can't just call it a wash, as if to say the Crown has nothing. Clearly the Crown has alot.

If the Defense does call evidence, I really don't see how they can get around not putting Rafferty on the stand, unless someone is stepping up for him with an alibi. He is the only one who can attest to all these suggestions about what really happened, and testify against TLM's credibility on her version of events.

The Crown has shown with all the hard, corroborating evidence, that TLM's version of events is exactly what happened that day, IMO.

The Crown has also shown with all the witnesses it presented, that not only was Rafferty NOT horrified by what he did, he clearly went out of his way to hide evidence of what he did.

I don't know if he will get up there or not, the odds show he will not, but, for some reason I just think that he will.

JMO

It was extremely "cocky" behavior for MTR to have gone to Genest knowing what he knew. I consider it tantamount to "walking the gauntlet and dancing a jig" considering it is a place of law enforcement and he is a huge criminal. He may just be cocky enough to take the stand. JMO

Wondergirl
04-27-2012, 10:20 AM
I have to say, that I would be pretty disappointed if Derstine didn't put up some kind of a defense for Rafferty. Just doesn't seem right. There is so much incriminating evidence, that if he doesn't present a defense, it is basically an admission of guilt, IMO. I am sure there are legal arguments otherwise, but, to me that is what it would seem like.

JMO

Wondergirl
04-27-2012, 10:37 AM
O/T - I don't know when this picture was taken, presumably a day during the trial.

I thought it was a little odd that a lawyer would be wearing jeans to court, in a high profile case. It doesn't mean much, but, sometimes appearances matter, and I would speculate that this would be one of them.

JMO

http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/michael-rafferty-defence.jpg?w=620

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/26/crown-expected-to-wrap-up-its-case-in-tori-stafford-murder-trial/

Confusedashell
04-27-2012, 10:45 AM
O/T - I don't know when this picture was taken, presumably a day during the trial.

I thought it was a little odd that a lawyer would be wearing jeans to court, in a high profile case. It doesn't mean much, but, sometimes appearances matter, and I would speculate that this would be one of them.

JMO

http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/michael-rafferty-defence.jpg?w=620

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/26/crown-expected-to-wrap-up-its-case-in-tori-stafford-murder-trial/
Whos the chick in the skirt?? never seen her before. This could have been a legal argument day as well

~n/t~
04-27-2012, 10:47 AM
Is there a picture of the Judge anywhere? Not a sketch but an actual picture of him. I googled but can't find him. TIA

snoofer
04-27-2012, 10:55 AM
O/T - I don't know when this picture was taken, presumably a day during the trial.

I thought it was a little odd that a lawyer would be wearing jeans to court, in a high profile case. It doesn't mean much, but, sometimes appearances matter, and I would speculate that this would be one of them.

JMO

http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/michael-rafferty-defence.jpg?w=620

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/26/crown-expected-to-wrap-up-its-case-in-tori-stafford-murder-trial/

who are these people in the photo? moo

~n/t~
04-27-2012, 11:02 AM
who are these people in the photo? moo

MR's defense team

Laura Giordano, Dirk Derstine and Jennifer Penman

antiquegirl
04-27-2012, 11:07 AM
O/T - I don't know when this picture was taken, presumably a day during the trial.

I thought it was a little odd that a lawyer would be wearing jeans to court, in a high profile case. It doesn't mean much, but, sometimes appearances matter, and I would speculate that this would be one of them.

JMO

http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/michael-rafferty-defence.jpg?w=620

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/26/crown-expected-to-wrap-up-its-case-in-tori-stafford-murder-trial/

I'm pretty sure that this pic was not taken on a court day. Check 00:35 in the video and the insert for what the lawyers are required to wear in court. This is topped by the traditional black "gown" when court is in session.

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20120301/stafford-trial-jury-selection-london-120301/

Also, this:

http://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large/1-defence-attorney-dirk-derstine-at-the-tori-stafford-murder-trial-in-london-alex-tavshunsky.jpg

Required judicial wear for various countries is outlined here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_dress#Canada

JMO

nobodyzgirl
04-27-2012, 11:12 AM
O/T - I don't know when this picture was taken, presumably a day during the trial.

I thought it was a little odd that a lawyer would be wearing jeans to court, in a high profile case. It doesn't mean much, but, sometimes appearances matter, and I would speculate that this would be one of them.

JMO

http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/michael-rafferty-defence.jpg?w=620

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/26/crown-expected-to-wrap-up-its-case-in-tori-stafford-murder-trial/

They wear robes in court, so it doesn't really matter what they wear underneath. I doubt he cares much what the general public thinks of his attire as he is going to/from court, he is there to defend his client, not making a fashion statement - JMO

Macright
04-27-2012, 11:14 AM
loved where Dirk threw in the "mulberry bush quote"..so the witness admitted that he can't say it was the same car at 9:04 am ... I am assuming that was the time he meant because I read somewhere else that was the question ... interesting....

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Crown+rests+case+Tori+Stafford+murder+trial/6522572/story.html

robynhood
04-27-2012, 11:20 AM
..so from everything that has been published in the papers ...IMo ..it seems to say that the Defense is NOT presenting HOW their Defense will proceed till Monday! ...Hey fellow memebers please give me a thumbs up in the MOST IMPOARTANT part to me>>>>
**** it seemed to say ...IF Rafferty is to take the STAND in Court In LONDON ...the defense MUST do that BEFORE any witnesses are CAlled?????...am I correct ????..
....ASKING because I am THINKING of going to LONDON even tho it is far....( approx 2 hours ) ....and I am sure we will have to GET there real early ! ......I guess he would not be on THE STAND ...MONDAY ????....Please can anyone ..LET ME know if my own assumptuins are CORRECT>>>???...still very concerned and UPSET...it has been a very long time waiting since 2009 like all of us...thanks ..any more info would be GREATLY appreciated ...robynhood

JayFriend
04-27-2012, 11:26 AM
A couple of days ago it was reported that two men were snapping cellphone pictures in the courtroom. It was tweeted by reporters and reported on the K104 website (local Woodstock radio station), but yesterday someone looking for the story on K104 said it was gone. I never heard anything about a publication ban concerning the incident, but I didn't see it in the local paper either.

Here's more on it on Jim Bender's blog:

http://jimbenderoxford.blogspot.ca/2012/04/illegal-photos-taken-inside-courtroom.html

(Jim Bender is a local business man and activist who owns a head shop/adult bookstore and has run for public office at various times in the past.)

antiquegirl
04-27-2012, 11:41 AM
A couple of days ago it was reported that two men were snapping cellphone pictures in the courtroom. It was tweeted by reporters and reported on the K104 website (local Woodstock radio station), but yesterday someone looking for the story on K104 said it was gone. I never heard anything about a publication ban concerning the incident, but I didn't see it in the local paper either.

Here's more on it on Jim Bender's blog:

http://jimbenderoxford.blogspot.ca/2012/04/illegal-photos-taken-inside-courtroom.html

(Jim Bender is a local business man and activist who owns a head shop/adult bookstore and has run for public office at various times in the past.)

Vince's excuse is total BS. Spectators are searched upon entering the courthouse and then again before entering this specific courtroom. Pockets have to be emptied, purses are ransacked, and you're wanded - twice. The guards (3 of them at each station when I attended) tell everyone to turn off all cell phones. When I wasn't sure whether or not I had turned mine off, I was told to stand off to the side and make sure. Also, there are guards inside the courtroom keeping an eye on everything, which is how I think these guys were caught. Despicable conduct, IMHO.

JMO

Confusedashell
04-27-2012, 11:44 AM
..so from everything that has been published in the papers ...IMo ..it seems to say that the Defense is NOT presenting HOW their Defense will proceed till Monday! ...Hey fellow memebers please give me a thumbs up in the MOST IMPOARTANT part to me>>>>
**** it seemed to say ...IF Rafferty is to take the STAND in Court In LONDON ...the defense MUST do that BEFORE any witnesses are CAlled?????...am I correct ????..
....ASKING because I am THINKING of going to LONDON even tho it is far....( approx 2 hours ) ....and I am sure we will have to GET there real early ! ......I guess he would not be on THE STAND ...MONDAY ????....Please can anyone ..LET ME know if my own assumptuins are CORRECT>>>???...still very concerned and UPSET...it has been a very long time waiting since 2009 like all of us...thanks ..any more info would be GREATLY appreciated ...robynhood
I agree I would like to do the same thing so if anyone has any insider info or think he will be on stand on tuesday

crazyladi
04-27-2012, 11:50 AM
I feel that the defence is going to really do a number when it comes to what they have planned. Its going to be boring, illogical and go right back to TLM for everything.

I realize that she has already admitted to the crime and I understand all that but I am sorry I dont think for a second she influenced him to do anything, it has nothing to do with a gang, it has to do with two people that should have never crossed paths, just like PB and KH. They were a poisonous combination.

The defence has to come up with something and I guess this is the only angle that might persuade the jury but I really doubt it will work because of all the evidence and his behaviour.

He was chummy chummy with TLM in the detention centre. If that were me I would have gone straight to the police and told him this crazy a@@ Bit_ _ killed this little girl etc etc.. They would have arrested her on the spot no threat to him.

But I guess the defence will just turn around and say he was scared for his life that this gang would kill him if he ratted. blah blah blah. So in reality Derstine is smart going this route because people might buy the fear of the gang as to why he behaved the way he did.

However I am a realist and the gang had nothing to do with why that child died, or their behaviour afterwards and I really hope the jury sees this.

Jezbel
04-27-2012, 12:06 PM
A couple of days ago it was reported that two men were snapping cellphone pictures in the courtroom. It was tweeted by reporters and reported on the K104 website (local Woodstock radio station), but yesterday someone looking for the story on K104 said it was gone. I never heard anything about a publication ban concerning the incident, but I didn't see it in the local paper either.

Here's more on it on Jim Bender's blog:

http://jimbenderoxford.blogspot.ca/2012/04/illegal-photos-taken-inside-courtroom.html

(Jim Bender is a local business man and activist who owns a head shop/adult bookstore and has run for public office at various times in the past.)


Vince's excuse is total BS. Spectators are searched upon entering the courthouse and then again before entering this specific courtroom. Pockets have to be emptied, purses are ransacked, and you're wanded - twice. The guards (3 of them at each station when I attended) tell everyone to turn off all cell phones. When I wasn't sure whether or not I had turned mine off, I was told to stand off to the side and make sure. Also, there are guards inside the courtroom keeping an eye on everything, which is how I think these guys were caught. Despicable conduct, IMHO.

JMO

Yesterday when someone asked what happened I tried to find the story again and no luck, no longer available. I did find this blog also and though it was strange.

Like AG said you are search when entering the courthouse and again when entering the courtroom. There are no extra searches to enter the overflow room, but there are signs everywhere telling you to turn off all phones/PDA’s/notebooks/tablets etc. This Vince guy is a liar, I wonder who he really is?

I just find it very odd how no-one else reported on it and how the story is no longer there. I have to think there was some sort of publication ban and the details of what happened will probably be revealed when the jury begins deliberations

Yody04
04-27-2012, 01:04 PM
What am I missing or what do I don't get? What kind of defence could that be?

What does it matter if there was a gang, drug dept or whatever??? ??

Fact is he knew that Tori didn't come for a ride on her own will. He was surprised when TLM showed up with the little girl? Really? Well we know now for a fact that he was already driving around the school area early in the morning. I am wondering what he was doing there....(appetizer?)

He was driving around a kidnapped girl (at some point in time even our Mr.Biceps must have figured that out) and he still didn't do anything about it.

What does it matter if he killed her or not? He was there, helped cleaning, didn't go to the police afterwards and didn't help to find her body. He was trying hard to hide any involvement). Gang influence? Who cares! Even then he could walk to the police and could have told them what happened. And if he comes with a story that he was scared for his own life then you really have me laughing. How scared he was shows his sexual activity. That didn't seemed to be influenced at all.

Maybe I am watching to much 48 hours but in the US the people that are similar involved in a murder always end up with 1st degree murder.

For Tories family I hope that he gets guilty for the rape too. But this is the only point where I am not so sure that the evidence is enough.
BUT
Even if he doesn't get the guilty there it will be in peoples minds forever (and his future prison inmates). I am sure they will take care of it for hopefully very long 25 years. That is something he will never get of his forehead. That is stamped there for the rest of his life regardless what the outcome of this trial is.


I just had to write all this because my head is spinning

robynhood
04-27-2012, 01:30 PM
What am I missing or what do I don't get? What kind of defence could that be?

What does it matter if there was a gang, drug dept or whatever??? ??

Fact is he knew that Tori didn't come for a ride on her own will. He was surprised when TLM showed up with the little girl? Really? Well we know now for a fact that he was already driving around the school area early in the morning. I am wondering what he was doing there....(appetizer?)

He was driving around a kidnapped girl (at some point in time even our Mr.Biceps must have figured that out) and he still didn't do anything about it.

What does it matter if he killed her or not? He was there, helped cleaning, didn't go to the police afterwards and didn't help to find her body. He was trying hard to hide any involvement). Gang influence? Who cares! Even then he could walk to the police and could have told them what happened. And if he comes with a story that he was scared for his own life then you really have me laughing. How scared he was shows his sexual activity. That didn't seemed to be influenced at all.

Maybe I am watching to much 48 hours but in the US the people that are similar involved in a murder always end up with 1st degree murder.

For Tories family I hope that he gets guilty for the rape too. But this is the only point where I am not so sure that the evidence is enough.
BUT
Even if he doesn't get the guilty there it will be in peoples minds forever (and his future prison inmates). I am sure they will take care of it for hopefully very long 25 years. That is something he will never get of his forehead. That is stamped there for the rest of his life regardless what the outcome of this trial is.


I just had to write all this because my head is spinning

Just had to type I agree 100 percent...this whole case has taken over my live since 2009 ...when I watched cp24 while they searched for OUR ANGEL ..I cried my eyes out! NIGHTLY ...IMo I NEVER knew Tori but ...my heart is aching over this whole DARN TRIAL ...Big time ...IMO the evidence is overwhelming and I cannot understand at all How the defense will proceed...IMO it shall be horrible as I feel this there is no way they can dispute those videos ...and IMO ...Rafferty did not appear ....exasperated when he visited TLM just after the MURDER and I am Certain POOR TORI was raped ..IMO I feel most of what TLM said was the TRUTH...do not undertsand her change in who MURDERED Tori BUT as you said does it really matter ????...It Does not to me ! ....IMO ..it is clear he participated ...it was his car caught on video all over the place on that nightmare of a day>>> APRIL 8 , 2009 ...the end and that is IMO ...concretely ...robynhood!

snoofer
04-27-2012, 01:44 PM
MR's defense team

Laura Giordano, Dirk Derstine and Jennifer Penman

very metropolitan looking bunch. MOO Like for a magazine.

matou
04-27-2012, 01:50 PM
very metropolitan looking bunch. MOO Like for a magazine.

I like how his hands are free and the other two are pulling the luggage around. LOL! JMO

Yody04
04-27-2012, 01:52 PM
Just had to type I agree 100 percent...this whole case has taken over my live since 2009 ...when I watched cp24 while they searched for OUR ANGEL ..I cried my eyes out! NIGHTLY ...IMo I NEVER knew Tori but ...my heart is aching over this whole DARN TRIAL ...Big time ...IMO the evidence is overwhelming and I cannot understand at all How the defense will proceed...IMO it shall be horrible as I feel this there is no way they can dispute those videos ...and IMO ...Rafferty did not appear ....exasperated when he visited TLM just after the MURDER and I am Certain POOR TORI was raped ..IMO I feel most of what TLM said was the TRUTH...do not undertsand her change in who MURDERED Tori BUT as you said does it really matter ????...It Does not to me ! ....IMO ..it is clear he participated ...it was his car caught on video all over the place on that nightmare of a day>>> APRIL 8 , 2009 ...the end and that is IMO ...concretely ...robynhood!

I have no doubt in it either that he raped the poor little one. Unfortunately in court it is not about what we believe. It is about what can be proofed. And that's my worry.

JayFriend
04-27-2012, 01:55 PM
very metropolitan looking bunch. MOO Like for a magazine.

Or a lawyer TV series. :)

otto
04-27-2012, 02:26 PM
O/T - I don't know when this picture was taken, presumably a day during the trial.

I thought it was a little odd that a lawyer would be wearing jeans to court, in a high profile case. It doesn't mean much, but, sometimes appearances matter, and I would speculate that this would be one of them.

JMO

http://nationalpostnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/michael-rafferty-defence.jpg?w=620

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/04/26/crown-expected-to-wrap-up-its-case-in-tori-stafford-murder-trial/

Prosecutors change into their "penguin" suits and gowns at the courthouse, then back into their street clothes when they leave. The penguin suit is a jacket with tails, specific type of pants ...

"In Canada, court dress is identical to that previously (pre-2008) in use in England, except that wigs are not worn. Bar jackets are worn under the gown, though QCs and Judges have more elaborate cuffs than other lawyers."

ref: wikipedia: court dress

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/William_Ballantine_Vanity_Fair_5_March_1870.jpg

BorgQueen
04-27-2012, 02:39 PM
Vince's excuse is total BS. Spectators are searched upon entering the courthouse and then again before entering this specific courtroom. Pockets have to be emptied, purses are ransacked, and you're wanded - twice. The guards (3 of them at each station when I attended) tell everyone to turn off all cell phones. When I wasn't sure whether or not I had turned mine off, I was told to stand off to the side and make sure. Also, there are guards inside the courtroom keeping an eye on everything, which is how I think these guys were caught. Despicable conduct, IMHO.

JMO

I agree that the excuse is BS. I don't believe for one second that he was ignorant and just didn't know. He knew. And IMO, he knew it could possibly cause a mistrial. JMO, but I think that could have possibly been the reason he did it. So who is he, why was he there, and what exactly was he doing?

MOO

Macright
04-27-2012, 02:42 PM
I feel that the defence is going to really do a number when it comes to what they have planned. Its going to be boring, illogical and go right back to TLM for everything.

I realize that she has already admitted to the crime and I understand all that but I am sorry I dont think for a second she influenced him to do anything, it has nothing to do with a gang, it has to do with two people that should have never crossed paths, just like PB and KH. They were a poisonous combination.

The defence has to come up with something and I guess this is the only angle that might persuade the jury but I really doubt it will work because of all the evidence and his behaviour.

He was chummy chummy with TLM in the detention centre. If that were me I would have gone straight to the police and told him this crazy a@@ Bit_ _ killed this little girl etc etc.. They would have arrested her on the spot no threat to him.

But I guess the defence will just turn around and say he was scared for his life that this gang would kill him if he ratted. blah blah blah. So in reality Derstine is smart going this route because people might buy the fear of the gang as to why he behaved the way he did.

However I am a realist and the gang had nothing to do with why that child died, or their behaviour afterwards and I really hope the jury sees this.


I agree that she didn't influenced him in anyway...but I do believe she lied to him about the reason she was picking up TS that day...just not sure yet when he realized that there was more to it than a babysitting job..I do believe that they drove to that spot to try and figure things out..maybe she told MR that she would talk to TS and he left the car ..things didn't go right with her "little talk and the rage in her surfaced and she dragged TS out of the car and began her assault on her..first being throwing her on the ground and stomping on her and when she had her subdued ( as I am sure that in itself knocked the poor kid for a loop..broken ribs etc.) then she took the hammer and finished her off...by the time MR got to the scene the damage was done and there was no way out for him...terrible as it sounds it just could have happened that way...he was into it way over his head at that time... may sound far fetched to some but so are some of the other posts of how it could have happened...just saying....my take...IMO I am also interested in hearing about this gang that Dirk has mentioned a few times...three years ago it was bikers everyone was talking about who were involved...now we are moving on to a gang....S/B rather interesting if that materializes....JMO and I know he could have gone straight to LE but he didn't and it's not too difficult to understand why he didn't...

swedie
04-27-2012, 02:47 PM
Sorry for such a long post, Just thought it may be helpful to bring this list over to the weekend thread for easy reference and being the case is now in the defense's hands next court date. Derstine's Q&A during cross examination of the Crown's witnesses. HTH

Dirk Derstine cross-examines Griffin-Murrell, Tori's teacher whether Tori was wearing earrings when she left.

Derstine only asks one question in cross of Det. R. Brocanier. Do you have any special expertise in examining videos? Det. R. Brocanier says no.

Perry witness waiting for her children at the top of the hill. Derstine asks if there was any interaction between woman in white coat and Tori, she says no. Perry said she was concerned about the white coat woman, "She was different. She was someone I never saw at the school".

Tara Tori's mother. Dirk Derstine asks why moved her kids farther away from school. Tara said her son was supposed to walk Tori home from school. Tara said it was Tori's first time walking back from school to her new house. Tara said she went looking for Tori around 4:30 p.m. after Goris returned from cashing the GST rebate cheque. Tara said she talked to Tori about not talking to strangers. Cross-examination of Tori's mom is over.

Cross examination of TLM. Defence lawyer playing Necro song. Lyrics- "When it comes to inflicting pain I am creative." More Necro lyrics - " I got a garbage bag with your name written on it." Another Necro song "Dead body disposal" played for jury. McClintic said she wasn't listening to song when she walked up to school day Tori Stafford abducted. McClintic said she listened to Necro when she was angry. Next song to be played "No remorse." Lawyer Dirk Derstine questioning McClintic on instructions she was given by Rafferty on what to say after Tori's death. Derstine suggests McClintic had ample opportunity to walk away with Tori after the abduction. "In my mind I was not going to let anything bad happen. I thought I would protect her." McClintic questioned about buying hammer and garbage bags at Home Depot. McClintic continues to maintain she did not know Tori before her abduction. Derstine tells McClintic it was her idea alone to buy hammer and garbage bags. "You are mistaken," she replied. Derstine suggests that McClintic offered Tori to Rafferty and he rejected the offer. McClintic says she strongly disagrees. Derstine suggests Rafferty wasn't present for the killing and was horrified when he saw what happened. McClintic says that is wrong. McClintic questioned about script written by her on what she would say if questioned by police. She maintains the script was from Rafferty, not her ideas. McClintic referred to police interview where she said the script was her ideas. Said that was wrong. Explaining conflicting versions, a number of times McClintic has said she can't explain how her mind works. McClintic being questioned about entries in her journal in April 2009. In journal she writes she is ready to snap. Lots of profanity. "I am getting f----- blood thirsty again." McClintic says she was struggling with emotional issues at time. Derstine asks McClintic about altercation she had with another inmate on Jan. 31 of this year. Agreed she kicked and stomped other inmate who was on the ground in a fetal position. Remembers telling Godmother that her only regret was the killing involved a young kid. Otherwise could do it again. Also told godmother during visit that she had microwaved one of her pet dogs as a kid. Concocted story at time to cover it. "I was a child. I didn't know what I was doing," McClintic said. McClintic excused as a witness, ending her testimony in the trial.

B. Armstrong. Derstine asks how much they chatted when she sold him the Percocets. She said nothing unusual that day.

Det. Constable D. Vittie. Derstine suggest that McClintic does not look upset or hesitant as she walks thru store, Vittie agrees.

Det. Scoyne. Derstine suggests that jerky video may make people seem to be walking faster than they are. Questioned about diagram of scene where remains found. Scoyne questioned about size of rock pile, location of fences by defense lawyer Dirk Derstine. Topography of area around rock pile discussed, sight lines. Scoyne questioned about the visibility of silos from the rock pile area. Scoyne shown diagram that Terri-Lynne McClintic made to help police find remains of Tori Stafford. Asked again about what silos could be seen from the crime scene.

Dr. Michael Pollanen. Pollanen agrees very substantial force was applied to the head. Blunt force can cause bleeding, he said. Pollanen agrees bleeding can occur after death in some cases. "I can't determine the volume of blood that was lost in this case." Injuries to head would have caused death by selves, nothing could have saved her from the head injuries, Pollanen agrees. Pollanen repeats that the medical evidence is silent on whether there was a sexual assault. Pollanen agrees medical evidence also silent on who inflicted injuries on Tori Stafford.

Stirling is an OPP sergeant and ERT coordinator. Derstine asking about topographical map of crime scene. Derstine and Stirling disagreeing how steep the walk would be from the stone pile east to a tree line. Stirling says it would not be a steep grade.

Butler is an identification constable; talking about the process of admitting prisoners into Woodstock police station. Butler participated in 'drive-along tours' with Terri-Lynne McClintic. Derstine lists 15 public schools; Butler done on the stand.


Scoyne; Dirk Derstine starts questioning letters read in court yesterday found in McClintic's home. Derstine asking about gang slang found in letters; now showing an image from McClintic's facebook page. Derstine asking Scoyne about the music McClintic says she likes on her facebook page; Derstine asks about untitled songs on iPod. Derstine wants to know the top 10 most frequently played song on the iPod; #1 "Baby Bash" by Sean Kingston... #2 is a Necro song. Court sees lyric sheet and is hearing the song "Your ****in' Head Split" by Necro. Derstine now playing the song "Most Sadistic" by Necro. Derstine confirms these songs are highly played on McClintic's iPod and ends cross-examination.

Scoyne back on stand. Derstine says there is no dispute that this Civic belonged to Rafferty. Derstine begins by asking Scoyne how longer the hammer was in the trunk of Rafferty's car. Scoyne says no way of telling. Now Derstine calls up surveillance photo of Raffety's car previously submitted of evidence; he observers that the white dash is visible.

Crown is reading point of admission into record having to do with an exchange between officers and Rafferty night of arrest. Rafferty asked officers for drugs and said he takes Oxy and Percocet; Rafferty rolls eyes during admission.

Barbara Doupe is an expert in examining hair and textile evidence. Doupe is a Western grad and lectured at Brescia. Derstine asks McLean if it is likely that DNA would be found on objects that people routinely handle. McLean agrees with Derstine that DNA can be indirectly transferred from one object to another McLean agrees with Derstine that only a small amount of blood is needed to generate DNA. Court is shown blood stain on door moulding near rear passenger seat in Rafferty's car. Derstine said there was sperm fraction in the blood spot but it does not mean it came from semen, McLean agrees. McLean tells Derstine there are technical problems in determining whether male DNA found in some samples is actually from semen. Court is shown photo of Goodlife Fitness bag. Derstine asks about size of the blood stain McLean said it is "a fraction of millimetre". There were several sources of DNA in the blood stain McLean said blood was one source but there could have been other sources. Derstine presents McLean with different scenarios for mixed DNA sample. Derstine suggests different scenario for DNA deposits on gym bag, all three at once, one at a time two plus one etc. McLean agrees there are more than a dozen ways that DNA from three people could have ended up in one deposit. Derstine asks McLean about washing the "Shaq" shoes - how much washing would eliminate DNA? Derstine asks if soap and water washing would eliminate DNA from shoes? McLean agrees it could. Derstine asked about blond hairs on pea coat. McLean repeats that Stafford was excluded from one of the hairs from coat that was tested. Derstine shifts focus to attempts to get DNA from Tori's body, McLean agrees that decomposition makes it difficult. Derstine wraps up cross examination of McLean.


Griswold MR’s neighbour said he saw a ripped car seat in the garbage pile in front of Rafferty's house There was a love seat on top. Derstine asks Griswold if he saw Rafferty remove the car seat late in March to install speakers. Derstine asks Griswold if he saw Rafferty put the car seat in the shed, Griswold says no.

A woman who met Rafferty online in 2003 "We became good friends" began to lose contact when he moved to Woodstock in 2008. The woman said Rafferty spoke about abducting kids - the kids grow up thinking the abductors are their real parents. Derstine asks the woman if she took oxycodone. She says no but is familiar with the drug.

A.Reid is 25 encountered Rafferty thru Plenty of Fish dating site. Derstine starts cross asks if Rafferty talked to her about Tori - she says no.

Latimer is 50 year old real estate agent who lives on farm outside Woodstock. Met Rafferty in Jan 2009 on Plenty of Fish. Derstine starts cross - asks about Rafferty's MSN sign in, "I thought I had it all but all is lost". Derstine asks Latimer about her later own MSN posting on Latimer's sign in.

Chambers met Rafferty on Plenty of Fish .She said he seemed friendly in conversation. He asks Chambers about reaction in Woodstock to Tori's disappearance. Chamber said it was major.

Cruikshank is the owner of Outdoor Services, a landscaping company based on Hwy 6 just north of Guelph. Cruikshank employed Rafferty from 2003 to 2005 as landscaper and snow shoveling. Rafferty worked with a team, licence suspended at time. Derstine ask about trucks that Cruickshank's firm used. Derstine asks about number of employees. Cruikshank says 12.

A. Woods - Derstine asks about farmland north of Woodstock for some reason. Woods said there is a lot of farmland north of Woodstock .

Waechter was assigned on to Stafford case on April 15. Investigated phone calls made by Rafferty on May 11. Waechter said Rafferty phone calls included two calls to Corey's auto wreckers on May 11. He asks if there was any indication why Rafferty was at Coreys, Waechter says no.

J. Meloche is 29. She met Rafferty on April 12 2009 through Plenty of Fish. Derstine asks Meloche if she ever saw a back seat in Rafferty's car she says no. Derstine asks about tools in the trunk of Raffety' s car Meloche said she saw them in late April .

C. Harnum. Derstine's cross of Harnum - He asked how often she checked Rafferty's Facebook page, she says often.

Waldron computer forensic back on stand Derstine asks about tagging on Facebook. Asked by Derstine Waldron said Terri-Lynne McClintic was not one of Rafferty's Facebook friends. Derstine asks if Rafferty was looking at Alexis Lane profile when he wrote "Everything good coming my way". Waldron can't confirm if he was looking at the profile when he was posting. Derstine asks if Facebook can be asked from anywhere that has Internet connection Waldron says yes. Derstine asks about signing on to setting from someone else's account Waldron says it depends on privacy settings. Derstine asks about accuracy of profiles on Plenty of Fish Waldron says its "buyer beware". Court is seeing a portion of Terri-Lynne McClintics Facebook page Derstine is asking about bottom portions being cropped off screen. Derstine is asking Waldron why she picked particular items on McClintic's website. Derstine asks if people would post quizzes on their Facebook page if they like the result - Waldron agrees. Derstine asks about favorite music posted on McClintic Facebook profile. Derstine points out songs by Necro on McClintic site.

Broad is a senior manager in information and digital forensics for Bell Canada Enterprises. Derstine is questioning a data call on Rafferty's phone record that appears to go on for 17 hours. Derstine is question a data call at 4:18 p.m. on April 8 that appears to go on for 44 minutes another just after 5 p.m. goes for two hours. Derstine points out that the two long data calls were almost consecutive Broad said that voice calls could still have been received. Derstine asks if a phone has be turned on to receive a data call. Broad agrees. Derstine ask about the tracking of data calls from point where call placed. Suggests not good for tracking long calls after call placed.


Mustafa Bakhtyar a radio frequency engineer. Derstine begins cross. He asks if we should be careful about pinning down the location where a cellphone call was made. Bahktyar agrees. Derstine suggests it is difficult to pin down an exact location because of all the variables Bahktyar agrees. Bahktyar said it is difficult to determine why a cell signal bounced off particular tower and not another. Derstine points out that the cellphone calls are logged from the point when the call is started and not good for tracing movements after. Derstine asks if it is possible there were malfunctions in the cell network on April 8, 2009 Bahktyar said the system was "working fine".

Youngs is a RIM employee from Waterloo She is a public safety liaison specialist. Derstine asks how BBMs different from texts.

Wilton is an RIM employees with an expertise in service maintenance for the network. Derstine suggests that MSN messages can get held up for various reasons Wilton agrees. He questions why the delivery times for BBMs tends to vary. Wilton said the messages should arrive within 4-5 seconds. Derstine suggests there are variables such as speed of carrier network. Wilton comments on list of Rafferty's MSN messages which indicates that some messages around 6:35 pm got held up and almost same time. Derstine suggests that MSN messages can get held up for various reasons Wilton agrees. Derstine suggest there was disruption in Rafferty's Blackberry around 16:35 on April 8th with various possible explanations.

C. Spitzig is 26, mother of 5. Defence asks about back seat of car. Spitzig said late in March 2009 there was no back seat in Rafferty's car.


E. Haye. She says she was sure she had sex with Rafferty on April 9. Derstine refers her to police statement where she said it might have been the 9th or 10th. Haid looking at calendar again says she had sex with Rafferty on the ninth, not 10th. Statement to police was either April 9 or 10th was at Rafferty's place in early afternoon.

Det. Con Gordon Johnson-Derstine ask about 4:18 pm two-hour data call on April 8 j15 seconds before money is withdrawn from ABM in Guelph. Derstine questions a call made on April 9 just after CASS surveillance video released to public. Derstine points out gaps - periods on May 7th when Rafferty didn't use phone doesn't explain significance.

Kerri-Lee Cushing-Mitchener - a manager at Genest detention centre. Derstine begins cross asking about protocol on visitors. Derstine clarifies that McClintic would have to ask for special permission to see Rafferty. Derstine asks about the term EOA (east of Adelaide) as a slur.

Special Constable Gerald Lanna a forensic video analyst. Derstine questions "unique" characteristics of Rafferty's Civic Lanna said combination of hood scoop spoiler rims together could be unique. Derstine questions Lanna's conclusion that car seen in three CASS videos likely the same. Lanna argues that the overlay technique he used on the three CASS videos shows they were the same type of car. Derstine suggest he can't be certain that it is the same car.

The Crown rests its case.

Macright
04-27-2012, 02:51 PM
[QUOTE=BorgQueen;7843479]I agree that the excuse is BS. I don't believe for one second that he was ignorant and just didn't know. He knew. And IMO, he knew it could possibly cause a mistrial. JMO, but I think that could have possibly been the reason he did it. So who is he, why was he there, and what exactly was he doing?

MOO[/QUO

I agree..all rather strange...I don't think he was planning to pawn the picture off to the news media...they already have pictures of MR...and I don't think he was trying for a mistrial...think there was another unsavoury reason behind .. JMO as I stated a while back...there are dark clouds hanging over this and others..JMO

BorgQueen
04-27-2012, 02:58 PM
I agree that the excuse is BS. I don't believe for one second that he was ignorant and just didn't know. He knew. And IMO, he knew it could possibly cause a mistrial. JMO, but I think that could have possibly been the reason he did it. So who is he, why was he there, and what exactly was he doing?

MOO

I agree..all rather strange...I don't think he was planning to pawn the picture off to the news media...they already have pictures of MR...and I don't think he was trying for a mistrial...think there was another unsavoury reason behind .. JMO as I stated a while back...there are dark clouds hanging over this and others..JMO

I definitely do not think he was trying to pawn the picture off to the news media, or even another inmate looking for somebody to beat up. IMO, it was either a mistrial these people were going for... or something else. What? Not sure. There definitely was a purpose, and it isn't a good one what ever it is.

Kittymama
04-27-2012, 03:21 PM
I agree..all rather strange...I don't think he was planning to pawn the picture off to the news media...they already have pictures of MR...and I don't think he was trying for a mistrial...think there was another unsavoury reason behind .. JMO as I stated a while back...there are dark clouds hanging over this and others..JMO

BBM

What are you talking about, please? I don't understand.

otto
04-27-2012, 03:32 PM
I definitely do not think he was trying to pawn the picture off to the news media, or even another inmate looking for somebody to beat up. IMO, it was either a mistrial these people were going for... or something else. What? Not sure. There definitely was a purpose, and it isn't a good one what ever it is.

I don't think that someone taking a picture in the courtroom would result in a mistrial. It may result in contempt of court charges - since the person that took the photo was in violation of court rules - but it's certainly not grounds to retry the case.

Wondergirl
04-27-2012, 03:53 PM
I like how his hands are free and the other two are pulling the luggage around. LOL! JMO

LMAO! Here I was looking at his jeans. Never even noticed that.

Lawyers dressed down in jeans come across as hippies to me, the ladies look lovely and professional though!

JMO

Bravo
04-27-2012, 03:57 PM
The jeans are not Courtroom attire. The pants worn are a grey pinstripe and are very tailored. Look great with the bar jackets. Same pant on each of the crown.

Yody04
04-27-2012, 04:05 PM
I agree that she didn't influenced him in anyway...but I do believe she lied to him about the reason she was picking up TS that day...just not sure yet when he realized that there was more to it than a babysitting job..I do believe that they drove to that spot to try and figure things out..maybe she told MR that she would talk to TS and he left the car ..things didn't go right with her "little talk and the rage in her surfaced and she dragged TS out of the car and began her assault on her..first being throwing her on the ground and stomping on her and when she had her subdued ( as I am sure that in itself knocked the poor kid for a loop..broken ribs etc.) then she took the hammer and finished her off...by the time MR got to the scene the damage was done and there was no way out for him...terrible as it sounds it just could have happened that way...he was into it way over his head at that time... may sound far fetched to some but so are some of the other posts of how it could have happened...just saying....my take...IMO I am also interested in hearing about this gang that Dirk has mentioned a few times...three years ago it was bikers everyone was talking about who were involved...now we are moving on to a gang....S/B rather interesting if that materializes....JMO and I know he could have gone straight to LE but he didn't and it's not too difficult to understand why he didn't...

babysitting job? why do I have to hide a child in my car when I am babysitting it?
And I don't believe that he didn't know what TLM is bying at HD. Now, what do you need a hammer and bags for while you're driving around with a kidnapped child?
And why was he driving around the school in the morning? I am sure that he wasn't looking for Tori. She was just the one standing alone in the afternoon. It could have been any other child.
No, sorry I don't believe his innocent bs. But this is only my opinion. We will see what we get to hear next week.

Flowercb
04-27-2012, 04:38 PM
Good point, maybe the "drug debt" theory is all about EOA, I don't know. Those online social media profiles that people have been discussing here for 3 years, pretty much indicate participation in that gang. Derstine could have dug up quite a bit.

Maybe Derstine found someone who would say that there was an initiation of murder etc. for that gang, I don't have a clue about it.

Pretty hard to argue with the fact that Tori was not seen inside the car, on any video or by witnesses that day. That is a strong indication she was hidden.

There is only 1 reason why she would be hidden.

It wouldn't have anything to do with a drug debt.

JMO

Even if TLM took Tori for a drug debt, it doesn't mean that MTR was in on the drug debt part. He may have wanted to fulfill his <modsnip> desires and TLM may have wanted revenge. She afterall chose the child for MTR. Maybe this child was chosen because she felt both parties would benefit. MOO

Jezbel
04-27-2012, 04:40 PM
I definitely do not think he was trying to pawn the picture off to the news media, or even another inmate looking for somebody to beat up. IMO, it was either a mistrial these people were going for... or something else. What? Not sure. There definitely was a purpose, and it isn't a good one what ever it is.

I agree, besides I highly doubt any media here would try and buy the picture anyway. They know the rules and they stick to them.

Bravo
04-27-2012, 04:53 PM
I thought perhaps the photo was taken for sale on the "net". I'm sure there is a forum for such out there. It would be a rare photo. Stupid tho. Did he really think he could snap a pic and walk away with it? Apparently. Perhaps not operating with all oars in the water LOL

Kamille
04-27-2012, 05:31 PM
I agree, besides I highly doubt any media here would try and buy the picture anyway. They know the rules and they stick to them.

True...but he might have been considering selling it to a US publicaton. They do not have to adhere to the Canadian ban I believe. And some of the more tabloid type ones would probably actually pay for the picture and publish it.

MOO

antiquegirl
04-27-2012, 06:21 PM
True...but he might have been considering selling it to a US publicaton. They do not have to adhere to the Canadian ban I believe. And some of the more tabloid type ones would probably actually pay for the picture and publish it.

MOO

But what is there to sell? A picture of a member of LE on the stand? One of MTR sitting in his glass box? There have been recent pics of MTR in a vehicle on his way to or from court, so there's nothing to reveal there. Spectators sit at the very back of the courtroom, the view is not great and there really isn't much to take pictures of. As for the evidence presented, that was all made available to the media at the end of the day. I don't see how anyone would pay money for anything they could have snapped. And I'm with Otto in that there would be no chance of a mistrial for this infraction. The only thing that makes sense to me is sheer stupidity.

JMO

daisy.faithfull
04-27-2012, 06:21 PM
I'm bringing this over from the other thread because it was a response to one of my posts.

Antiquegirl wrote:

Everyone keeps saying that TLM isn't on trial here, MTR is. But TLM's credibility is very much on trial here. Her testimony is a crucial piece of evidence against the accused and the basis for almost everything. Without her confession, MTR may never have been caught. If, as the Crown alleges, these two people worked as a team, then you can't try MTR without bringing TLM into it. She is the only witness still alive who can verify or deny what truly happened on April 8, 2009. It is the job of the Crown and the defence to convince the jury whether or not to believe TLM's testimony, which parts of it, and why. And that means that she needs to be discussed here. MTR and TLM are inexorably linked for the duration of this trial and that just can't be avoided or denied.

I didn't say that we shouldn't discuss it here. She did testify, and a portion of her testimony was about her behavior before, during and after Tori's abduction, rape and murder. Her entire testimony was entered into evidence.

But IMO, TLM's testimony is not this basis of the Cown's case, the evidence corroborating her testimony is the basis of the Crown's case.


I absolutely do not see how TLMs connection to the behavior of someone in EOA that she might know through a friend of hers has anything to do with Tori's abduction. Derstine already questioned TLM about EOA. I don't think Derstine's questions about EOA indicate anything about EOA will be brought up when the defence presents their case.

I think the minimal evidence he used to show any type of connection with that gang was used for the purposes of discrediting TLM as a witness. If he had more about that particular connection I think he would have asked her about it at that time and presented the evidence then as he did with the letter with EOA on it. If the questions were related to people instead of items, he could have asked if she knows this gang member, if she was involved in inforcing drug debts with this gang. Then i could see him bringing in others that could support related alternate scenarios. Derstine could have asked Tara if she had any connections to a gang that is connected to TLM. Or he could have asked if she owed money to EOA.

When it comes to TLM's involvement in this crime, yes her credibility is important, but it is not the most important part of the Crown's case. Derstine has already done his cross-examination of her up to poke as many holes in it as he can, including bringing up very disturbing behavior of TLM unrelated to Tori's abduction. I completely understand that because there is so much evidence against MTR that was not provided by TLM.

Even if TLM was not an extremely violent and disturbed criminal I would still need other corroborating evidence. Especially considering the studies that have shown the flaws in direct eye witness testimony. I believe a strong case needs strong circumstantial evidence.

So IMO what is most important in this trial is the evidence that corroberates TLM's story, what people testify to regarding his behavior, his statements to others about Tori's abduction and his relationship with TLM, his behavior when he was with TLM before and after the abduction, what videos show him doing, his phone records, his interview with LE, his lies to LE, and everything else about MTR the Crown has presented to support their case.

Macright
04-27-2012, 06:29 PM
True...but he might have been considering selling it to a US publicaton. They do not have to adhere to the Canadian ban I believe. And some of the more tabloid type ones would probably actually pay for the picture and publish it.

MOO


I don't think a US rag mag would be interested in a case in Canada and I doubt they would pay $$$ for a pix of MR...they could easily score one from one of the Cdn newspapers and secondly since when has anything that ever happened in Canada ever made the US news... ( no offence to our US posters)..JMO ... the very reason it has been taken down from any news site in Canada makes me believe there is more to this than meets the eye...time will tell....besides it was two people that took the pictures with two separate camera's...JMO one nosey guy I could understand but two...makes one go "what the heck"....

roseofsharon
04-27-2012, 06:35 PM
I don't think a US rag mag would be interested in a case in Canada and I doubt they would pay $$$ for a pix of MR...they could easily score one from one of the Cdn newspapers and secondly since when has anything that ever happened in Canada ever made the US news... ( no offence to our US posters)..JMO ... the very reason it has been taken down from any news site in Canada makes me believe there is more to this than meets the eye...time will tell....besides it was two people that took the pictures with two separate camera's...JMO one nosey guy I could understand but two...makes one go "what the heck"....


http://www.timminstimes.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1528823&archive=true



http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Bsgx_beclakJ:www.amw.com/missing_children/brief.cfm%3Fid%3D64826+America's+Most+Wanted+adds+ Tori+Stafford+to+data+base&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

Macright
04-27-2012, 06:41 PM
The jeans are not Courtroom attire. The pants worn are a grey pinstripe and are very tailored. Look great with the bar jackets. Same pant on each of the crown.


I don't think he wore the jeans as part of his attire during the court hours..more than likely these lawyers keep their court clothes at the court house rather than drag them back and forth each day while the trial is going on.. I am sure the lawyers are assigned a room for the duration of the trial.. he is either commuting daily from Toronto or he is staying at a hotel during court days...so I wouldn't read anything into that photo..just saying...JMO and you are correct Bravo about the court attire...since Canadian law is based on the British system the only thing they don't wear anymore is the wigs which I believe they still wear in the British courts... JMO and actually some lawyers here in Canada still use the word solicitor rather than lawyer... I think there is another distinction between solicitors and barristers in Britain..I think it depends on the type of court etc. JMO not sure if the same applies in Canada...

Macright
04-27-2012, 06:49 PM
http://www.timminstimes.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1528823&archive=true



that is an old article and I believe at the time John Walsh contacted the family or the other way around and also at that time the child was still missing and there was talk about the border being so close etc. etc. .. there was a blip shown on his show at the time...same with NG show.. she did touch on it... I am talking about now that the trial is going on.... JMO that is my belief and either way I don't think it has any bearing on the trial at this time... it was just my response to another poster re: US rag mag....

roseofsharon
04-27-2012, 07:02 PM
My point is that USA certainly does report and follow high profile cases occurring in Canada. JUST MOO

Kamille
04-27-2012, 07:06 PM
I don't think a US rag mag would be interested in a case in Canada and I doubt they would pay $$$ for a pix of MR...they could easily score one from one of the Cdn newspapers and secondly since when has anything that ever happened in Canada ever made the US news... ( no offence to our US posters)..JMO ... the very reason it has been taken down from any news site in Canada makes me believe there is more to this than meets the eye...time will tell....besides it was two people that took the pictures with two separate camera's...JMO one nosey guy I could understand but two...makes one go "what the heck"....

Well it's good to know then that the US media won't be doing the same thing that they did in the Bernardo trial by enticing people with information that is under a ban here in Canada.

MOO

daisy.faithfull
04-27-2012, 07:11 PM
Well it's good to know then that the US media won't be doing the same thing that they did in the Bernardo trial by enticing people with information that is under a ban here in Canada.

MOO

That's what I was thinking about because I think they had a really big problem with that during his trial.

Bravo
04-27-2012, 07:22 PM
I don't think he wore the jeans as part of his attire during the court hours..more than likely these lawyers keep there court clothes at the court house rather than drag them back and forth each day while the trial is going on.. I am sure the lawyers are assigned a room for the duration of the trial.. he is either commuting daily from Toronto or he is staying at a hotel during court days...so I wouldn't read anything into that photo..just saying...JMO and you are correct Bravo about the court attire...since Canadian law is based on the British system the only thing they don't wear anymore is the wigs which I believe they still wear in the British courts... JMO and actually some lawyers here in Canada still use the word solicitor rather than lawyer...

Yes i am glad the wigs are gone LOL I luv the attire. Classic and respectful attire indeed.

Jezbel
04-27-2012, 07:47 PM
I don't think he wore the jeans as part of his attire during the court hours..more than likely these lawyers keep there court clothes at the court house rather than drag them back and forth each day while the trial is going on.. I am sure the lawyers are assigned a room for the duration of the trial.. he is either commuting daily from Toronto or he is staying at a hotel during court days...so I wouldn't read anything into that photo..just saying...JMO and you are correct Bravo about the court attire...since Canadian law is based on the British system the only thing they don't wear anymore is the wigs which I believe they still wear in the British courts... JMO and actually some lawyers here in Canada still use the word solicitor rather than lawyer...

Yep the solicitors still wear those lovely wigs :)

snoofer
04-27-2012, 07:56 PM
What am I missing or what do I don't get? What kind of defence could that be?

What does it matter if there was a gang, drug dept or whatever??? ??

Fact is he knew that Tori didn't come for a ride on her own will. He was surprised when TLM showed up with the little girl? Really? Well we know now for a fact that he was already driving around the school area early in the morning. I am wondering what he was doing there....(appetizer?)

He was driving around a kidnapped girl (at some point in time even our Mr.Biceps must have figured that out) and he still didn't do anything about it.

What does it matter if he killed her or not? He was there, helped cleaning, didn't go to the police afterwards and didn't help to find her body. He was trying hard to hide any involvement). Gang influence? Who cares! Even then he could walk to the police and could have told them what happened. And if he comes with a story that he was scared for his own life then you really have me laughing. How scared he was shows his sexual activity. That didn't seemed to be influenced at all.

Maybe I am watching to much 48 hours but in the US the people that are similar involved in a murder always end up with 1st degree murder.

For Tories family I hope that he gets guilty for the rape too. But this is the only point where I am not so sure that the evidence is enough.
BUT
Even if he doesn't get the guilty there it will be in peoples minds forever (and his future prison inmates). I am sure they will take care of it for hopefully very long 25 years. That is something he will never get of his forehead. That is stamped there for the rest of his life regardless what the outcome of this trial is.


I just had to write all this because my head is spinning

what doesn't make sense is the full circle of it all. He didn't tell LE and lied to LE because...afraid of gangs? Yet here he sits in prison/at trial and going to blame gangs?? Am I missing something? No reason he shouldn't have told LE if that were the truth but of course it was not the truth IMO

daisy.faithfull
04-27-2012, 07:59 PM
From Paul Bernardo's wiki:


Public access to the Internet effectively nullified the court's order, however; as did proximity to the American border, since a publication ban by an Ontario Court cannot apply in New York, Michigan, or anywhere else outside of Ontario. American journalists cited the First Amendment in editorials and published details of Homolka's testimony, which were widely distributed by many "electronic ban-breakers", primarily on the alt.fan.karla-homolka[12] Usenet newsgroup. Information and rumours spread across a myriad of electronic networks available to anyone with a computer and a modem in Canada. Moreover, many of the Internet rumours went beyond the known details of the case. Newsweek's 6 December 1993 edition, for example, "reprinted without permission" as the correspondent stated, reported: "Another account said that, to keep them from escaping, both girls were hobble[d] by their abductors, who used veterinary surgical instruments to sever tendons in their legs."[13][dubious – discuss]
Newspapers in Buffalo, Detroit, Washington, New York and even Britain, together with border radio and television stations, reported details gleaned from sources at Homolka's trial. The syndicated series A Current Affair aired two programs on the crimes. Canadians bootlegged copies of The Buffalo Evening News across the border, prompting orders to NRP to arrest all those with more than one copy at the border. Extra copies were confiscated. Copies of other newspapers, including The New York Times, were either turned back at the border or were not accepted by distributors in Ontario.[11] Gordon Domm, a retired police officer who defied the publication ban by distributing details from the foreign media, was charged and convicted on two counts of contempt of court.

It does look like msm and other media outlets have respected Canada's publication ban during MTR's trial. It also looks like the Canadians that violated the ban during Bernardo's trial did not cause a mistrial and were held accountable for their crimes. I think one of the tweeters reporting MTR's trial briefly mentioned before this incident that charges would be filed against any one who went against the ban.

If anything, I think the Internet would be the most likely outlet that would purchase and publish something breaking the ban. Other websites are nothing like Websleuths. Anything breaking the ban is not allowed here and the mods are moderating this thread. I don't know if other sites really do that, and I think Websleuths is the largest forum of its kind on the Internet.

There are newsources that we cannot link to here because of their reputation. Those types of sites would be the type that would run anything breaking the ban. But obvioously Canada has it under control and if something does happen as it did during Bernardo's trial, they know how to deal with it. I'm not really that worried about whatever happened with those two men.

JayFriend
04-27-2012, 08:47 PM
Rodney Stafford interview today

http://www.ctvlondon.ca/2012/04/rodney-stafford-interview/

matou
04-27-2012, 09:20 PM
With Crown Attorneys at the Michael Rafferty murder trial in London, ON resting their 12-part case against the accused, the trial draws that much closer to a close, but they're not there yet.
The next step in the trial now depends solely on what Rafferty's defence team decides to do. They will take the next four days to decide whether they will call any witnesses. Any list of witnesses could include Rafferty himself.

The Defence doesn't necessarily have to call anyone, though. As Justice Thomas Heeney reminded the jury Thursday afternoon, "the defence has no onus to prove anything." The burden of proof in Canadian jury trials is always on the Crown.

Jurors won't find out what lawyer Dirk Derstine decides to do until court reconvenes Tuesday.

If the defence decides not to call any witnesses at all, proceedings will move straight toward closing arguments and the eventual deliberation of the jury.
If Rafferty is called to the stand by Derstine, expect him to be testifying for several days.
When Terri-Lynne McClintic took the stand earlier in the trial it took five-and-a-half days before Crown and Defence lawyers wrapped up their respective examinations.


http://www.newstalk1010.com/blog/michaelrafferty/blogentry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10377247

matou
04-27-2012, 09:30 PM
I was watching the video of Rafferty at the detention center (May 8th, 2009) and he has what look like keys in his hand with a dangling loop of some kind of material. My keys have the same kind of strap thingy. Were his keys and strap analyzed for Tori's DNA and his sperm? I can see MR overlooking getting rid of that kind of object or not cleaning it afterwards. JMO

http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/2012/04/26/rafferty-mcclintic-act-like-young-lovers-in-surveillance-video

Tahorn
04-27-2012, 09:39 PM
I was watching the video of Rafferty at the detention center (May 8th, 2009) and he has what look like keys in his hand with a dangling loop of some kind of material. My keys have the same kind of strap thingy. Were his keys and strap analyzed for Tori's DNA and his sperm? I can see MR overlooking getting rid of that kind of object or not cleaning it afterwards. JMO

http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/2012/04/26/rafferty-mcclintic-act-like-young-lovers-in-surveillance-video

It would be an awful shame if they over looked it.

Oldsoul2
04-27-2012, 09:43 PM
I like how his hands are free and the other two are pulling the luggage around. LOL! JMO

It takes one to know one as they say LOL....reminds me of the CA case with Baez.

maxfactor
04-27-2012, 09:50 PM
Rodney Stafford interview today

http://www.ctvlondon.ca/2012/04/rodney-stafford-interview/

Listening to this interview with Rodney only reaffirms my belied that there is a lot of evidence that the Crown is not able to introduce to the jury, and that's a real shame.

matou
04-27-2012, 09:55 PM
I think this is the video from yesterday. 14 min 37 seconds BOTH parts are there at the link. Second clip is 15 minutes 36 seconds.

Crown rests its case in Rafferty trial

http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/2012/04/26/crown-rests-its-case-in-rafferty-trial

Kamille
04-27-2012, 10:16 PM
Listening to this interview with Rodney only reaffirms my belied that there is a lot of evidence that the Crown is not able to introduce to the jury, and that's a real shame.

Why didn't we hear anything about the second trip to the movie theatre? The evidence clearly shows them both wearing different clothes and a different time of day. We don't even know if it was the same day.

MOO

maxfactor
04-27-2012, 10:21 PM
Why didn't we hear anything about the second trip to the movie theatre? The evidence clearly shows them both wearing different clothes and a different time of day. We don't even know if it was the same day.

MOO

If you watch Matou's link in the post above yours it shows both trips to the theatre and says they returned later the same day.

daisy.faithfull
04-27-2012, 10:24 PM
This is going to be longest of all the long weekends during this trial. Waiting to see what the defence is going to present, hear their opening statements, and wondering if MTR is going to get up on the stand. I guess there's even the chance that we could hear closing arguments too.

Whatever happens, I think we are nearing the end of the trial. At which time we'll get a better idea of what went on in the courtroom. I think that is the only good part about this tweet journalism, we will have lots and lots to discuss while we're waiting for a verdict because that. Always. Seems. To. Take. So. Looooooooooooooooong. :)

snoofer
04-27-2012, 10:33 PM
Rodney Stafford interview today

http://www.ctvlondon.ca/2012/04/rodney-stafford-interview/

wow, powerful. 5 years from now what do you want people to think when they hear Tori Stafford's name; tears me up.

moo

tmhco
04-27-2012, 10:34 PM
I hope MR saw RS tell the press he didn't think he was man enough to testify. If I was falsely accused of a crime, nothing could stop me from telling the world. I guess we will see. JMO

Tahorn
04-27-2012, 10:37 PM
I think this is the video from yesterday. 14 min 37 seconds BOTH parts are there at the link. Second clip is 15 minutes 36 seconds.

Crown rests its case in Rafferty trial

http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/2012/04/26/crown-rests-its-case-in-rafferty-trial

He is such a strong man, VS would have been proud.

Snoopster
04-27-2012, 10:40 PM
First off, I would like to apologize if these things have already been discussed, but I haven't had the time to keep up with all of the posts.

In yesterday's thread I believe it was Heliotrope who asked if there was a 'silent juror' in the courtroom, watching, observing and reporting back to legal counsel. I would imagine there might be, but, in a similar vein, why wouldn't the defense counsel have someone (or more than one) monitoring what is going on here on this board? ....checking out how we are responding to different evidence, out theories, etc. We would be like a shadow jury and they would have a window into our thoughts.


And, just a random thought, did we hear of many instances of "Mr. dance instructor" going out dancing?

snoofer
04-27-2012, 10:43 PM
I hope MR saw RS tell the press he didn't think he was man enough to testify. If I was falsely accused of a crime, nothing could stop me from telling the world. I guess we will see. JMO

I'm glad MTR got his trial. It meant he had to sit in the same room with RS and face him. Each day MTR went to his trial seeing RS would be a constant reminder to him of what a man does and what he did not do and those horrid things he did do. JMO I would think that MTR would feel very small in the same room with RS.

snoofer
04-27-2012, 10:47 PM
First off, I would like to apologize if these things have already been discussed, but I haven't had the time to keep up with all of the posts.

In yesterday's thread I believe it was Heliotrope who asked if there was a 'silent juror' in the courtroom, watching, observing and reporting back to legal counsel. I would imagine there might be, but, in a similar vein, why wouldn't the defense counsel have someone (or more than one) monitoring what is going on here on this board? ....checking out how we are responding to different evidence, out theories, etc. We would be like a shadow jury and they would have a window into our thoughts.


And, just a random thought, did we hear of many instances of "Mr. dance instructor" going out dancing?

oh joy! Maybe defense will present some dance video. Or better still, if MTR takes the stand maybe he will break out in some sort of dance. JMO

tmhco
04-27-2012, 10:49 PM
First off, I would like to apologize if these things have already been discussed, but I haven't had the time to keep up with all of the posts.

In yesterday's thread I believe it was Heliotrope who asked if there was a 'silent juror' in the courtroom, watching, observing and reporting back to legal counsel. I would imagine there might be, but, in a similar vein, why wouldn't the defense counsel have someone (or more than one) monitoring what is going on here on this board? ....checking out how we are responding to different evidence, out theories, etc. We would be like a shadow jury and they would have a window into our thoughts.


And, just a random thought, did we hear of many instances of "Mr. dance instructor" going out dancing?

If you are familiar with a high profile case in the US where a mother was acquitted of murdering her daughter (CA), her lawyer admitted he did just that. He prowled social media looking for a defence theory that might work. He found out that people suggested her actions reminded them of a victim of abuse and the rest is history. Her father became the villain. JMO

Macright
04-27-2012, 10:52 PM
He is such a strong man, VS would have been proud.


you are so right..I think he is the only honest one in this whole mess...JMO

tmhco
04-27-2012, 10:55 PM
I'm glad MTR got his trial. It meant he had to sit in the same room with RS and face him. Each day MTR went to his trial seeing RS would be a constant reminder to him of what a man does and what he did not do and those horrid things he did do. JMO I would think that MTR would feel very small in the same room with RS.

Not small enough to admit his part in one of the most cruel and inhumane crimes I have ever followed. There will never be a defence that will excuse him in my eyes. He is either a child rapist or coward. Either way an innocent child died as the result of his action or inaction. And don't get me wrong, I do believe he raped that poor girl. JMO

Macright
04-27-2012, 10:56 PM
First off, I would like to apologize if these things have already been discussed, but I haven't had the time to keep up with all of the posts.

In yesterday's thread I believe it was Heliotrope who asked if there was a 'silent juror' in the courtroom, watching, observing and reporting back to legal counsel. I would imagine there might be, but, in a similar vein, why wouldn't the defense counsel have someone (or more than one) monitoring what is going on here on this board? ....checking out how we are responding to different evidence, out theories, etc. We would be like a shadow jury and they would have a window into our thoughts.


And, just a random thought, did we hear of many instances of "Mr. dance instructor" going out dancing?



because we are known in their world as "armchair" detectives and we give them more laughs than anything else...that is if they even take the time to read these types of boards.. which I doubt any of the legal eagles do..they have more important things on their plate.. too bad though cause some on here are pretty perceptive..IMO....there is one reporter that I think reads these boards and gets some ideas...JMO

Macright
04-27-2012, 11:01 PM
I have wondered throughout this for the past three years why we have not read anything about MR's upbringing and where he was originally from and where he was employed...we have read the whole life of TLM..even know where her stepfather lives etc. I wonder why the reporters did not seek out this info on MR...yes we have some idea but nothing concrete except what we have picked up during the trial..I find that very strange and wonder why..we kid about his various jobs especially the dance instructor but maybe he was ..we don't know for a fact that he wasn't...It just seems that his previous life before Jan 2009 is a hush hush and I don't think he just appeared at that time from under a turnip patch.... JMO

snoofer
04-27-2012, 11:04 PM
Not small enough to admit his part in one of the most cruel and inhumane crimes I have ever followed. There will never be a defence that will excuse him in my eyes. He is either a child rapist or coward. Either way an innocent child died as the result of his action or inaction. And don't get me wrong, I do believe he raped that poor girl. JMO

agrees. I do hope however it was uncomfortable as hell for him to have to sit in the same room with the father of the child he is accused of brutally murdering, raping and kidnapping. moo

tmhco
04-27-2012, 11:12 PM
agrees. I do hope however it was uncomfortable as hell for him to have to sit in the same room with the father of the child he is accused of brutally murdering, raping and kidnapping. moo

I would like to think that as well but to me anyone who could harm a child wouldn't think twice about the victim's parents. From the press's accounts, the only emotion he showed was not for the victim or her family, but an old flame. JMO

JayFriend
04-27-2012, 11:13 PM
I hope MR saw RS tell the press he didn't think he was man enough to testify. If I was falsely accused of a crime, nothing could stop me from telling the world. I guess we will see. JMO
I wonder, hypothetically, if MR was to testify, is he permitted to watch all media coverage of the trial beforehand?

SFB73
04-27-2012, 11:13 PM
If you are familiar with a high profile case in the US where a mother was acquitted of murdering her daughter (CA), her lawyer admitted he did just that. He prowled social media looking for a defence theory that might work. He found out that people suggested her actions reminded them of a victim of abuse and the rest is history. Her father became the villain. JMO

Actually, radio host "Bubba The Love Sponge" aka Todd Clem outlined on his Florida based radio program shortly after CA became a suspect the theory the defense would use...

"No matter how outrageous, radio "shock-jocks" have often used the platform of their own shows to express their opinions.* And,*Bubba the Love Sponge, whose local*show originates from Tampa, Fl, proved, again, why he's one of the most infamous when he, recently, claimed it was*"his" ideas that formed the basis for Casey Anthony's new line of defense.

According to Bubba,*this week's revelations that Casey Anthony did not kill her daughter, Caylee, who she now claims drowned in the family swimming pool, as well as, the allegations that she was sexually abused by her Father and brother, came as no surprise to him, since he had predicted this defense during two different occasions, on his show, in 2010.* To hear the actual audio, go to Bubba's fan page at www.btls.com.

"None of the so-called "legal experts" on television predicted the route the defense would take", said Bubba.* "My strong opinions in this case reflect my ability to see through con-artists and manipulators like Casey Anthony.* I called the defense plan a year and a half ago and discussed it numerous times on my show.* To my listeners, Baez's defense theory is old news.* George Anthony should have cooperated with the state, now, he's solidly the scapegoat.* I knew that Casey would see her Father as the only way out."

You never know who is lurking, or listening for possible ideas or theories.

tmhco
04-27-2012, 11:23 PM
Actually, radio host "Bubba The Love Sponge" aka Todd Clem outlined on his Florida based radio program shortly after CA became a suspect the theory the defense would use...

"No matter how outrageous, radio "shock-jocks" have often used the platform of their own shows to express their opinions.* And,*Bubba the Love Sponge, whose local*show originates from Tampa, Fl, proved, again, why he's one of the most infamous when he, recently, claimed it was*"his" ideas that formed the basis for Casey Anthony's new line of defense.

According to Bubba,*this week's revelations that Casey Anthony did not kill her daughter, Caylee, who she now claims drowned in the family swimming pool, as well as, the allegations that she was sexually abused by her Father and brother, came as no surprise to him, since he had predicted this defense during two different occasions, on his show, in 2010.* To hear the actual audio, go to Bubba's fan page at www.btls.com.

"None of the so-called "legal experts" on television predicted the route the defense would take", said Bubba.* "My strong opinions in this case reflect my ability to see through con-artists and manipulators like Casey Anthony.* I called the defense plan a year and a half ago and discussed it numerous times on my show.* To my listeners, Baez's defense theory is old news.* George Anthony should have cooperated with the state, now, he's solidly the scapegoat.* I knew that Casey would see her Father as the only way out."

You never know who is lurking, or listening for possible ideas or theories.

Interesting, I hadn't heard that. I saw the firm he hired to monitor social media interviewed. They analyzed twitter, blogs and facebook groups and decided that was the best theory to go with. Bubba may have started the whole thing! I wonder if that jury realizes that they were "played" JMO

tmhco
04-27-2012, 11:24 PM
I wonder, hypothetically, if MR was to testify, is he permitted to watch all media coverage of the trial beforehand?

I really don't know what his restrictions are. I assume he can watch the news? JMO

Macright
04-27-2012, 11:29 PM
If you are familiar with a high profile case in the US where a mother was acquitted of murdering her daughter (CA), her lawyer admitted he did just that. He prowled social media looking for a defence theory that might work. He found out that people suggested her actions reminded them of a victim of abuse and the rest is history. Her father became the villain. JMO


I didn't follow that case simply because I had no interest in it but I thought this article in Time explained to me why the crown lost... the crown couldn't prove any of their charges and that is why the jury came back with a not guilty...not saying myself that she was guilty or not guilty..can't really comment as I didn't follow but it just shows how jurors can react if the evidence it not there...also I noted that her character or lifestyle had no bearing on the outcome and was not considered...Understand now why the judge in MR's trial said what he did to the jury...

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2081590,00.html

tmhco
04-27-2012, 11:37 PM
I didn't follow that case simply because I had no interest in it but I thought this article in time explained to me why the crown lost... the crown couldn't prove any of their charges and that is why the jury came back with a not guilty...not saying myself that is was guilty or not guilty..can't really comment as I didn't follow but it just shows how jurors can react...

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2081590,00.html

I watched every minute and read all of the discovery. I believe each of us is unique and we all have different thresholds of reasonable doubt. CA was responsible for the death of her daughter, no doubt in my mind. I refuse to let the process of decomposition interfere with MY common sense. I was so upset after they read the verdict that I visibly shook. I must be out of my mind to be following another trial! JMO

tmhco
04-27-2012, 11:46 PM
I didn't follow that case simply because I had no interest in it but I thought this article in Time explained to me why the crown lost... the crown couldn't prove any of their charges and that is why the jury came back with a not guilty...not saying myself that she was guilty or not guilty..can't really comment as I didn't follow but it just shows how jurors can react if the evidence it not there...also I noted that her character or lifestyle had no bearing on the outcome and was not considered...Understand now why the judge in MR's trial said what he did to the jury...

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2081590,00.html

Here is an article that mirrors my thoughts on the CA trial. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/spycatcher/201107/the-not-so-obvious-lessons-the-casey-anthony-trial

LadyL
04-27-2012, 11:52 PM
Prosecutors change into their "penguin" suits and gowns at the courthouse, then back into their street clothes when they leave. The penguin suit is a jacket with tails, specific type of pants ...

"In Canada, court dress is identical to that previously (pre-2008) in use in England, except that wigs are not worn. Bar jackets are worn under the gown, though QCs and Judges have more elaborate cuffs than other lawyers."

ref: wikipedia: court dress

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/William_Ballantine_Vanity_Fair_5_March_1870.jpg

except that photo was of the defense team ...

to the WS members that have attended this trial - did the defense lawyer Derstine have on a robe or was it just the prosecutor?

because I'm confused now about the formal dress in other criminal trials that I've been to at that courthouse because the prosecutor always had the robe on but I don't remember the defense lawyer wearing it (and, specifically know that he did not in one case in which I was personally involved)

sillybilly
04-27-2012, 11:56 PM
[/COLOR][/B]

oh joy! Maybe defense will present some dance video. Or better still, if MTR takes the stand maybe he will break out in some sort of dance. JMO

"Jailhouse Rock" springs to mind ;)

Macright
04-28-2012, 12:10 AM
except that photo was of the defense team ...

to the WS members that have attended this trial - did the defense lawyer Derstine have on a robe or was it just the prosecutor?

because I'm confused now about the formal dress in other criminal trials that I've been to at that courthouse because the prosecutor always had the robe on but I don't remember the defense lawyer wearing it (and, specifically know that he did not in one case in which I was personally involved)


maybe this will answer your question...also someone posted an artist drawing of the trial and both the crown and defence were wearing their gowns..

http://www.ojen.ca/sites/ojen.ca/files/sites/default/files/resources/American%20visitor%20to%20Canadian%20Court%20eng%2 0updated.pdf

LadyL
04-28-2012, 12:12 AM
First off, I would like to apologize if these things have already been discussed, but I haven't had the time to keep up with all of the posts.

In yesterday's thread I believe it was Heliotrope who asked if there was a 'silent juror' in the courtroom, watching, observing and reporting back to legal counsel. I would imagine there might be, but, in a similar vein, why wouldn't the defense counsel have someone (or more than one) monitoring what is going on here on this board? ....checking out how we are responding to different evidence, out theories, etc. We would be like a shadow jury and they would have a window into our thoughts.


And, just a random thought, did we hear of many instances of "Mr. dance instructor" going out dancing?

they are likely checking out social media when they have time, not necessarily this board but any of the dozens of crime boards and comments under news articles etc.

this is where Mike was a dance 'instructor' - according to Mike in his first police interview, he had begun the unpaid training to become an instructor but never completed the training:

http://www.fredastaire.ca/pages/currentpositions.php

they have studios in London, Kitchener, and Oakville (among other locations) ...

LadyL
04-28-2012, 12:16 AM
maybe this will answer your question...also someone posted an artist drawing of the trial and both the crown and defence were wearing their gowns..

http://www.ojen.ca/sites/ojen.ca/files/sites/default/files/resources/American%20visitor%20to%20Canadian%20Court%20eng%2 0updated.pdf

thanks ... didn't find my answer but I just realized that the court cases I've been to didn't involve juries so that might make a difference

sillybilly
04-28-2012, 12:22 AM
except that photo was of the defense team ...

to the WS members that have attended this trial - did the defense lawyer Derstine have on a robe or was it just the prosecutor?

because I'm confused now about the formal dress in other criminal trials that I've been to at that courthouse because the prosecutor always had the robe on but I don't remember the defense lawyer wearing it (and, specifically know that he did not in one case in which I was personally involved)

Mr. Derstine would definitely be wearing his robes, and there have been various courtroom sketches that depict this, i.e. <scroll down>

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/03/22/stafford-rafferty-trial-thurs.html

HTH

ETA: I see this has already been "asked and answered". :)

Macright
04-28-2012, 12:23 AM
thanks ... didn't find my answer but I just realized that the court cases I've been to didn't involve juries so that might make a difference


also depending on what type of court and the offence you were in..it says that the requirement of court attire in not necessary in lower courts...so I took that to be something lower than a murder trial...

LadyL
04-28-2012, 12:32 AM
also depending on what type of court and the offence you were in..it says that the requirement of court attire in not necessary in lower courts...so I took that to be something lower than a murder trial...

ah, I get it now

I did read that but wasn't sure what 'lower' court meant ... I was only thinking of criminal vs. civil, not the difference between charges

thank you [insert smiley icon here]

brighidin
04-28-2012, 12:44 AM
because we are known in their world as "armchair" detectives and we give them more laughs than anything else...that is if they even take the time to read these types of boards.. which I doubt any of the legal eagles do..they have more important things on their plate.. too bad though cause some on here are pretty perceptive..IMO....there is one reporter that I think reads these boards and gets some ideas...JMO

Not true. Many lawyers and LE follow big boards like WS. Some are registered here and even post. Defense attorneys pay attention to social media to gauge how the public reacts to their arguments, amongst other reasons. This trend will continue to grow.


imo

swedie
04-28-2012, 01:54 AM
Not true. Many lawyers and LE follow big boards like WS. Some are registered here and even post. Defense attorneys pay attention to social media to gauge how the public reacts to their arguments, amongst other reasons. This trend will continue to grow.


imo

Yes it does happen. In the CA case, there was a lead detective who was a member of WS. JB questioned him about his participation on WS. JB referred to him as his user name. He was not releasing information to members, just his opinion and chatting IIRC. HTH

daisy.faithfull
04-28-2012, 03:07 AM
I have wondered throughout this for the past three years why we have not read anything about MR's upbringing and where he was originally from and where he was employed...we have read the whole life of TLM..even know where her stepfather lives etc. I wonder why the reporters did not seek out this info on MR...yes we have some idea but nothing concrete except what we have picked up during the trial..I find that very strange and wonder why..we kid about his various jobs especially the dance instructor but maybe he was ..we don't know for a fact that he wasn't...It just seems that his previous life before Jan 2009 is a hush hush and I don't think he just appeared at that time from under a turnip patch.... JMO

I think we didn't hear about MTR like we heard about TLM because of the publication ban.

otto
04-28-2012, 03:13 AM
Yes it does happen. In the CA case, there was a lead detective who was a member of WS. JB questioned him about his participation on WS. JB referred to him as his user name. He was not releasing information to members, just his opinion and chatting IIRC. HTH

It certainly seems to happen in the US, but I don't think it happens in Canada. I don't think that prosecutor's offices can afford to hire people to surf the net reading comments about ongoing cases, and I doubt that suspects would want to pay for the service either. There would never be a Casey Anthony situation in Canada where the media paid the suspect $200,000 for pictures of the victim.

swedie
04-28-2012, 03:58 AM
I brought this post over from yesterday as I feel it is fitting to MR. Does anyone else see the similarities? Very odd, that both of my links to sites worked yesterday but do not work now...hmm. Anyhow I have posted two more links. Interesting read. HTH.

I really wonder if MR was really not "into" women. Could it be he actually disliked women and used them for what he could get out of them? Were women the only sex he could have a friendship with as opposed to males? Did he feel neglected and abandoned by his mother at some point in his life? He was shipped off to live with relatives for some time. Wonder how long? I would be interested in knowing why his parents divorced? Was his birth father ever in his life or was MR the result of an affair and his real father never knew about him or didn't care about him? Just because he had many women coming and going doesn't mean he really cared about them. There are men who hate women but will use them to their advantage. So many questions and not enough answers Answers we may never know. MOO

The misogynists. You may have heard of them. But what you may not know is that they can be anywhere around you. They are notoriously hard to spot. They do not come with a label attached to them, and they may even come across as woman lovers.

http://www.lifescript.com/life/relationships/hang-ups/how_to_tell_if_your_guy_is_a_misogynist.aspx

http://www.lovesicklove.com/2011/07/men-who-hate-women.html

Is it just me or does anyone else believe MR holds many of these traits/characteristics? IKES!! MOO

snoofer
04-28-2012, 05:02 AM
except that photo was of the defense team ...

to the WS members that have attended this trial - did the defense lawyer Derstine have on a robe or was it just the prosecutor?

because I'm confused now about the formal dress in other criminal trials that I've been to at that courthouse because the prosecutor always had the robe on but I don't remember the defense lawyer wearing it (and, specifically know that he did not in one case in which I was personally involved)

In Canada, court dress is identical to that previously (pre-2008) in use in England, except that wigs are not worn. Bar jackets are worn under the gown, though QCs and Judges have more elaborate cuffs than other lawyers. Barristers are required to "gown" for the Courts of Appeal and Superior-level courts of the provinces and territories, as well as the Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada. The donning of business attire is acceptable by barristers in "inferior" provincial and territorial courts; court dress is also permitted, though rarely worn. Judges of the Supreme Court of Canada wear red robes with white fur trim on ceremonial occasions together with tricorne hats; however, they wear black gowns when hearing cases. Judges of all other federal and provincial courts wear black gowns, sometimes adorned with various sashes and crests which depend on the level of court and the province in which the case is heard. All Canadian judges also wear black court waistcoats with white collar and tabs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_dress#Canada

Ardy
04-28-2012, 08:26 AM
Those following the trial on social media, not only don't a full understanding of everything that happened in court, but they also don't know the content of the legal arguments and rulings. The lawyers for the Crown and defense have much more information than the general public does.

We can speculate and follow up on testimony, but the jury hears it as it was spoken and that is what they will base their verdict on.

There would be no reason for either the defense or Crown to pay much attention to social media websites, because the public perception is often far different than that of the jury.

That is why the public is often surprised by jury verdicts.

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

snoofer
04-28-2012, 08:40 AM
I would like to think that as well but to me anyone who could harm a child wouldn't think twice about the victim's parents. From the press's accounts, the only emotion he showed was not for the victim or her family, but an old flame. JMO

yes, you are likely right. MOO

Ardy
04-28-2012, 08:48 AM
Considering I don't for a second believe the "escort" friend of MR was simply handing over all her money to MR, because he was some kind of Svengali, I am thinking there is more to the debt theory than we presently know.

MR was picking up drugs from various sources , and people were depositing money into his account...............to me that looks like drug trafficking. It doesn't mean MR was the man behind it all though. He might have just been the errand boy and go between.

If there is more the defense should be able to reveal it all.

After all, they have MR sitting right there with all the information.

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

Snoopster
04-28-2012, 10:07 AM
Those following the trial on social media, not only don't a full understanding of everything that happened in court, but they also don't know the content of the legal arguments and rulings. The lawyers for the Crown and defense have much more information than the general public does.

We can speculate and follow up on testimony, but the jury hears it as it was spoken and that is what they will base their verdict on.

There would be no reason for either the defense or Crown to pay much attention to social media websites, because the public perception is often far different than that of the jury.

That is why the public is often surprised by jury verdicts.

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

While I agree that we definitely wouldn't be in the same position as a juror, I still think that defense cousel counsel could check in on these kinds of sites at key times.

While the general public (i.e. us) tends to react in a more simplistic, emotional way ("he's charged, he's a bad person, it's a brutal crime, therefore he must be found guilty!), there is still some excellent discussion that goes on. If you watch this particular thread for instance, you can see the give and take between posters with different views. You can pick out which 'arguments' seem to have some impact on the posters. I absolutely think that cousel may check the pulse of the general public who are actively following the case.

matou
04-28-2012, 10:17 AM
I have wondered throughout this for the past three years why we have not read anything about MR's upbringing and where he was originally from and where he was employed...we have read the whole life of TLM..even know where her stepfather lives etc. I wonder why the reporters did not seek out this info on MR...yes we have some idea but nothing concrete except what we have picked up during the trial..I find that very strange and wonder why..we kid about his various jobs especially the dance instructor but maybe he was ..we don't know for a fact that he wasn't...It just seems that his previous life before Jan 2009 is a hush hush and I don't think he just appeared at that time from under a turnip patch.... JMO

I think the defense team got that info thrown out. JMO. We know all about TLM and the defense were all over that but nothing much about their client has come out at all. Why not?

Alethea Dice
04-28-2012, 10:22 AM
But what is there to sell? A picture of a member of LE on the stand? One of MTR sitting in his glass box? There have been recent pics of MTR in a vehicle on his way to or from court, so there's nothing to reveal there. Spectators sit at the very back of the courtroom, the view is not great and there really isn't much to take pictures of. As for the evidence presented, that was all made available to the media at the end of the day. I don't see how anyone would pay money for anything they could have snapped. And I'm with Otto in that there would be no chance of a mistrial for this infraction. The only thing that makes sense to me is sheer stupidity.

JMO

Just curious, AG. What is the spectator's view of the jury? Are they blocked from view to protect their identity? Or are they in plain sight?

Alethea Dice
04-28-2012, 10:44 AM
what doesn't make sense is the full circle of it all. He didn't tell LE and lied to LE because...afraid of gangs? Yet here he sits in prison/at trial and going to blame gangs?? Am I missing something? No reason he shouldn't have told LE if that were the truth but of course it was not the truth IMO

I think it's more likely that he stayed quiet because he was afraid of spending the rest of his life behind bars. Also, the same reason he continued to entertain TLM. Once he started to wait 3 or 4 days to return her calls and told her they needed to distance themselves, she sang. JMO

robynhood
04-28-2012, 10:45 AM
I think the defense team got that info thrown out. JMO. We know all about TLM and the defense were all over that but nothing much about their client has come out at all. Why not?

I agree 100 percent...I too feel that this is very odd...and YES Mr. Rafferty certain DID NOT suddenly appear ...I'll say hmmm may be a stork delivered him at the age of 29...and he just got dropped on OUR wonderful Province Ont...LMAO!...but it is NOT funny in the least way ....I think I shall be traveling to LONDON next week ...I can hardly bare this whole BS story IMO....robynhood!

Wondergirl
04-28-2012, 11:02 AM
I hope MR saw RS tell the press he didn't think he was man enough to testify. If I was falsely accused of a crime, nothing could stop me from telling the world. I guess we will see. JMO

BBM: That's the thing, right?

Most defendants do not testify on their own behalf. Most defendants of murder are found guilty.

I think Rafferty is going to testify.

The Crown is going to have a field day.

JMO

antiquegirl
04-28-2012, 11:04 AM
Just curious, AG. What is the spectator's view of the jury? Are they blocked from view to protect their identity? Or are they in plain sight?

They're in plain sight off to the left of the courtroom on slightly elevated seats (IIRC). How well you can see them depends on how tall you are and where you're sitting. I guess one can get the best view of them as they enter and exit the room via the front doors. But because spectators sit at the far back and are at the same level as all the media people in front of them, the best view is of the judge and the witnesses on the stand because they're more highly elevated.

I'm guessing that no one is allowed to stand during the proceedings. That would be the best way (if standing in the back, right-hand side of the room) to get pics of anything in the courtroom. Are you implying that these men were trying to get pics of the jury? Because that's interesting.

JMO

Wondergirl
04-28-2012, 11:06 AM
I'm glad MTR got his trial. It meant he had to sit in the same room with RS and face him. Each day MTR went to his trial seeing RS would be a constant reminder to him of what a man does and what he did not do and those horrid things he did do. JMO I would think that MTR would feel very small in the same room with RS.

BBM: Unfortunately, I disagree, Snoofer.

MTR SHOULD feel very small, being in the same room with Rodney.

As Rodney said in his interview, Rafferty has been cool as a cucumber. In other words, no remorse, little expression, certainly no horrified behaviour, and no conscience.

JMO

Wondergirl
04-28-2012, 11:09 AM
I think the defense team got that info thrown out. JMO. We know all about TLM and the defense were all over that but nothing much about their client has come out at all. Why not?

The info will all come out when the jurors go to deliberate.

The LFP and others have expressedly said so.

Sounds to me that there is ALOT of info about the accused that is going to hit the fan.

JMO


11:35
http://www.coveritlive.com/templates/coveritlive/images/spacer.gif[Comment From Phil Phil : ]

Usually,when a murder case wraps up,and jury is sequestered prior to reaching a verdict,additional "info" on accused's past is revealed. Will you be reporting on this,if applicable?

Wednesday April 25, 2012 11:35 Phil

11:36
http://www.coveritlive.com/templates/coveritlive/images/spacer.gifMike Knoll:

@Phil - yes. Once the jury is sequestered we will have much additional reportage.

Salem
04-28-2012, 11:18 AM
First off, I would like to apologize if these things have already been discussed, but I haven't had the time to keep up with all of the posts.

In yesterday's thread I believe it was Heliotrope who asked if there was a 'silent juror' in the courtroom, watching, observing and reporting back to legal counsel. I would imagine there might be, but, in a similar vein, why wouldn't the defense counsel have someone (or more than one) monitoring what is going on here on this board? ....checking out how we are responding to different evidence, out theories, etc. We would be like a shadow jury and they would have a window into our thoughts.


And, just a random thought, did we hear of many instances of "Mr. dance instructor" going out dancing?

We have discussed this is passing - but never hurts to discuss it again. We know this happened in the Caylee Anthony case. There were articles written about it in MSM and some of the articles even discussed what the watchers were looking at when reviewing different boards.

Also, in the Madeleine McCann case there was much talk about using paid posters to try to influence the public perception. I don't know if that was ever proven but it was an interesting concept.

I think we always need to be aware that others are watching, everywhere. Not just here and not just crime boards. If you look at the number of members and guests that have been on WS for the last 24 hours, it says WS has had 16,000 guests (not members) in the last 24 hours.

Also there have been 82 visitors to this thread since it opened Fri morning. We know not all of those visitors have posted.

I firmly believe that this internet technology is changing the way the law happens. It many, many ways and one of the most important, is in the ability for the average person to follow and even in a sense, participate, in trials.

Salem

antiquegirl
04-28-2012, 11:44 AM
We have discussed this is passing - but never hurts to discuss it again. We know this happened in the Caylee Anthony case. There were articles written about it in MSM and some of the articles even discussed what the watchers were looking at when reviewing different boards.

Also, in the Madeleine McCann case there was much talk about using paid posters to try to influence the public perception. I don't know if that was ever proven but it was an interesting concept.

I think we always need to be aware that others are watching, everywhere. Not just here and not just crime boards. If you look at the number of members and guests that have been on WS for the last 24 hours, it says WS has had 16,000 guests (not members) in the last 24 hours.

Also there have been 82 visitors to this thread since it opened Fri morning. We know not all of those visitors have posted.

I firmly believe that this internet technology is changing the way the law happens. It many, many ways and one of the most important, is in the ability for the average person to follow and even in a sense, participate, in trials.

Salem

(RSBM)

I'm just curious why they would do this. How would public perception have any effect on the jury and their ultimate verdict? (Or the judge, if there is no jury?) Am I mistaken in believing that in Canada at least, they are not permitted to read about the case during the trial? Certainly not during deliberations.

IMHO, the public has an unrealistic view of their actual influence on the outcome of criminal trials. A very good example of this is the CA debacle.

JMO

Salem
04-28-2012, 11:49 AM
(RSBM)

I'm just curious why they would do this. How would public perception have any effect on the jury and their ultimate verdict? (Or the judge, if there is no jury?) Am I mistaken in believing that in Canada at least, they are not permitted to read about the case during the trial? Certainly not during deliberations.

IMHO, the public has an unrealistic view of their actual influence on the outcome of criminal trials. A very good example of this is the CA debacle.

JMO

From the Caylee Anthony case, it was reported after the trial that there were media/internet watchers that did exactly what Snoopster was suggesting. They sat on the boards and then reported back to the defense. The information was used to influence the direction of the defense. One of the woman actually gave an interview - I don't have a link, it is buried in the Anthony case media files - but I will look to see if a thread was set up to discuss as it seems there was. It was speculated by posters here that the prosecution should have also used this technique to stay on top of their presentation.

The public should NOT have any influence on the outcome of a criminal trial - but I think they have more influence now with the internet then they ever had before.

Salem

robynhood
04-28-2012, 11:57 AM
I hope this interview with Rodney Strafford is ok to post as I personally never saw it on here....IMO it probably was posted but I missed it here and just read above that is was done ....Sorry if this is a re post ...IMO it is Important ...so here it is Tori's father opinon on the crown resting his case and defense goes forward Mon. Apr. 30 , 2011........robynhood ..here is the link I just found ...agains sorry if it is a repeat!

Rodney Stafford Interview | CTV Londonwww.ctvlondon.ca/2012/04/rodney-stafford-interview/

otto
04-28-2012, 12:14 PM
In Canada, court dress is identical to that previously (pre-2008) in use in England, except that wigs are not worn. Bar jackets are worn under the gown, though QCs and Judges have more elaborate cuffs than other lawyers. Barristers are required to "gown" for the Courts of Appeal and Superior-level courts of the provinces and territories, as well as the Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada. The donning of business attire is acceptable by barristers in "inferior" provincial and territorial courts; court dress is also permitted, though rarely worn. Judges of the Supreme Court of Canada wear red robes with white fur trim on ceremonial occasions together with tricorne hats; however, they wear black gowns when hearing cases. Judges of all other federal and provincial courts wear black gowns, sometimes adorned with various sashes and crests which depend on the level of court and the province in which the case is heard. All Canadian judges also wear black court waistcoats with white collar and tabs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_dress#Canada

I find the discussions about official court clothing interesting, in part because there was a similar, long discussion about the subject during the Italian trial of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito ... except in that case there was an awful lot of criticism over the fact that official court clothing was worn by the officers of the court. It was as though the concept was so foreign that it was held up for ridicule as something that was archaic and backwards - medieval; a reflection of a culture that was out of step with the present. I think its more the norm in most countries for court oficials to wear official clothing.

I'm curious whether there was ever a time in US history when officers of the courts wore official clothing.

otto
04-28-2012, 12:17 PM
Considering I don't for a second believe the "escort" friend of MR was simply handing over all her money to MR, because he was some kind of Svengali, I am thinking there is more to the debt theory than we presently know.

MR was picking up drugs from various sources , and people were depositing money into his account...............to me that looks like drug trafficking. It doesn't mean MR was the man behind it all though. He might have just been the errand boy and go between.

If there is more the defense should be able to reveal it all.

After all, they have MR sitting right there with all the information.

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

The "escort" woman that gave MR $16,000 believed that he was the "one" and that they would eventually get married. She was "investing" in her future. Unless there was evidence that she was a drug dealer, I think we have to believe the testimony that was presented ... she was in love, foolish and had her priorities all screwed up.

otto
04-28-2012, 12:21 PM
Just curious, AG. What is the spectator's view of the jury? Are they blocked from view to protect their identity? Or are they in plain sight?

The jury is normally in plain site along the side of the courtroom. Another interesting point in Canadian law is that jurors can't discuss the deliberations, or publish books about the case after the fact - they can't profit from their civic duty.

Oldsoul2
04-28-2012, 12:28 PM
I brought this post over from yesterday as I feel it is fitting to MR. Does anyone else see the similarities? Very odd, that both of my links to sites worked yesterday but do not work now...hmm. Anyhow I have posted two more links. Interesting read. HTH.

I really wonder if MR was really not "into" women. Could it be he actually disliked women and used them for what he could get out of them? Were women the only sex he could have a friendship with as opposed to males? Did he feel neglected and abandoned by his mother at some point in his life? He was shipped off to live with relatives for some time. Wonder how long? I would be interested in knowing why his parents divorced? Was his birth father ever in his life or was MR the result of an affair and his real father never knew about him or didn't care about him? Just because he had many women coming and going doesn't mean he really cared about them. There are men who hate women but will use them to their advantage. So many questions and not enough answers Answers we may never know. MOO

The misogynists. You may have heard of them. But what you may not know is that they can be anywhere around you. They are notoriously hard to spot. They do not come with a label attached to them, and they may even come across as woman lovers.

http://www.lifescript.com/life/relationships/hang-ups/how_to_tell_if_your_guy_is_a_misogynist.aspx

http://www.lovesicklove.com/2011/07/men-who-hate-women.html

Is it just me or does anyone else believe MR holds many of these traits/characteristics? IKES!! MOO

Also, these men fear other men but never fear women. His total lack of respect for women is very apparent, IMO there HAS to be some dynamic we don't know about in regards to his relationship with his mother, no question.

otto
04-28-2012, 12:31 PM
(RSBM)

I'm just curious why they would do this. How would public perception have any effect on the jury and their ultimate verdict? (Or the judge, if there is no jury?) Am I mistaken in believing that in Canada at least, they are not permitted to read about the case during the trial? Certainly not during deliberations.

IMHO, the public has an unrealistic view of their actual influence on the outcome of criminal trials. A very good example of this is the CA debacle.

JMO

That's right. A Canadian jury is not allowed to watch the news, read the paper, or be involved in any discussions related to the case - they are in a media blackout, so they cannot be influenced by public perception.

Hopefully, the prosecutor and defence counsel have formalated solid arguments based on evidence and testimony and do not need to rely on forum discussions to form trial strategies. I think a big difference is that in the US, much of the evidence is released to the public well before the trial. This gives the public a lot of time to come up with theories - some of which may appeal to US court officials. In Canada, the evidence is first learned by the public at the time it is heard in court, so the jury and the public hear it at the same time. I'm not convinced that there's any real advantage for the prosecutor or defence counsel to see what is being said on forums.

Oldsoul2
04-28-2012, 12:35 PM
From the Caylee Anthony case, it was reported after the trial that there were media/internet watchers that did exactly what Snoopster was suggesting. They sat on the boards and then reported back to the defense. The information was used to influence the direction of the defense. One of the woman actually gave an interview - I don't have a link, it is buried in the Anthony case media files - but I will look to see if a thread was set up to discuss as it seems there was. It was speculated by posters here that the prosecution should have also used this technique to stay on top of their presentation.

The public should NOT have any influence on the outcome of a criminal trial - but I think they have more influence now with the internet then they ever had before.

Salem

Interesting you brought this up because my biggest beef with that defense team was their own constant complaining about the possible media influence on their clients verdict, costing the state of Florida and its tax payers more money than any other trial in history. Yet they used the media to get their angle to get their client off on a crime IMO she clearly committed. Not only did the jury get duped but the public paid for her to walk. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. My point is there is no way to prevent the public from stating their opinion, here on WS or anywhere else and whether were watching it live from a courtroom or following via twitter, the system will always use public opinion some way some how.

otto
04-28-2012, 12:36 PM
From the Caylee Anthony case, it was reported after the trial that there were media/internet watchers that did exactly what Snoopster was suggesting. They sat on the boards and then reported back to the defense. The information was used to influence the direction of the defense. One of the woman actually gave an interview - I don't have a link, it is buried in the Anthony case media files - but I will look to see if a thread was set up to discuss as it seems there was. It was speculated by posters here that the prosecution should have also used this technique to stay on top of their presentation.

The public should NOT have any influence on the outcome of a criminal trial - but I think they have more influence now with the internet then they ever had before.

Salem

That would require that the defendant agree to pay for someone to read forums and that he/she have funds to pay for the service. I suppose it's possible, but I doubt that it has ever happened in Canada. Prosecutors that I know impose their own media blackout during trial because they do not want exposure to opinions about the trial progress and direction. They are doing a job, for better or worse, and are doing the best they can.

Another point about Canadian law that may make a difference is that prosecutors are not elected in Canada, like they are in the US. They are regular lawyers that apply for the job, work their way up the ranks and can keep the job for life if they choose. Although they want to "win" as badly as any prosecutor, their job, promotions and future are not on the line when they try a case.

JayFriend
04-28-2012, 01:01 PM
We have discussed this is passing - but never hurts to discuss it again. We know this happened in the Caylee Anthony case. There were articles written about it in MSM and some of the articles even discussed what the watchers were looking at when reviewing different boards.

What is "MSM"?

Shasta
04-28-2012, 01:07 PM
What is "MSM"?

main stream media

greenthumb
04-28-2012, 01:22 PM
Not directly related to this case, but I found this description of withdrawal from Oxy interesting...

The symptoms of withdrawal are excruciating. It's like having barbed wire pulled through your veins.”

And there's another problem: if you're already on a methadone program when you go to jail, they make sure that you continue treatment. But if you're not on the program, you can't get on it in jail. Instead you face about a week of acute withdrawal and then a chemically induced depression for 12 to 18 months.

“In jail, (prisoners) have no education around their addiction, no access to counselling and when they come out of jail they're no further ahead in accessing services for addictions. It's a huge set-up for them to fail.”

http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/2012/04/27/car-theft-oxy-linked-in-a-big-way

I cannot say it I find it displeasing to imagine that the first week of MR's jail time was very, very unpleasant for him. And am I correct that there was a time when he was on suicide watch? Perhaps due to the 12-18 months of chemically induced depression - because IMHO, it would not be from remorse, since he has displayed absolutely no sign of having a consience.

Just MOO.

Yody04
04-28-2012, 01:27 PM
I was searching around for some information about Tori's law.
I found an old article and want to share this part about MTR. That was shortly after his arrest.

*A 28-year-old man, Michael Thomas Rafferty, is facing charges of kidnapping and first-degree murder.

Rafferty, who is said to be on suicide watch in a London, Ont. prison and is in isolation, is expected to make a video appearance in court on Thursday.

His lawyer, Hal Mattson, said his client is having a difficult time adjusting to his situation.

"It is a difficult thing when you've never been in a jail cell and you've never been in jail before and you're charged with a serious crime like this," told CTV News. "It's very difficult, for anybody."
*
I am wondering if he got used to the cell now

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 01:45 PM
I think the defense team got that info thrown out. JMO. We know all about TLM and the defense were all over that but nothing much about their client has come out at all. Why not?
IME it's the norm, much of what is out about TLM came out after her trial. We'll have to wait and see if there is more info about MR.

Friends and I were discussing the 1994 Stark trial for the abduction and murder of 14 year old Julie Ann Stanton in Pickering. She was his daughter's best friend. :( It was huge then to have a first degree murder conviction with no body or crime scene. Her remains were found a few years after the trial. Horrible, but at least her remains were found, unlike Liz Bain.

Anyway, the jurors were not told about Stark's past, including serving time for stabbing a hitch hiker and I don't recall what else. I remember being really startled at the time. JME

daisy.faithfull
04-28-2012, 01:57 PM
Not directly related to this case, but I found this description of withdrawal from Oxy interesting...

The symptoms of withdrawal are excruciating. It's like having barbed wire pulled through your veins.”

And there's another problem: if you're already on a methadone program when you go to jail, they make sure that you continue treatment. But if you're not on the program, you can't get on it in jail. Instead you face about a week of acute withdrawal and then a chemically induced depression for 12 to 18 months.

“In jail, (prisoners) have no education around their addiction, no access to counselling and when they come out of jail they're no further ahead in accessing services for addictions. It's a huge set-up for them to fail.”

http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/2012/04/27/car-theft-oxy-linked-in-a-big-way

I cannot say it I find it displeasing to imagine that the first week of MR's jail time was very, very unpleasant for him. And am I correct that there was a time when he was on suicide watch? Perhaps due to the 12-18 months of chemically induced depression - because IMHO, it would not be from remorse, since he has displayed absolutely no sign of having a consience.

Just MOO.

If someone is using Oxy and is addicted to it do they have withdrawals if they have to use Percocets?

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 02:34 PM
I'm not sure, depends how many they can get I suppose?

"What is OxyContin?
OxyContin (“Oxy” or “OC” on the street) is a time-released pain medication. It was developed in 1995 for people needing around-the-clock pain relief, so they don’t have to take pills as often. OxyContin contains oxycodone, which is an opioid drug, like morphine, codeine, heroin and methadone.

Oxycodone is the same opioid that’s in Percocet, Oxycocet and Endocet.


What’s the difference between Percocet and OxyContin?
Both Percocet and OxyContin relieve pain, but while Percocet gives relief for about five hours, the effects of OxyContin last for about 12 hours.

Percocet contains five milligrams of oxycodone, which is all released when the pill is taken. Percocet also contains acetaminophen (the drug in Tylenol), which makes people sick if they take a lot of it.

OxyContin doesn’t contain acetaminophen. It is pure oxycodone in amounts much larger than in Percocet. In Canada, OxyContin pills come with 10, 20, 40 or 80 mg of oxycodone. Just one OxyContin pill can have the same amount of oxycodone as 16 Percocet pills.

With OxyContin, only part of the oxycodone is released when the pill is taken. The rest of the oxycodone has been coated so that it is released into the body slowly. This is how OxyContin relieves pain for so many hours. "

http://www.camh.net/about_addiction_mental_health/drug_and_addiction_information/oxycontin_straight_talk.html

snoofer
04-28-2012, 02:36 PM
I agree 100 percent...I too feel that this is very odd...and YES Mr. Rafferty certain DID NOT suddenly appear ...I'll say hmmm may be a stork delivered him at the age of 29...and he just got dropped on OUR wonderful Province Ont...LMAO!...but it is NOT funny in the least way ....I think I shall be traveling to LONDON next week ...I can hardly bare this whole BS story IMO....robynhood!

His mother should have thrown him out and kept the stork - Mae West


MOO

otto
04-28-2012, 02:46 PM
bet mom wished she had kept the stork and sent him back MOO

MR was still living with his mom at the age of 28 ... he had no career direction, no income, no life path. She obviously enabled him through his life if she was still providing for her unemployed 28 year old son. It was her responsibilty to ask how he was able to make car payments and where his money came from since she knew he wasn't working. She must have turned a blind eye many times.

Macright
04-28-2012, 02:48 PM
IME it's the norm, much of what is out about TLM came out after her trial. We'll have to wait and see if there is more info about MR.

Friends and I were discussing the 1994 Stark trial for the abduction and murder of 14 year old Julie Ann Stanton in Pickering. She was his daughter's best friend. :( It was huge then to have a first degree murder conviction with no body or crime scene. Her remains were found a few years after the trial. Horrible, but at least her remains were found, unlike Liz Bain.

Anyway, the jurors were not told about Stark's past, including serving time for stabbing a hitch hiker and I don't recall what else. I remember being really startled at the time. JME


actually I read most about TLM and her life BEFORE her trial..after she was picked up as a suspect...just how evil and demented she was I learned at this trial...so I am still wondering why we have not heard a great deal about MR's life and upbringing...as I said previously...it all seems to be rather hush hush...JMO

Salem
04-28-2012, 02:56 PM
Sorry to take so long getting back to this, I had to step out for a bit. Here is the thread containing the discussion of the social media consultant in the Caylee Anthony case, for those that are interested: How the defense team used social media to their advantage - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

Salem

Macright
04-28-2012, 02:57 PM
MR was still living with his mom at the age of 28 ... he had no career direction, no income, no life path. She obviously enabled him through his life if she was still providing for her unemployed 28 year old son. It was her responsibilty to ask how he was able to make car payments and where his money came from since she knew he wasn't working. She must have turned a blind eye many times.


lots of people live with their parents these days...not unusual at all..we don't know if he was contributing anything or not.. and as per the bank records he certainly was earning $$$..well he had access to $$$ as per the escort "lady"...we know nothing about his relationship with his Mother or his family only what people want to think it was..no actual facts...yes we did hear a snippet from the ex of his Mother but nothing concrete...so until we hear more I would never think to make statements on his relationship with his Mother because I will not surmise anything until I know for certain..the only think I know for a fact now is that he was using drugs and possibly dealing in them...and in a business deal with an "escort"... I think his relationship with CM & TLM MAY have been because of drugs... JMO remember we are "armchair" detectives (or so I have been told many times ha.) JMO

tmhco
04-28-2012, 02:58 PM
I just ran across this article regarding the crown releasing discovery to TLM and her lawyer. They turned over a massive amount of discovery on 8/12/09 which I would guess included the fact that they could not determine who murdered Tori. TLM knew that they could not determine who did it when she plead guilty. JMO

http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1697080

Tahorn
04-28-2012, 03:02 PM
lots of people live with their parents these days...not unusual at all..we don't know if he was contributing anything.. and as per the bank records he certainly was earning $$$..well he had access to $$$ as per the escort "lady"...we know nothing about his relationship with his Mother or his family only what people want to think it was..no actual facts...yes we did hear a snippet from the ex of his Mother but nothing concrete...so until we hear more I would never think to make statements on his relationship with his Mother because I will not surmise anything until I know for certain..the only think I know for a fact now is that he was using drugs and possibly dealing in them...and in a business deal with an "escort"... I think his relationship with CM & TLM MAY have been because of drugs... JMO remember we are "armchair" detectives (or so I have been told many times ha.) JMO

Back in 2009 lots of people were unemployed and living with family ... our economy was in a recession. I had PHD's applying for housekeeping position because they found themselves out of work ... people did a lot of things to earn money.

Macright
04-28-2012, 03:03 PM
Sorry to take so long getting back to this, I had to step out for a bit. Here is the thread containing the discussion of the social media consultant in the Caylee Anthony case, for those that are interested: How the defense team used social media to their advantage - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144441)

Salem

thanks for that...I also remember the case about the jogger in DC who was missing and later found murdered...I also remember how a member of Congress & his family from CA was crucified nightly on LK live by NG and a few other infamous talking heads when that girl went missing..granted I realize that HE was having an affair with her..thank god that would never be permitted in Canada (not the affair) but the talking head shite..... years later when her body was found they arrested someone else for the crime but the damage had been done by that time...sad... JMO

otto
04-28-2012, 03:10 PM
lots of people live with their parents these days...not unusual at all..we don't know if he was contributing anything.. and as per the bank records he certainly was earning $$$..well he had access to $$$ as per the escort "lady"...we know nothing about his relationship with his Mother or his family only what people want to think it was..no actual facts...yes we did hear a snippet from the ex of his Mother but nothing concrete...so until we hear more I would never think to make statements on his relationship with his Mother because I will not surmise anything until I know for certain..the only think I know for a fact now is that he was using drugs and possibly dealing in them...and in a business deal with an "escort"... I think his relationship with CM & TLM MAY have been because of drugs... JMO remember we are "armchair" detectives (or so I have been told many times ha.) JMO

I push offspring out of the nest when they turn 18. I'm there for them, and they can come back for a short time if they falter, but 18 years old is when I expect children to embark on their own lives. If they study, costs are covered, if they don't study, they are mostly on their own financially. Personally, if I had a 28 year old, unemployed, dishonest, doped-up child in my life, he/she would definitely not be living at home, sponging off me. 28 year old men living with their moms often turn into 50 year old men living with their moms ... they have no incentive to make change ... it's not healthy for anyone. That said, yes, I do have opinions about 28 year old men that still need mom to look after them, none of them flattering to the men or the mom.

snoofer
04-28-2012, 03:11 PM
MR was still living with his mom at the age of 28 ... he had no career direction, no income, no life path. She obviously enabled him through his life if she was still providing for her unemployed 28 year old son. It was her responsibilty to ask how he was able to make car payments and where his money came from since she knew he wasn't working. She must have turned a blind eye many times.

yes all the money for the expensive clothes, drugs, gas....she had to know it was illegal behavior; unless lordy knows maybe she thought he taught dancing every day.MOO

wonders what he told the neighbours about whether he was employed or not; and wonder what the mother told others about whether he worked or not. MOO

Tahorn
04-28-2012, 03:15 PM
I just ran across this article regarding the crown releasing discovery to TLM and her lawyer. They turned over a massive amount of discovery on 8/12/09 which I would guess included the fact that they could not determine who murdered Tori. TLM knew that they could not determine who did it when she plead guilty. JMO

http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1697080

I truly believe that since she was the one on video kidnapping VS pleading guilty was her only chance of every getting out. Besides life in prison for killing VS because she wanted to stop VS suffering will be hard enough, but almost impossible if she did it for no reason... I DO NOT BELIEVE she plead out of the goodness in her heart …

otto
04-28-2012, 03:17 PM
Back in 2009 lots of people were unemployed and living with family ... our economy was in a recession. I had PHD's applying for housekeeping position because they found themselves out of work ... people did a lot of things to earn money.

The Canadian recession was very mild compared to other countries, and it was only starting in 2009. During a recession, many people take advantage of government retraining opportunities to upgrade skills. Workman's Compensation, Employment Insurance both provide free educational upgrading. I don't know about welfare, but I suspect that there are possibilities for people on welfare to access educational upgrades ... and there is always the option of student loans. Every year, regardless of a recession, people find themselves in difficult financial situations. Some 28 year old single, young, fit, men with no limitations in the world will take the easy route and move in with mom, but many will make the best of the situation and manage on their own.

otto
04-28-2012, 03:28 PM
yes all the money for the expensive clothes, drugs, gas....she had to know it was illegal behavior; unless lordy knows maybe she thought he taught dancing every day.MOO

wonders what he told the neighbours about whether he was employed or not; and wonder what the mother told others about whether he worked or not. MOO

I completely agree. She should have known that something was amiss. Not asking the difficult questions, or intervening to push him to get help and move forward with his life, would be the easy way out. Maybe I'm wrong and maybe his mom was working hard to help her son get on the right path. It's pretty difficult to influence the choices of a 28 year old. Letting him hit rock bottom on a street corner would have been better. I wonder if she always sensed that there was something off about him and thought that it was best to keep an eye on him under her roof.

Salem
04-28-2012, 03:35 PM
thanks for that...I also remember the case about the jogger in DC who was missing and later found murdered...I also remember how a member of Congress & his family from CA was crucified nightly on LK live by NG and a few other infamous talking heads when that girl went missing..granted I realize that HE was having an affair with her..thank god that would never be permitted in Canada (not the affair) but the talking head shite..... years later when her body was found they arrested someone else for the crime but the damage had been done by that time...sad... JMO

I'm not sure I understand the correlation between the talking heads and the social media consultant used by the defense team here, but I certainly agree the media can put a slant on things.

Just here at WS - we often find that we have to remind sleuths that some folks are off limits for sleuthing until there is a reason, from LE or MSM, to do so. Most investigations start with those closest to the victim and work their way out - that can be very hard on a family or other loved ones.

So... no talking heads in Canada?

Salem

Tahorn
04-28-2012, 03:40 PM
The Canadian recession was very mild compared to other countries, and it was only starting in 2009. During a recession, many people take advantage of government retraining opportunities to upgrade skills. Workman's Compensation, Employment Insurance both provide free educational upgrading. I don't know about welfare, but I suspect that there are possibilities for people on welfare to access educational upgrades ... and there is always the option of student loans. Every year, regardless of a recession, people find themselves in difficult financial situations. Some 28 year old single, young, fit, men with no limitations in the world will take the easy route and move in with mom, but many will make the best of the situation and manage on their own.


One key feature of the downturn is that younger individuals and men from age 25 to 54 have been more affected by job losses (Table 1). Between October 2008 and October 2009, employment declined by 10.8% among young men under 25, and by 6.5% among women in the same age group. Men in their prime working years (25 to 54) were also affected as employment declined by 3.3% over the period for men in this age group. However, gains were seen among those 55 and over, especially for women, among whom employment increased by 6.0%.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2009112/article/11048-eng.htm



Maybe it was just me, but being in the hotel industry I was exposed to many different people from different walks of life, and with that I saw an abundance of young hard working professional men take the long walk back home to mom and dad.

otto
04-28-2012, 03:46 PM
I'm not sure I understand the correlation between the talking heads and the social media consultant used by the defense team here, but I certainly agree the media can put a slant on things.

Just here at WS - we often find that we have to remind sleuths that some folks are off limits for sleuthing until there is a reason, from LE or MSM, to do so. Most investigations start with those closest to the victim and work their way out - that can be very hard on a family or other loved ones.

So... no talking heads in Canada?

Salem

It's true. There are no talking heads discussing court cases prior to trial in Canada. The laws (similar to what we saw in England during the Joanna Yeates trial) do not permit the release of any investigative information prior to trial. There will be blurbs on the evening news about crimes, investigations and arrests, but then there is silence until the trial. During trial, updates are available in the news, but I don't think I've ever seen talking heads trying to guess the outcome of a trial, speculating on what will happen, or discussing the personal lives of the suspects. Nancy Grace would be out of a job in Canada.

tmhco
04-28-2012, 03:51 PM
I truly believe that since she was the one on video kidnapping VS pleading guilty was her only chance of every getting out. Besides life in prison for killing VS because she wanted to stop VS suffering will be hard enough, but almost impossible if she did it for no reason... I DO NOT BELIEVE she plead out of the goodness in her heart …

I wonder what her motivation was to change her story? I am unable to come up with any scenarios that benefitted her. JMO

otto
04-28-2012, 03:51 PM
Maybe it was just me, but being in the hotel industry I was exposed to many different people from different walks of life, and with that I saw an abundance of young hard working professional men take the long walk back home to mom and dad.

My experience was different. I saw that those with marketable skills were able to find employment even when the economy slowed down. The most employable demographic group is young, single, fit men. If they are unable to find work locally, the oil patch in Fort McMurray always has a need for workers, even during recession, where thousands of dollars can be made each month. The only downside for someone like MR is that there's no room for doped up screwups anywhere.

Doped up screwups are all eventually out of work, regardless of the economy.

otto
04-28-2012, 03:54 PM
I wonder what her motivation was to change her story? I am unable to come up with any scenarios that benefitted her. JMO

She was under oath to tell the truth? Maybe her first story morphed between the time that we first heard it and the time that she testified, but that it seems like it was a sudden flip because we only heard about the two conflicting statements with a long time gap in between.

Macright
04-28-2012, 03:55 PM
I'm not sure I understand the correlation between the talking heads and the social media consultant used by the defense team here, but I certainly agree the media can put a slant on things.

Just here at WS - we often find that we have to remind sleuths that some folks are off limits for sleuthing until there is a reason, from LE or MSM, to do so. Most investigations start with those closest to the victim and work their way out - that can be very hard on a family or other loved ones.

So... no talking heads in Canada?

Salem

nothing that would closely resemble what I see on American TV..we are rather a staid bunch up this way and political correctness is always an issue... don't get me wrong...not knocking the US cause I vacation and shop there all the time and find the people very friendly and warm..Canadians as I stated are rather cold and staid..just saying there is a stricter code up this way when it comes to reporting etc....there is only one reporter that I would consider rag mag material but I don't think I can mention the name on here but I am sure you will know who I mean...JMO

robynhood
04-28-2012, 03:57 PM
...IMo this case has really baffled me ...I am sure we will never get some answers ...But I STILL question...HIGHLY why TLM changed her Plea to GULITY of killing Tori ...????

IMO It really breaks my heart that there was NOT more evidence to MR raping Tori...I wish there was NO DOUBTS LEFT AT ALL !...with more forensiac evidence !...I guess MR made sure to TRY to get rid of all.... IMO that is where some of this turned EXTREMELY DIRTY ...Imo I do not think they would have ever LET TORI GO alive ....IMO I feel strongly that both TLM & MR were out for their own ...BACKS ...as Tori could have identified both of them !...also serious wonder what MR mother thought about what has going on with her son....???no job and way too many expensive things and did she not realize he was addicted to Oxy ( bottles were left out )....as mentioned already above my others...I agree 100 percent...again robynhood >>>>

IMO I would love to be a fly on the wall in MR Jail ceel as I am sure MR. Destine is and has PAID many visits to MR about how they are going to deal with his defense ...OMG they did have 3 years and computers full of evidence to EXPLAIN ...?????....How can he ever think that MR will walk free...the thought makes me shake this weekend ....IMo ....OMG ...Now is it not Monday they start this cirus event????...robynhood ...Just can not get my head around the cards they will use for defense ...time shall tell ..IMO ..his colck is ticking FAST ...robynhood...your thoughts fellow SLeuthers....???

otto
04-28-2012, 04:00 PM
nothing that would closely resemble what I see on American TV..we are rather a staid bunch up this way and political correctness is always an issue... don't get me wrong...not knocking the US cause I vacation and shop there all the time and find the people very friendly and warm..Canadians as I stated are rather cold and staid..just saying there is a stricter code up this way when it comes to reporting etc....there is only one reporter that I would consider rag mag material but I don't think I can mention the name on here but I am sure you will know who I mean...JMO

The presumption of innocence is taken very seriously in Canada. The release of investigative information about a case, or talking heads twisting facts prior to trial can taint opinions, juries and the good character of innocent suspects.

Macright
04-28-2012, 04:00 PM
She was under oath to tell the truth? Maybe her first story morphed between the time that we first heard it and the time that she testified, but that it seems like it was a sudden flip because we only heard about the two conflicting statements with a long time gap in between.


I don't think the fact that TLM was under oath caused her to tell the truth..JMO..maybe the kerfuffle in January when she beat up another fellow prisoner had something to do with it...who knows what that person knew and maybe was going to rat on her or had ratted on her...JMO

gardenia
04-28-2012, 04:14 PM
I think TLM would only confess to her role in the murder if it served her own purpose... so she must've thought it did! Guess we'll never know what that was about.
JMO

Tahorn
04-28-2012, 04:33 PM
I wonder what her motivation was to change her story? I am unable to come up with any scenarios that benefitted her. JMO

It may be that her first statement was all a lie, and knowing that there was no DNA evidence to prove the sexual assault that she was the one who kidnapped VS and then admitted to killing her ... MR would get off.

Personally, I believe that if she admitted that MR did not arrange the sexual assault,
a. she would be brought up on charges and classified a dangerous offender and never let out and
b. her status in prison would put her in a very uncomfortable situation. It seems to me she is not in protective custody now …

Just guessing …

daisy.faithfull
04-28-2012, 05:04 PM
I'm not sure, depends how many they can get I suppose?

"What is OxyContin?
OxyContin (“Oxy” or “OC” on the street) is a time-released pain medication. It was developed in 1995 for people needing around-the-clock pain relief, so they don’t have to take pills as often. OxyContin contains oxycodone, which is an opioid drug, like morphine, codeine, heroin and methadone.

Oxycodone is the same opioid that’s in Percocet, Oxycocet and Endocet.


What’s the difference between Percocet and OxyContin?
Both Percocet and OxyContin relieve pain, but while Percocet gives relief for about five hours, the effects of OxyContin last for about 12 hours.

Percocet contains five milligrams of oxycodone, which is all released when the pill is taken. Percocet also contains acetaminophen (the drug in Tylenol), which makes people sick if they take a lot of it.

OxyContin doesn’t contain acetaminophen. It is pure oxycodone in amounts much larger than in Percocet. In Canada, OxyContin pills come with 10, 20, 40 or 80 mg of oxycodone. Just one OxyContin pill can have the same amount of oxycodone as 16 Percocet pills.

With OxyContin, only part of the oxycodone is released when the pill is taken. The rest of the oxycodone has been coated so that it is released into the body slowly. This is how OxyContin relieves pain for so many hours. "

http://www.camh.net/about_addiction_mental_health/drug_and_addiction_information/oxycontin_straight_talk.html

Sizzle, that's a lot! They've given me Percacets before and they knock me over. Can't imagine taking that many! MTR and TLM really could have had a huge, huge habit. Especially TLM since she shot it IV, but then again we don't know that MTR wasn't shooting it.

PS... I love your avatar!

swedie
04-28-2012, 05:19 PM
His mother should have thrown him out and kept the stork - Mae West


MOO

Lol that's a good one Snoof, never heard that one before. I love it! Thanks for the laugh. <3

In my honest opinion I do not foresee MR taking the stand in his own defense. The defense knows as well as MR that the evidence against him is too overwhelming for him to excuse it away. There is no way they can spin a story to make him look like an innocent dupe in this whole case. Especially when we see the video of him driving past the school that morning. That right there goes to show he was up to no good, looking for a child who may have been late for school and planning something. And all the evidence that shows the three of them were all together in his car, Tori's blood mixed with male sperm, her body being found naked from the waist down.

MR IMO won't take the stand. He's a coward and the Crown will chew him up and spit him out and he knows it, Derstine knows it too. My prediction is court will be in Tuesday, Derstine has no witnesses, MR will not take the stand and defense will give their closing argument followed by the Crown's argument and that will be that. The jurors will begin deliberating that day coming back with a guilty verdict in less than eight hours. Of course JMHO.

Tahorn
04-28-2012, 05:20 PM
Sizzle, that's a lot! They've given me Percacets before and they knock me over. Can't imagine taking that many! MTR and TLM really could have had a huge, huge habit. Especially TLM since she shot it IV, but then again we don't know that MTR wasn't shooting it.

PS... I love your avatar!

I believe TLM tesitfied that he only took them orally.

BA testified that before VS went missing she only saw him a couple of times a month, but after she saw him about a dozen. Seems to me he increased his drug use after. Especially after the undercover officers testified.


On Thursday, the trial heard how Rafferty, while in police custody, asked two undercover officers if they had any OxyContin, the highly addictive prescription pill.

He said if he had 80 mg pills, he took four or five daily. But if he had 40 mg ones, he took dozen or so. And if he had Percocets, also prescription pills, he took 20 to 30 every day.

tmhco
04-28-2012, 05:26 PM
It may be that her first statement was all a lie, and knowing that there was no DNA evidence to prove the sexual assault that she was the one who kidnapped VS and then admitted to killing her ... MR would get off.

Personally, I believe that if she admitted that MR did not arrange the sexual assault,
a. she would be brought up on charges and classified a dangerous offender and never let out and
b. her status in prison would put her in a very uncomfortable situation. It seems to me she is not in protective custody now …

Just guessing …

Then why admit to the murder? I would think that would be the greater evil. I can't find a rational reason for her to do so unless it's the truth. All if it. JMO

tmhco
04-28-2012, 05:30 PM
What I am trying to convey is that if you believe TLM implicated MR for revenge, she would never have admitted to the murder. LE could not determine who did it. Everytime I try to go down the defence's suggested theory, that is where I get stuck. JMO

tmhco
04-28-2012, 05:33 PM
I don't think the fact that TLM was under oath caused her to tell the truth..JMO..maybe the kerfuffle in January when she beat up another fellow prisoner had something to do with it...who knows what that person knew and maybe was going to rat on her or had ratted on her...JMO

She changed her story before the assault, I believe. JMO

gardenia
04-28-2012, 05:48 PM
so she first claimed MR murdered VS ... and later admitted that it was her.

so part 1 was a lie & part 2 is the truth, right?

obviously something came to light that might expose the truth, so she 'fessed up. but what?!

jmo

swedie
04-28-2012, 05:53 PM
actually I read most about TLM and her life BEFORE her trial..after she was picked up as a suspect...just how evil and demented she was I learned at this trial...so I am still wondering why we have not heard a great deal about MR's life and upbringing...as I said previously...it all seems to be rather hush hush...JMO

Yes I found that rather strange also how TLM hid nothing about her past, put it all on facebook and boasted to people about her character in and out of detention and to her friends. TLM was more the character who was more talk then action. "If" she was the one who welded that hammer, it is because she was put up to it by MR or she did suffer from severe flashbacks of herself being sexually abused as a child and could not stand to think of what Tori would endure for the rest of her life being a victim to sexual assault. I will go for the first though that MR put her up to it. As TLM stated during her testimony MR saying, "we can't keep her and we can't take her back" and "you're just as far into it as I am", speaks volumes. I just pray Tori did not understand or was privy to their sick discussions, or understood what MR was meaning while she was huddled and terrified on the floor of his car.

Then there's MR so secretive and sly. As the saying goes, those are the ones you have to look out for; wolf in sheep's clothing. I believe MR was the more evil of the two. I see him as being the sexual deviant and finding the perfect victim/partner in TLM to help him carry out his hidden sexual demons. With all the women he had traipsing in and out of his life and using them for sex, money, a place to stay, taking advantage of CS for financial gain, even using his own mother for personal and financial gains shows me he had no respect for woman whatsoever. It was all a false front to fill his own warped needs. He sure is one sick puppy in MOO.

antiquegirl
04-28-2012, 05:55 PM
MR was still living with his mom at the age of 28 ... he had no career direction, no income, no life path. She obviously enabled him through his life if she was still providing for her unemployed 28 year old son. It was her responsibilty to ask how he was able to make car payments and where his money came from since she knew he wasn't working. She must have turned a blind eye many times.

(RSBM)

I agree that there had to have been a lot of enabling going on, but wanted to correct a couple of things. MTR was technically not "still" living with his mom; he was living with her again. He had been on his own either off and on for years prior, or continuously, for many years before moving back in with her. Although our knowledge of several of those years are sketchy, we do know he lived in Toronto in his early twenties, with DM in Guelph, and again with a different girl in Oakville. He moved back in with his mother about a year and a bit before the crime.

We haven't had confirmation of the other jobs he claimed to have, but he did work for "Outdoor Services", the landscaping company, off and on from 2003 to 2006.

As for income, I almost laughed reading that. According to CS's testimony, he had more than $16,000 of it coming from her in less than six months. Regardless of how you classify it, I guess you still have to consider it income. And then there was the alleged drug dealing, although there has not really been testimony to verify that.

Certainly, not an admirable lifestyle for sure and one that I would have a lot of questions about if I were his mother. But, more than likely, he lied to her like he lied to everyone else. It seems he was pretty good at it.

This entire case has so many tragic elements with the most obvious being little Tori's fate, of course. But there are many victims here and, as a mother myself, I can't help but think that MTR's mom once carried him for nine months, fed him, changed his diapers, and rocked him in her arms as a baby. No matter what the jury decides, these are memories that will always be with her. Even on the unlikely chance that he is acquitted of all charges, the revelations about her son that have surfaced over the past few weeks should fill her with many questions, guilt, regret, and great sorrow. I pity her.

JMO

daisy.faithfull
04-28-2012, 06:05 PM
lots of people live with their parents these days...not unusual at all..we don't know if he was contributing anything or not.. and as per the bank records he certainly was earning $$$..well he had access to $$$ as per the escort "lady"...we know nothing about his relationship with his Mother or his family only what people want to think it was..no actual facts...yes we did hear a snippet from the ex of his Mother but nothing concrete...so until we hear more I would never think to make statements on his relationship with his Mother because I will not surmise anything until I know for certain..the only think I know for a fact now is that he was using drugs and possibly dealing in them...and in a business deal with an "escort"... I think his relationship with CM & TLM MAY have been because of drugs... JMO remember we are "armchair" detectives (or so I have been told many times ha.) JMO

We don't know for certain, but if at the very least he was "just" doing drugs and "had a business deal with an 'escort' he would be engaging in illegal activities, because didn't escorting just become legal up there?

I would never want to live with someone that was engaged in illegal activity and especially illegal activity where they come into contact with other criminals and people that are on drugs. That is a dangerous combination. Maybe I'm on here too much, but what if he pissed off the wrong person? People are always wondering if Tara had a drug debt which resulted in what happened to Tori, and while I don't think that is the case here, I really believe that people put their loved ones in jeapordy when they do stuff like that.

Maybe his mom was in deep denial, maybe she was just so overwhelmed with everything she just didn't know what to do, but she didn't deserve that.

moo

Wondergirl
04-28-2012, 06:23 PM
Considering I don't for a second believe the "escort" friend of MR was simply handing over all her money to MR, because he was some kind of Svengali, I am thinking there is more to the debt theory than we presently know.

MR was picking up drugs from various sources , and people were depositing money into his account...............to me that looks like drug trafficking. It doesn't mean MR was the man behind it all though. He might have just been the errand boy and go between.

If there is more the defense should be able to reveal it all.

After all, they have MR sitting right there with all the information.

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

I just LOVE how Derstine didn't touch the Escort testimony with a 10 foot pole.

He just wasn't gonna go there.

Hmmmmm.....wonder why??

P.S. You aren't suggesting that MTR wasn't a drug dealer, are you?!

JMO

brighidin
04-28-2012, 06:27 PM
(RSBM)


This entire case has so many tragic elements with the most obvious being little Tori's fate, of course. But there are many victims here and, as a mother myself, I can't help but think that MTR's mom once carried him for nine months, fed him, changed his diapers, and rocked him in her arms as a baby. No matter what the jury decides, these are memories that will always be with her. Even on the unlikely chance that he is acquitted of all charges, the revelations about her son that have surfaced over the past few weeks should fill her with many questions, guilt, regret, and great sorrow. I pity her.

JMO

As a mother, I feel so sad for Tara. Despite her faults, she loved Tori so much. She carried her for 9 months, changed her, rocked her, comforted her, played with her. Then MR and TLM stole all that from her. TM should be having to deal with a precious, whirlwind of a pre-teen daughter right now. Instead, she is attending the trial of her darling daughter's alleged murder. That is who I feel sorry for.

swedie
04-28-2012, 06:31 PM
I wonder what her motivation was to change her story? I am unable to come up with any scenarios that benefitted her. JMO

IMHO I feel TLM told the truth and she wanted the jurors to see it as just that. That they could take her testimony as the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. She was influenced by MR the more evil of the the two to carry out what happened to Tori and she feels that if she is going to pay with a 25 year sentence, so is he. As she stated or similar, "I don't want MR to do this to any other children". We know her story throughout this whole case has remained consistent other than who was the one to stomp and kick Tori and who struck her with the hammer. So why would she now admit to it as it serves no purpose to help her? Especially if she was privy to the fact that the autopsy results could not prove who did all the damage to Tori. If anything it is more damaging for her if she ever had the hope of using the faint hope clause. AND once again I fail to see where TLM is a chronic liar other then what I pointed out above. Damn she even admitted to nuking her dog. I for one believe her testimony to be the whole truth and IMHO I bet the jurors see it as such also. MOO

Wondergirl
04-28-2012, 06:38 PM
What I am trying to convey is that if you believe TLM implicated MR for revenge, she would never have admitted to the murder. LE could not determine who did it. Everytime I try to go down the defence's suggested theory, that is where I get stuck. JMO


Bingo!

daisy.faithfull
04-28-2012, 06:39 PM
I believe TLM tesitfied that he only took them orally.

BA testified that before VS went missing she only saw him a couple of times a month, but after she saw him about a dozen. Seems to me he increased his drug use after. Especially after the undercover officers testified.

That's a lot of drugs.

That makes sense, the only thing though is that I think he had other drug contact and may have been getting scripts from others too. I thought TLM also testified that she would take MTR to get drugs from her friends. I don't think that BA was his only Dr. Feelgood so I don't really think we can use her as a gauge in determining how much MTR was using. And then remember the pill bottles they found at his mom's house?

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 06:42 PM
actually I read most about TLM and her life BEFORE her trial..after she was picked up as a suspect...just how evil and demented she was I learned at this trial...so I am still wondering why we have not heard a great deal about MR's life and upbringing...as I said previously...it all seems to be rather hush hush...JMO

sorry the "much" I meant is the evil demented things we learned about TLM at this trial.

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 06:48 PM
yes all the money for the expensive clothes, drugs, gas....she had to know it was illegal behavior; unless lordy knows maybe she thought he taught dancing every day.MOO

wonders what he told the neighbours about whether he was employed or not; and wonder what the mother told others about whether he worked or not. MOO

JME he wouldn't be the first adult child living at home with a parent/parents, and them being unaware of how they made money. And we don't know how long he was unemployed, and many adults return to the nest at times afaik. JMO I posted awhile ago I think about my fiance's roomie before we lived together, he would dress and leave for "work" every day. And after my fiance left he would go back home and start drinking. Reminds me of another recent case. JME

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 06:53 PM
I wonder what her motivation was to change her story? I am unable to come up with any scenarios that benefitted her. JMO

JMO could be to have cred in jail, be seen as crazy and tough to deter physical attacks, or could be trying to not appear to be a "pigeon", also very bad in jail. If there was a sexual attack, and if it was by TLM, she'll never cop to that imo. Anyway as far as reasons, only she knows imo, and possibly her attorney. It was to her benefit in some way for sure JMO

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 07:00 PM
Sizzle, that's a lot! They've given me Percacets before and they knock me over. Can't imagine taking that many! MTR and TLM really could have had a huge, huge habit. Especially TLM since she shot it IV, but then again we don't know that MTR wasn't shooting it.

PS... I love your avatar!

bbm, thanks, HaLeigh and her family are always in my thoughts and prayers.

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 07:03 PM
...IMo this case has really baffled me ...I am sure we will never get some answers ...But I STILL question...HIGHLY why TLM changed her Plea to GULITY of killing Tori ...????

IMO It really breaks my heart that there was NOT more evidence to MR raping Tori...I wish there was NO DOUBTS LEFT AT ALL !...with more forensiac evidence !...I guess MR made sure to TRY to get rid of all.... IMO that is where some of this turned EXTREMELY DIRTY ...Imo I do not think they would have ever LET TORI GO alive ....IMO I feel strongly that both TLM & MR were out for their own ...BACKS ...as Tori could have identified both of them !...also serious wonder what MR mother thought about what has going on with her son....???no job and way too many expensive things and did she not realize he was addicted to Oxy ( bottles were left out )....as mentioned already above my others...I agree 100 percent...again robynhood >>>>

IMO I would love to be a fly on the wall in MR Jail ceel as I am sure MR. Destine is and has PAID many visits to MR about how they are going to deal with his defense ...OMG they did have 3 years and computers full of evidence to EXPLAIN ...?????....How can he ever think that MR will walk free...the thought makes me shake this weekend ....IMo ....OMG ...Now is it not Monday they start this cirus event????...robynhood ...Just can not get my head around the cards they will use for defense ...time shall tell ..IMO ..his colck is ticking FAST ...robynhood...your thoughts fellow SLeuthers....???

bbm,Tuesday

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 07:07 PM
What I am trying to convey is that if you believe TLM implicated MR for revenge, she would never have admitted to the murder. LE could not determine who did it. Everytime I try to go down the defence's suggested theory, that is where I get stuck. JMO

bbm, JMO she didn't until long after she was sentenced. JMO

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 07:12 PM
As a mother, I feel so sad for Tara. Despite her faults, she loved Tori so much. She carried her for 9 months, changed her, rocked her, comforted her, played with her. Then MR and TLM stole all that from her. TM should be having to deal with a precious, whirlwind of a pre-teen daughter right now. Instead, she is attending the trial of her darling daughter's alleged murder. That is who I feel sorry for.

JMO I feel sorry for Tori's beloved brother, both of her parents, her grandparents, and aunts and uncles, all of Tori's friends and extended family. I also feel for the families of the convicted and accused. However, I feel sorry for Tori most of all. JMO

snoofer
04-28-2012, 07:52 PM
What I am trying to convey is that if you believe TLM implicated MR for revenge, she would never have admitted to the murder. LE could not determine who did it. Everytime I try to go down the defence's suggested theory, that is where I get stuck. If convicted for the rape part; his gf list would suffer big time. JMO

Could it be or perhaps defense might suggest TLM changed her story to "take the fall" as she suggested she would to MTR but figured if she leaves in the rape part that would mess him up with other women, but she would still have sex with him as she was right along. Gets rid of the other women and MTR still has her and she gets him to herself. She said she told because she didn't want him doing that to other children. Yet, it didn't bother her to continue a romantic relationship with him afterwards as seen in the Genest video. JMO Maybe thought they could have CV in prison and he might get out as time served with the 2:1 for serving time in detention awaiting trial. And then when out he might continue visiting her as they had before. MOO

Sometimes a prisoner will get a 2 for 1 credit for time spent in detention awaiting trial because it is considered hard time and it takes so long to go to trial. MOO In the Don Jail some prisoners were give 3 to 1 credit for time spent in detention awaiting trial there. Not sure that would happen with such a serious crime; but not sure JMO It might not happen anymore but it used to for sure.

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 08:12 PM
Could it be or perhaps defense might suggest TLM changed her story to "take the fall" as she suggested she would to MTR but figured if she leaves in the rape part that would mess him up with other women, but she would still have sex with him as she was right along. Gets rid of the other women and MTR still has her and she gets him to herself. She said she told because she didn't want him doing that to other children. Yet, it didn't bother her to continue a romantic relationship with him afterwards as seen in the Genest video. JMO Maybe thought they could have CV in prison and he might get out as time served with the 2:1 for serving time in detention awaiting trial. And then when out he might continue visiting her as they had before. MOO

Sometimes a prisoner will get a 2 for 1 credit for time spent in detention awaiting trial because it is considered hard time and it takes so long to go to trial. MOO In the Don Jail some prisoners were give 3 to 1 credit for time spent in detention awaiting trial there. Not sure that would happen with such a serious crime; but not sure JMO It might not happen anymore but it used to for sure.

bbm, jmo, doubt it. from wiki:

"In Canada, all inmates, with the exception of those on disciplinary restrictions or at risk for family violence, are permitted "private family visits" of up to 72 hours' duration once every two months. Eligible visitors, who may not themselves be prison inmates, are: spouse, or common-law partner of at least six months; children; parents; foster parents; siblings; grandparents; and "persons with whom, in the opinion of the institutional head, the inmate has a close familial bond". Food is provided by the institution but paid by the inmates and visitors, who are also responsible for cleaning the unit after the visit. During a visit, staff members have regular contact with the inmate and visitors"

snoofer
04-28-2012, 08:14 PM
I completely agree. She should have known that something was amiss. Not asking the difficult questions, or intervening to push him to get help and move forward with his life, would be the easy way out. Maybe I'm wrong and maybe his mom was working hard to help her son get on the right path. It's pretty difficult to influence the choices of a 28 year old. Letting him hit rock bottom on a street corner would have been better. I wonder if she always sensed that there was something off about him and thought that it was best to keep an eye on him under her roof.

she may have been manipulated or she may have known he wasn't "all there" and was at a loss what to do with him. JMO

and yes (highlighted in red) that could be possible as well. JMO

we don't know anything from the news about his mother; so I would like to give her the benefit of the doubt. There is a movie called "Beautiful Boy" that deals with a very similar situation and it shows the confusion of the parents, the guilt, the questioning of themselves and every small detail throughout the son's childhood. And in the end they still had no answers but they suffered immensely. They grieved too because they lost a son that day too but there would be no caring, mercy or understanding for them because their son was a murderer so they cried in hiding. We don't know what that relationship was like except for he lived at home at that age while being a criminal..but we don't know the "why". MOO

That in no way lessens the empathy I have for TS family as TS and her family are the most obvious victims and it was horrendous what has happened to TS and her parents and those that love her. And I have no use for the perpetrators of this crime. MOO

I would assume the parents of a murderer or rapist etc would go through similar stages of grief. Because that person is no longer the person they thought they were. That person would be gone to them similar to a death although not exactly like one. MOO That first stage may even be denial.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1533013/

Above link contains the trailer for "Beautiful Boy". Very thought provoking movie dealing with this subject. JMO

matou
04-28-2012, 08:14 PM
(RSBM)

I agree that there had to have been a lot of enabling going on, but wanted to correct a couple of things. MTR was technically not "still" living with his mom; he was living with her again. He had been on his own either off and on for years prior, or continuously, for many years before moving back in with her. Although our knowledge of several of those years are sketchy, we do know he lived in Toronto in his early twenties, with DM in Guelph, and again with a different girl in Oakville. He moved back in with his mother about a year and a bit before the crime.

We haven't had confirmation of the other jobs he claimed to have, but he did work for "Outdoor Services", the landscaping company, off and on from 2003 to 2006.

As for income, I almost laughed reading that. According to CS's testimony, he had more than $16,000 of it coming from her in less than six months. Regardless of how you classify it, I guess you still have to consider it income. And then there was the alleged drug dealing, although there has not really been testimony to verify that.

Certainly, not an admirable lifestyle for sure and one that I would have a lot of questions about if I were his mother. But, more than likely, he lied to her like he lied to everyone else. It seems he was pretty good at it.

This entire case has so many tragic elements with the most obvious being little Tori's fate, of course. But there are many victims here and, as a mother myself, I can't help but think that MTR's mom once carried him for nine months, fed him, changed his diapers, and rocked him in her arms as a baby. No matter what the jury decides, these are memories that will always be with her. Even on the unlikely chance that he is acquitted of all charges, the revelations about her son that have surfaced over the past few weeks should fill her with many questions, guilt, regret, and great sorrow. I pity her.

JMO

Rafferty isn't dead. I pity the mother of the victim. JMO

Flossie JMO
04-28-2012, 08:21 PM
Could it be or perhaps defense might suggest TLM changed her story to "take the fall" as she suggested she would to MTR but figured if she leaves in the rape part that would mess him up with other women, but she would still have sex with him as she was right along. Gets rid of the other women and MTR still has her and she gets him to herself. She said she told because she didn't want him doing that to other children. Yet, it didn't bother her to continue a romantic relationship with him afterwards as seen in the Genest video. JMO Maybe thought they could have CV in prison and he might get out as time served with the 2:1 for serving time in detention awaiting trial. And then when out he might continue visiting her as they had before. MOO

Sometimes a prisoner will get a 2 for 1 credit for time spent in detention awaiting trial because it is considered hard time and it takes so long to go to trial. MOO In the Don Jail some prisoners were give 3 to 1 credit for time spent in detention awaiting trial there. Not sure that would happen with such a serious crime; but not sure JMO It might not happen anymore but it used to for sure.

re credits for time served ie dead time: http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?Language=E&ls=C25&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=2&source=library_prb



"The bill amends the Criminal Code (the Code) to limit the credit a judge may allow for any time spent in pre-sentencing custody in order to reduce the punishment to be imposed at sentencing, commonly called “credit for time served.”(1) There are three scenarios:


■In general, a judge may allow a maximum credit of one day for each day spent in pre-sentencing custody (“custody” in the bill) (clause 3 of the bill, new section 719(3) of the Code). On 8 October 2009, the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs proposed to amend the bill to allow a maximum credit of one and one-half days for each day spent in pre-sentencing custody. However, the Senate defeated the amendment on 20 October 2009.
■However, if, and only if, the circumstances justify it, a judge may allow a maximum credit of one and one-half days for each day spent in pre-sentencing custody (clause 3 of the bill, new section 719(3.1) of the Code). On 8 October 2009, the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs proposed to amend the bill to allow a maximum credit of two days for each day spent in pre-sentencing custody. However, the Senate defeated the amendment on 20 October 2009.
■If the person’s criminal record or breach of conditions of release on bail was the reason for the pre-sentencing custody,(2) a judge may not allow more than one day’s credit for each day spent in pre-sentencing custody (clause 3 of the bill, new section 719(3.1) of the Code). On 8 October 2009, the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs proposed to amend the bill to allow a maximum credit of one and one-half days for each day spent in pre-sentencing custody. However, the Senate defeated the amendment on 20 October 2009."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2010/02/23/nicholson-truth-sentencing.html

"New law ends 2-for-1 credit on jail sentencesJustice Minister Rob Nicholson announced on Tuesday that the Truth in Sentencing Act has now come into effect. (Chris Wattie/Reuters) Federal legislation limiting the amount of credit prisoners can get for time served in custody before and during their trial has become law, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson announced on Tuesday.

"The two-for-one credit is no longer an option. This will bring more truth in sentencing and give Canadians confidence that justice is being served," Nicholson told reporters in Ottawa .

The Truth in Sentencing Act was actually granted royal assent on Oct. 21, 2009, but came into effect on Monday."

Truth in sentencing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"In Canada, the Truth in Sentencing act, or Bill C-25[1] came into effect on Monday, February 22, 2010.[2] This bill amends s.719 of the Criminal Code of Canada, limiting the discretion of a sentencing judges to give credit to individuals who have spent time incarcerated prior to conviction. Prior to this bill being implemented, as discussed by Justice Arbour in R v. Wust,[3] credit for pre-sentencing custody was not determined by a 'mathematical formula' but many judges have frequently granted a two-for-one credit. This is justified by the quantitative and qualitative differences between pre-and post-sentencing incarceration. Most individuals who are incarcerated will not serve the full length of their sentence, and because time spent incarcerated pre-sentence does not count towards remission time, where a lengthy pre-sentence incarceration is credited equally to post-sentencing incarceration the convicted individual will serve a longer sentence compared to an individual given the same sentence without a lengthy period of pre-sentencing incarceration. Arbour also points out that pre-sentence incarceration is typically served in detention, in harsher circumstances than the sentence will ultimately call for and without access to educational, rehabilitative and vocational programs.

Bill C-25 creates three changes in the Criminal Code;[4] now under s.719(3), generally the maximum credit a judge can give 1:1. Under s.719(3.1) and 719(3.2) a judge can only give a credit of 1.5:1 "if the circumstances justify it" and under s.719(3.1) the sentencing judge cannot give greater than 1:1 credit where the reason for pre-sentencing incarceration is either that person's criminal record or where that individual has breached their bail conditions.

The constitutionality of this bill was challenged under s.7, s.13 and s.15 of The Charter in the Ontario Court of Justice by Marvin Johnson.[5] The court found that the amendment will survive Charter scrutiny provided the phrase if the circumstances justify it is interpreted in a manner that doesn't limit the granting of a 1.5:1 credit to such a high standard "that mandates a level of exceptionality that goes well beyond the ordinary experience of “dead time” or the penal disparities that typically flow from such pre-sentence custody". In this case, Johnson who was sentenced to 18 months for the sale of $20 of cocaine to an undercover officer, was given a 1.5:1 credit for the 12 months he had spent in pre-sentence custody and was released two days after his sentencing hearing to a one year period of probation."

snoofer
04-28-2012, 08:26 PM
Back in 2009 lots of people were unemployed and living with family ... our economy was in a recession. I had PHD's applying for housekeeping position because they found themselves out of work ... people did a lot of things to earn money.

MTR did not. MOO

otto
04-28-2012, 08:36 PM
Then why admit to the murder? I would think that would be the greater evil. I can't find a rational reason for her to do so unless it's the truth. All if it. JMO

I think that several people called in a tip that the woman in the white coat looked like TLM. I think the gig was up and she knew it. Even Russell Williams knew when to throw in the towel during a police interrogation ... and he was far more intelligent and accomplished than TLM.

Macright
04-28-2012, 08:47 PM
Rafferty isn't dead. I pity the mother of the victim. JMO



both Mothers have my pity...both of their children are lost to them..JMO it is sad all the way around and I would never blame MR's mother...there is that saying "but for the grace of god"...JMO

Tahorn
04-28-2012, 09:03 PM
both Mothers have my pity...both of their children are lost to them..JMO it is sad all the way around and I would never blame MR's mother...there is that saying "but for the grace of god"...JMO

Agreed, with the exception of CM

snoofer
04-28-2012, 09:09 PM
I think that several people called in a tip that the woman in the white coat looked like TLM. I think the gig was up and she knew it. Even Russell Williams knew when to throw in the towel during a police interrogation ... and he was far more intelligent and accomplished than TLM.

You gotta know when to hold'em; know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away; know when to run....

- performed by Kenny Rogers

TLM "ran out of aces". MOO

daisy.faithfull
04-28-2012, 09:16 PM
Has anyone seen a case where the defence doesn't call evidence?

Tahorn
04-28-2012, 09:26 PM
I think that several people called in a tip that the woman in the white coat looked like TLM. I think the gig was up and she knew it. Even Russell Williams knew when to throw in the towel during a police interrogation ... and he was far more intelligent and accomplished than TLM.

RW is more intelligent but it still took LE over a month to get TLM to talk.

robynhood
04-28-2012, 09:27 PM
...re reading threads ...ok got it now defense is not back until TUESDAY MAY 1 BUt....I thought I read during tweets from Court room that the defense was to produce a witness list if they were to call anyone to the STAND....? ...and In an article I thought ....i read that IF Rafferty was to take the STAND ...he was to do this BEFORE ANY witnesses start....? I have been reading so many articles, tweets and posts here ....I am now confused ....is the defense to AMIT on MONDAY if they are calling RAFFERTY to the stand....so frustrated...please clarify again....???..I find this case just a BIt CONFUSING ...ty again... robynhood...

otto
04-28-2012, 09:29 PM
both Mothers have my pity...both of their children are lost to them..JMO it is sad all the way around and I would never blame MR's mother...there is that saying "but for the grace of god"...JMO

We have an 18 year old child murderer and a 28 year old child rapist. Something went terribly wrong somewhere during their childhoods for that to happen. Even if they were born with those tendencies, something in their environments contributed to this deadly pair.

With the recent discussion about whether Victoria was drugged ... there was a nasty blue handled knife involved in the abduction. The blade was missing when it was found. I think that this was used during the abduction to keep her quiet, subdue ... force compliance, even while MR was buying drugs for 10 minutes.

otto
04-28-2012, 09:42 PM
RW is more intelligent but it still took LE over a month to get TLM to talk.

It took her that long to fully understand that she was really caught and there was no way around it. RW only needed about 4 hours.

I think TLM was picked up for a parole violation because her name came up after the "white coat" video was released. When did the video analysis officer identify the car at the school ... were investigators waiting for TLM to confess so they could get the name of the guy with the car?

robynhood
04-28-2012, 09:46 PM
...found the article and it said Derstine will tell his defense and any witnesses TUESDAY ...in paper from London Press on friday ...gees ..IMO they certainly are given LOTS of time but again! ...IMO>>>>this waiting must be very horrible for Tori's family AGAIN ! ....I listened carefully to Rodney's last video after the crown rested his case...I certainly pray that his wishes are reality ...here in and Ontario remebers Tori in a way that makes it safer for all KIDS IN ONTARIO...amen ..MAY WE NEVER HAVE TO FACE SUCH a SAVAGE ABDUCTION AND MURDER for any other child !...robynhood

otto
04-28-2012, 09:47 PM
...re reading threads ...ok got it now defense is not back until TUESDAY MAY 1 BUt....I thought I read during tweets from Court room that the defense was to produce a witness list if they were to call anyone to the STAND....? ...and In an article I thought ....i read that IF Rafferty was to take the STAND ...he was to do this BEFORE ANY witnesses start....? I have been reading so many articles, tweets and posts here ....I am now confused ....is the defense to AMIT on MONDAY if they are calling RAFFERTY to the stand....so frustrated...please clarify again....???..I find this case just a BIt CONFUSING ...ty again... robynhood...

Court starts again on Tuesday.
If MR takes the stand, he is the first witness - mandatory.
The defence has already released an expert witness list to the court - mandatory. The defence has also released the names of any alibi witnesses they intend to present - to their advantage.
I think the court has to be prepared for all possibilities on Tuesday morning.

snoofer
04-28-2012, 09:48 PM
We have an 18 year old child murderer and a 28 year old child rapist. Something went terribly wrong somewhere during their childhoods for that to happen. Even if they were born with those tendencies, something in their environments contributed to this deadly pair.

With the recent discussion about whether Victoria was drugged ... there was a nasty blue handled knife involved in the abduction. The blade was missing when it was found. I think that this was used during the abduction to keep her quiet, subdue ... force compliance, even while MR was buying drugs for 10 minutes.

with the info we have on TLM that is obvious for sure; but have no info on MTR family. You may be correct. I do think that sometimes there is a "one off" that alien kid that just seems to come out of nowhere ie the whole host of serious genetic mental health disorders, organic brain disorders, etc. Do not have psychology background so I am speaking off the cuff but I would assume there are those "one offs" those murderers where there is no obvious family dysfunction reason to explain those tendencies. But alas we do not know anything about this family. But I digress as we all have an opinion and mine isn't based on education on the subject; mostly a movie! :O) MOO

otto
04-28-2012, 09:51 PM
...found the article and it said Derstine will tell his defense and any witnesses TUESDAY ...in paper from London Press on friday ...gees ..IMO they certainly are given LOTS of time but again! ...IMO>>>>this waiting must be very horrible for Tori's family AGAIN ! ....I listened carefully to Rodney's last video after the crown rested his case...I certainly pray that his wishes are reality ...here in and Ontario remebers Tori in a way that makes it safer for all KIDS IN ONTARIO...amen ..MAY WE NEVER HAVE TO FACE SUCH a SAVAGE ABDUCTION AND MURDER for any other child !...robynhood

I think both the prosecution and the defence will be preparing for their closing arguments this weekend - both parties benefit from the time.

I can't get his video to work. It stops at about 43 seconds every time.

snoofer
04-28-2012, 09:54 PM
I think both the prosecution and the defence will be preparing for their closing arguments this weekend - both parties benefit from the time.

I can't get his video to work. It stops at about 43 seconds every time.

the movie trailer??

Beautiful Boy - Official Trailer [HD] - YouTube
Beautiful Boy | trailer (2011) - YouTube

maybe one of those u tube ones will work better

otto
04-28-2012, 09:59 PM
with the info we have on TLM that is obvious for sure; but have no info on MTR family. You may be correct. I do think that sometimes there is a "one off" that alien kid that just seems to come out of nowhere ie the whole host of serious genetic mental health disorders, organic brain disorders, etc. Do not have psychology background so I am speaking off the cuff but I would assume there are those "one offs" those murderers where there is no obvious family dysfunction reason to explain those tendencies. But alas we do not know anything about this family. But I digress as we all have an opinion and mine isn't based on education on the subject; mostly a movie! :O) MOO

If I hear "28 year old man" and "8 year old female with no clothing below waist", and the child is then found murdered, I can figure out what happened ... he's a child rapist.

MR is slimy and morally defective ... not psychologically challenged ... in my opinion. I think he could spot a potential victim a mile away, that he would slide up beside them and ride it for all it's worth. He's a predator of women, TLM and Victoria. Perhaps he simply took advantage of his mother ... because he could ... maybe she tried and failed.

Macright
04-28-2012, 10:03 PM
It took her that long to fully understand that she was really caught and there was no way around it. RW only needed about 4 hours.

I think TLM was picked up for a parole violation because her name came up after the "white coat" video was released. When did the video analysis officer identify the car at the school ... were investigators waiting for TLM to confess so they could get the name of the guy with the car?


RW fessed up after 4 hours because by that time LE already had a search warrant in place and were in the midst of conducting a search of his home and had boxes of evidence which included pictures...video's etc. etc. so he knew there was no way out..In the case of TLM all LE had to go on was a video which at that time could have been anyone..long after they had her in custody and before she confessed they were still trying to finger others namely TM..somewhere along the way they broke TLM and she confessed...all the other evidence came after..so big difference. JMO

snoofer
04-28-2012, 10:05 PM
If I hear "28 year old man" and "8 year old female with no clothing below waist", and the child is then found murdered, I can figure out what happened ... he's a child rapist.

MR is slimy and morally defective ... not psychologically challenged ... in my opinion. I think he could spot a potential victim a mile away, that he would slide up beside them and ride it for all it's worth. He's a predator of women, TLM and Victoria. Perhaps he simply took advantage of his mother ... because he could ... maybe she tried and failed.

agrees. MOO

I guess I just believe monsters can be raised but also monsters can be born. MOO But I am not positive of that. MOO And unsure if he was raised a monster or born a monster or a combination. But since limited info on family I want to give the mother benefit of doubt; as she may have tried and failed due to x,y or z. MOO

....and (gulp) defense is up next...stay tuned MOO

daisy.faithfull
04-28-2012, 10:06 PM
...re reading threads ...ok got it now defense is not back until TUESDAY MAY 1 BUt....I thought I read during tweets from Court room that the defense was to produce a witness list if they were to call anyone to the STAND....? ...and In an article I thought ....i read that IF Rafferty was to take the STAND ...he was to do this BEFORE ANY witnesses start....? I have been reading so many articles, tweets and posts here ....I am now confused ....is the defense to AMIT on MONDAY if they are calling RAFFERTY to the stand....so frustrated...please clarify again....???..I find this case just a BIt CONFUSING ...ty again... robynhood...


Mike Knoll: Interesting tidbit from colleague Chip Martin - he says that if Rafferty is going to be called to testify, it is required that he testify first, before any other defence witnesses. So we will know soon if Rafferty is going to testify.

Is that what you are looking for?

Macright
04-28-2012, 10:11 PM
If I hear "28 year old man" and "8 year old female with no clothing below waist", and the child is then found murdered, I can figure out what happened ... he's a child rapist.

MR is slimy and morally defective ... not psychologically challenged ... in my opinion. I think he could spot a potential victim a mile away, that he would slide up beside them and ride it for all it's worth. He's a predator of women, TLM and Victoria. Perhaps he simply took advantage of his mother ... because he could ... maybe she tried and failed.


I would never believe that he took advantage of TLM... I could believe he raped TS first and of that I am very doubtful...he may be a lot of things but I don't think he is a child rapist...JMO I do agree with your description of MR as morally defective though... TLM is quite capable of rape herself..it is not unheard of that a female raped another female...it happened a couple of years ago in the US with some church worker whose grandfather was a minister at the same church that she lured the child to and raped and murdered her...so it is not impossible to imagine but I don't think TS was raped...I think that maybe TLM removed her clothing to make it look like a rape...JMO

snoofer
04-28-2012, 10:12 PM
Is that what you are looking for?

will they announce it in advance or just on tuesday when defense is up they would call him. MOO

otto
04-28-2012, 10:13 PM
RW fessed up after 4 hours because by that time LE already had a search warrant in place and were in the midst of conducting a search of his home and had boxes of evidence which included pictures...video's etc. etc. so he knew there was no way out..In the case of TLM all LE had to go on was a video which at that time could have been anyone..long after they had her in custody and before she confessed they were still trying to finger others namely TM..somewhere along the way they broke TLM and she confessed...all the other evidence came after..so big difference. JMO

I understand that investigators had difficutly excluding the family because of drug connections, but it's obvious they were pursuing many leads at the time. I'm pretty sure that the name of TLM came up soon after the abduction because of her distinctive walk, white puffy coat and long dark hair.

Once she was nailed for the video, her prepared answers about talking to the child and then leaving didn't stand up. Police would have identified the drivebys by MR in the morning and afternoon and they would have been interested in the name of the friend that she met after supposedly leaving Victoria on the street that day. That was the connection they needed because the header on the car is too distinctive to be some other guy's car.

otto
04-28-2012, 10:15 PM
agrees. MOO

I guess I just believe monsters can be raised but also monsters can be born. MOO But I am not positive of that. MOO And unsure if he was raised a monster or born a monster or a combination. But since limited info on family I want to give the mother benefit of doubt; as she may have tried and failed due to x,y or z. MOO

Nature versus nurture. Even a monster, raised in the right environment, can grow up and not act on monstrous tendencies.

snoofer
04-28-2012, 10:18 PM
I understand that investigators had difficutly excluding the family because of drug connections, but it's obvious they were pursuing many leads at the time. I'm pretty sure that the name of TLM came up soon after the abduction because of her distinctive walk, white puffy coat and long dark hair.

Once she was nailed for the video, her prepared answers about talking to the child and then leaving didn't stand up. Police would have identified the drivebys by MR in the morning and afternoon and they would have been interested in the name of the friend that she met after supposedly leaving Victoria on the street that day. That was the connection they needed because the header on the car is too distinctive to be some other guy's car.

TLM's own neighbours recognized her on the tape, and went to her house and asked her if she took Tori and TLM screamed no and locked herself in bathroom. They called LE. MOO

otto
04-28-2012, 10:27 PM
I would never believe that he took advantage of TLM... I could believe he raped TS first and of that I am very doubtful...he may be a lot of things but I don't think he is a child rapist...JMO I do agree with your description of MR as morally defective though... TLM is quite capable of rape herself..it is not unheard of that a female raped another female...it happened a couple of years ago in the US with some church worker whose grandfather was a minister at the same church that she lured the child to and raped and murdered her...so it is not impossible to imagine but I don't think TS was raped...I think that maybe TLM removed her clothing to make it look like a rape...JMO

So what does "grown man" and "young female child without clothes below waist" say if not child rape?

Is MR the cowering type, being forced by TLM to drive her and an unknown child to a place that only he was familiar with (not her) so she could sexually assault and murder that child? Was he so intimidated, even though the only weapon in the car was his blue knife ... that he called one girlfriend to put money in his account and then withdrew it so his other girlfriend could buy a hammer and garbage bags?

Was Victoria lying on the floor in the back seat listening to them discuss buying a hammer and garbage bags? That's cruel ... TLM seems cruel while MR is really slimy ... and neither has boundaries in terms of what they will do for kicks, even if it means kidnapping, rape and murder.

otto
04-28-2012, 10:33 PM
TLM's own neighbours recognized her on the tape, and went to her house and asked her if she took Tori and TLM screamed no and locked herself in bathroom. They called LE. MOO

Exactly. Thanks. TLM was quickly recognized after the release of video. She may have pre-planned her answers, but she didn't have one for: what is the name of the friend you met after speaking with Victoria.

The mother was also looked at because of her drug addiction, but it was the media that made the mistake and focused exclusively on the mother ... they had no idea about other suspects until the arrests ... but that's no excuse. Victoria's mother must be a very strong woman to withstand public contempt while looking for a missing child.

It seems to me that the Canadian Press may be following forums - or reading comments posted in response to their court news updates, but I don't think that the courts or defence lawyers are paying employees to read forums .. neither the crown nor the defendant have money for that

otto
04-28-2012, 10:37 PM
will they announce it in advance or just on tuesday when defense is up they would call him. MOO

No news until after court starts Tuesday ... then decisions will be reported in the news.

otto
04-28-2012, 10:48 PM
It's interesting to follow trials in different countries to see how the law differs. On TV shows, it all looks the same, but in reality we see that there are so many significant differences in the laws of different countries ... even countries that may seem similar are significantly different, like: Canada, the US, England, Aruba, Italy ...Roman Law is the foundation of law in Canada, England, Aruba and Italy.

With all the talk about the defendant having all the advantage in Canada, I think it's really important to point out that there is no double jeopardy in Canada. If this trial were to result in a not guilty verdict, there is nothing to stop the prosecution from filing to retry him.

Alethea Dice
04-28-2012, 10:49 PM
They're in plain sight off to the left of the courtroom on slightly elevated seats (IIRC). How well you can see them depends on how tall you are and where you're sitting. I guess one can get the best view of them as they enter and exit the room via the front doors. But because spectators sit at the far back and are at the same level as all the media people in front of them, the best view is of the judge and the witnesses on the stand because they're more highly elevated.

I'm guessing that no one is allowed to stand during the proceedings. That would be the best way (if standing in the back, right-hand side of the room) to get pics of anything in the courtroom. Are you implying that these men were trying to get pics of the jury? Because that's interesting.

JMO

Thanks, AG. IIRC, the article didn't say what the men had taken pictures of. I was wondering what they may have wanted that isn't already available through media. IMO, the reasons given in JB's blog didn't make sense. First of all, MR's picture is everywhere. Secondly, if he's in PC, how would this person even get to him. The only thing I could think of that's not available to the public is the identities of the jury. But, who knows. Maybe they were just idiots wanting a souvenir.

otto
04-28-2012, 11:16 PM
Yes I found that rather strange also how TLM hid nothing about her past, put it all on facebook and boasted to people about her character in and out of detention and to her friends. TLM was more the character who was more talk then action. "If" she was the one who welded that hammer, it is because she was put up to it by MR or she did suffer from severe flashbacks of herself being sexually abused as a child and could not stand to think of what Tori would endure for the rest of her life being a victim to sexual assault. I will go for the first though that MR put her up to it. As TLM stated during her testimony MR saying, "we can't keep her and we can't take her back" and "you're just as far into it as I am", speaks volumes. I just pray Tori did not understand or was privy to their sick discussions, or understood what MR was meaning while she was huddled and terrified on the floor of his car.

Then there's MR so secretive and sly. As the saying goes, those are the ones you have to look out for; wolf in sheep's clothing. I believe MR was the more evil of the two. I see him as being the sexual deviant and finding the perfect victim/partner in TLM to help him carry out his hidden sexual demons. With all the women he had traipsing in and out of his life and using them for sex, money, a place to stay, taking advantage of CS for financial gain, even using his own mother for personal and financial gains shows me he had no respect for woman whatsoever. It was all a false front to fill his own warped needs. He sure is one sick puppy in MOO.

I think Victoria understood perfectly well what was going on and offered that she would keep her mouth shut, say she was with her cousin, if they would let her go.

I think the question is: what was his relationship with his mother? ... since he seems to have no respect for women. That doesn't happen by accident.

otto
04-28-2012, 11:18 PM
Thanks, AG. IIRC, the article didn't say what the men had taken pictures of. I was wondering what they may have wanted that isn't already available through media. IMO, the reasons given in JB's blog didn't make sense. First of all, MR's picture is everywhere. Secondly, if he's in PC, how would this person even get to him. The only thing I could think of that's not available to the public is the identities of the jury. But, who knows. Maybe they were just idiots wanting a souvenir.

If he had a wide angle lens, then he got the gallery, judge, lawyers, jury and security.

Souvenier?

Ardy
04-28-2012, 11:26 PM
It's interesting to follow trials in different countries to see how the law differs. On TV shows, it all looks the same, but in reality we see that there are so many significant differences in the laws of different countries ... even countries that may seem similar are significantly different, like: Canada, the US, England, Aruba, Italy ...Roman Law is the foundation of law in Canada, England, Aruba and Italy.

With all the talk about the defendant having all the advantage in Canada, I think it's really important to point out that there is no double jeopardy in Canada. If this trial were to result in a not guilty verdict, there is nothing to stop the prosecution from filing to retry him.

In Canada, both sides can appeal a trial, but it must be based on judicial errors during the trial..........not on the verdict itself.

Section 11, of the Canadian Charter of Rights protects against double jeopardy.

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

Alethea Dice
04-28-2012, 11:32 PM
If he had a wide angle lens, then he got the gallery, judge, lawyers, jury and security.

Souvenier?

I believe it was a cell phone. If he had a wide angle lens, he would have had to purchase it separately and attach it to the phone. JMO

otto
04-28-2012, 11:35 PM
In Canada, both sides can appeal a trial, but it must be based on judicial errors during the trial..........not on the verdict itself.

Section 11, of the Canadian Charter of Rights protects against double jeopardy.

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

The crown has grounds to appeal a not guilty verdict and will often be granted a new trial. That is not possible in the US .. so in terms of whether the defendant has all the advantage in Canada, this is a point where the defendant has a balancing disadvantage.

Ardy
04-28-2012, 11:39 PM
There are a lot of differing opinions on why TLM testified.

My opinion is that TLM did what she always does.......look after TLM.

Since the day of her sentencing, she no longer had any access to the almost 3 years of investigative work by LE.

Her lawyer, was no longer connected to the case, and had gone on to be appointed a Judge.

TLM didn't know if the hammer and clothes had been found by LE.

She DID know that her fingerprints, and only her fingerprints, would be on the hammer.

She didn't want to testify, and expressed that to LE after he confession to the counselor. She was advised that she would still be forced to testify.

I believe she simply didn't know if her fingerprints would be on the hammer when she went to court to testify...........and wouldn't know what to say on the stand.

Would she maintain MR did it? Or, would she admit she did it?

If she was caught lying on the stand during MR's trial, it would question the validity of all of her testimony................and she knew it.

She didn't want to be in the position of not knowing if LE had found the hammer when she had to take the witness stand............so she confessed hoping to avoid testifying at all.

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

roseofsharon
04-28-2012, 11:39 PM
MTR and TLM met in February 2009 and by April 8, 2009, during this short amount of time, both were able to get into the other's psyche.

Why did they do this and why the overkill. How did these two ever broach the subject of carrying out these horrific acts upon a child. I think it is the worst case I have ever followed.

The Genest video does not portray either one of them, the least bit anxious.

It appears both MTR and TLM were able to compartmentalize their despicable acts.


MOO

roseofsharon
04-28-2012, 11:47 PM
It's quite amazing that for two people so high on Oxycontin, most of the day, every day, have any memory of the events of April 8, 2009.


MOO

Ardy
04-28-2012, 11:50 PM
Let's also not forget that TLM was arrested for a breach of probation.

She was on probation after serving 14 months in custody for stabbing a man.

She was no introverted, easily manipulated little waif when MR met her.

She was already a hardened criminal, and knew her way around the justice system.

Let's also not forget that she told her godmother that she DIDN'T regret the murder at all and would do it again.

She did add that she was sorry VS was so young.

Apparently to her, "someone a little older" would be better.

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

otto
04-28-2012, 11:50 PM
I believe it was a cell phone. If he had a wide angle lens, he would have had to purchase it separately and attach it to the phone. JMO

The pictures have been destroyed on the phone that was used in the courtroom ... maybe that person will be charged with contempt of court, maybe not, but it's definitely a contempt of court situation. The judge has rules, like no photos in the courtroom ... anyone than snaps a shot is in contempt.

Another thing about Canadian courts is that everyone must be seated before trial starts for the day (all rise) and everyone rises while the judge is seated, sits back down after the judge is seated ... some religious facilities have the congregation stand up when the speaker (pastor, minister, Rabbi, Muhammad, etc) enters the religious facility. I didn't see that in the US courts, but maybe I missed it. In Italy everyone rose when the Judge entered the room ... same as Canada.

Formality ... court dress ... standards and expectations ... Freedom and Responsibility ... MR probably didn't know what hit him when he was first arrested and may have thought that because he wasn't wielding the hammer (got the girl to do it) then he would be innocent of murder. He should rot in jail for the remainder of his life for thinking that he could get the girl (TLM) - who would do anything for a "little lovin"- to buy and use the hammer so he could sexually assault a young girl.

He strikes me as the kind of guy that wouldn't survive prison.

Ardy
04-28-2012, 11:59 PM
When TLM told her godmother she would like to kill again.........did she say she needed MR around to manipulate her into doing it?

I don't recall their was any testimony that MR was included in that conversation by TLM about killing someone.

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

otto
04-29-2012, 12:06 AM
MTR and TLM met in February 2009 and by April 8, 2009, during this short amount of time, both were able to get into the other's psyche.

Why did they do this and why the overkill. How did these two ever broach the subject of carrying out these horrific acts upon a child. I think it is the worst case I have ever followed.

The Genest video does not portray either one of them, the least bit anxious.

It appears both MTR and TLM were able to compartmentalize their despicable acts.


MOO

Two other couples that come to mind as having immediately gotten into each other's psyches are Karla and Paul Homolka/Bernardo and Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito (and a few other couples, one in California). There wasn't any overkill. They both lived out their sick fantasies ... each walked away while the other acted it out ... MR sexually assaulting Victoria and TLM murdering.

The detention centre video shows TLM with the same walk - always moving around, almost sparring in circles - just like MR, flat footed movement that we saw when she approached Victoria ... it seems confrontational. I don't think that Victoria had a chance after she was approached by someone like TLM, whose only objective was to harm a child. They may have compartmentalized themselves from most people, but they let if all out with each other ... clearly ... given the result.

otto
04-29-2012, 12:09 AM
Let's also not forget that TLM was arrested for a breach of probation.

She was on probation after serving 14 months in custody for stabbing a man.

She was no introverted, easily manipulated little waif when MR met her.

She was already a hardened criminal, and knew her way around the justice system.

Let's also not forget that she told her godmother that she DIDN'T regret the murder at all and would do it again.

She did add that she was sorry VS was so young.

Apparently to her, "someone a little older" would be better.

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

Let's not forget that MR went along with all of it, right down to concealing the crime ... murderous couple at work, neither better than the other.

otto
04-29-2012, 12:18 AM
When TLM told her godmother she would like to kill again.........did she say she needed MR around to manipulate her into doing it?

I don't recall their was any testimony that MR was included in that conversation by TLM about killing someone.

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

When MR was cruising in front of the school twice (morning and afternoon) on the day that Victoria was abducted, writing "good things are coming my way" on social media, did he need TLM to convince an 8 year old girl to get into his car? He did. His facebook status sounds so excited about the good things that even though he knows it's illegal, he can't keep it to himself.

TLM could murder without the help of MR, but he couldn't sexually assault a young girl without someone procuring her ... so with TLM's help, he got Victoria. He is a predator.

Alethea Dice
04-29-2012, 12:20 AM
The pictures have been destroyed on the phone that was used in the courtroom ... maybe that person will be charged with contempt of court, maybe not, but it's definitely a contempt of court situation. The judge has rules, like no photos in the courtroom ... anyone than snaps a shot is in contempt.

Another thing about Canadian courts is that everyone must be seated before trial starts for the day (all rise) and everyone rises while the judge is seated, sits back down after the judge is seated ... some religious facilities have the congregation stand up when the speaker (pastor, minister, Rabbi, Muhammad, etc) enters the religious facility. I didn't see that in the US courts, but maybe I missed it. In Italy everyone rose when the Judge entered the room ... same as Canada.

Formality ... court dress ... standards and expectations ... Freedom and Responsibility ... MR probably didn't know what hit him when he was first arrested and may have thought that because he wasn't wielding the hammer (got the girl to do it) then he would be innocent of murder. He should rot in jail for the remainder of his life for thinking that he could get the girl (TLM) - who would do anything for a "little lovin"- to buy and use the hammer so he could sexually assault a young girl.

He strikes me as the kind of guy that wouldn't survive prison.

I don't believe there was any testimony that he got her to use the hammer either. IIRC, TLM said that all the hate and anger and rage came boiling up out of her and she went back to the car and savagely murdered her.


AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReply
She says sometimes it is like she wasn't even there. She turned back to the car. All she could see was her younger self...

AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReply
...and all the hate and anger and rage she had. She went back to the car and murdered Tori. Calls it a savage murder.

She also changed her story a couple of times about whose decision it was to buy the hammer.


AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReplyMcClintic says she lied about the hammer purchase in January 14th statement. Said she decided to buy the hammer.

AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReplyMcClintic says now she only said that to get out of testifying.

Alethea Dice
04-29-2012, 12:24 AM
MTR and TLM met in February 2009 and by April 8, 2009, during this short amount of time, both were able to get into the other's psyche.

Why did they do this and why the overkill. How did these two ever broach the subject of carrying out these horrific acts upon a child. I think it is the worst case I have ever followed.

The Genest video does not portray either one of them, the least bit anxious.

It appears both MTR and TLM were able to compartmentalize their despicable acts.


MOO

The Genest video showed a small portion of the visits. I'd be interested in seeing what the other approximately 45 minutes of each visit was like.

Tahorn
04-29-2012, 12:25 AM
Two other couples that come to mind as having immediately gotten into each other's psyches are Karla and Paul Homolka/Bernardo and Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito (and a few other couples, one in California). There wasn't any overkill. They both lived out their sick fantasies ... each walked away while the other acted it out ... MR sexually assaulting Victoria and TLM murdering.

The detention centre video shows TLM with the same walk - always moving around, almost sparring in circles - just like MR, flat footed movement that we saw when she approached Victoria ... it seems confrontational. I don't think that Victoria had a chance after she was approached by someone like TLM, whose only objective was to harm a child. They may have compartmentalized themselves from most people, but they let if all out with each other ... clearly ... given the result.


AK wasn't guilty, they have the actual killer.

otto
04-29-2012, 12:27 AM
I don't believe there was any testimony that he got her to use the hammer either. IIRC, TLM said that all the hate and anger and rage came boiling up out of her and she went back to the car and savagely murdered her.



She also changed her story a couple of times about whose decision it was to buy the hammer.

So ... if it was about hatred and rage about her own childhood, then ... might he have been pushing her buttons?

otto
04-29-2012, 12:28 AM
AK wasn't guilty, they have the actual killer.

Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito got into each other's psyches really fast, just like TLM and MR. That is not disputed.

Alethea Dice
04-29-2012, 12:45 AM
So ... if it was about hatred and rage about her own childhood, then ... might he have been pushing her buttons?

Don't know. Personally, I don't believe her. If she really was angry about her own childhood, and really wanted to stop what was happening to Tori, and really doesn't want him to be able to do it to any other children, then why didn't she use the hammer on him?

JMO

Salem
04-29-2012, 12:49 AM
Let's drop the AK/RS conversation please. It is off topic and doesn't belong here.

Thanks,

Salem

otto
04-29-2012, 12:59 AM
Don't know. Personally, I don't believe her. If she really was angry about her own childhood, and really wanted to stop what was happening to Tori, and really doesn't want him to be able to do it to any other children, then why didn't she use the hammer on him?

JMO

I think she gets off on seeing suffering in others ... like the puppy in the microwave.

I think her hammer assault on a young child was about reliving her own experiences but viewing it from the predator, rather than victim, perspective. She loved her partner in crime and had no empathy for the victim ... so stopping the abuse only meant stopping the jealousy she felt when MR wanted someone else.

Ardy
04-29-2012, 01:02 AM
The Genest video showed a small portion of the visits. I'd be interested in seeing what the other approximately 45 minutes of each visit was like.

I was wondering about that as well.

I didn't think it was allowed as evidence to show edited versions.

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

otto
04-29-2012, 01:07 AM
Let's drop the AK/RS conversation please. It is off topic and doesn't belong here.

Thanks,

Salem

The only similarity I see relates to the "getting into each other's psyches really fast".

"Vronsky reminds us that there is nothing especially new or unique to the Bernardo Homolka crimes. The case is similar to the Moors murders in England in the 1960s, when Myra Hindley and Ian Brady, tortured, raped, and killed several children, recording their cries on audio tape," Vronsky says. Nor is Homolkas rape of her younger sister particularly unique; husband and wife serial killers Fred and Rose West in England raped and murdered their own daughter."

...

"Vronsky describes the case of husband and wife serial killers Charlene and Gerald Gallego in California and Nevada in the late 1970s. Exactly like Homolka, Charlene lured teenage female victims in shopping mall parking lots into her husbands van. The couple would then rape and torture the girls before driving them out into the desert and killing them. In one case Charlene had bitten off the nipple of one of her victims. Another victim was buried alive by the couple. They killed at least ten girls between 1978 and 1980, sometimes murdering pairs of teenage victims. They were identified after their car was linked to a kidnapping and murder of a teenage couple on their high school prom night outing but police at first could not believe that a married couple were capable of such horrific murder rapes."

http://financeswests.com/ears/r12e214331mi/

Ardy
04-29-2012, 01:11 AM
I think she gets off on seeing suffering in others ... like the puppy in the microwave.

I think her hammer assault on a young child was about reliving her own experiences but viewing it from the predator, rather than victim, perspective. She loved her partner in crime and had no empathy for the victim ... so stopping the abuse only meant stopping the jealousy she felt when MR wanted someone else.

If what you say is true, there would be questions about MR's intent that VS be killed.

I don't believe that is what the Crown is alleging happened, because it would fall short of fulfilling the elements of the charge of first degree murder.

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

Alethea Dice
04-29-2012, 01:15 AM
I was wondering about that as well.

I didn't think it was allowed as evidence to show edited versions.

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

It shouldn't be IMO. The edited pieces showed only what the Crown needed to make their point. How the visits started and ended doesn't mean the entire visit was all hugs and giggles and cracking backs.

JMO

otto
04-29-2012, 01:19 AM
If what you say is true, there would be questions about MR's intent that VS be killed.

I don't believe that is what the Crown is alleging happened, because it would fall short of fulfilling the elements of the charge of first degree murder.

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

I disagree. MR knew perfectly well when he wrote that "good things" were coming his way, and he cruised back and forth in front of the elementary school that morning and afternoon, that he intended to follow through on his sick fantasies with TLM helping him kidnap a young girl. His only complaint was that the kidnap victim "wasn't young enough".

Do we know who called who first on Apil 8? How did they end up getting together that day?

otto
04-29-2012, 01:21 AM
It shouldn't be IMO. The edited pieces showed only what the Crown needed to make their point. How the visits started and ended doesn't mean the entire visit was all hugs and giggles and cracking backs.

JMO

The edited version on the news may or may not be the same as what was viewed in court. If what was viewed in court was presented as evidence with time stamps, then what difference does it make if other footage that is not evidence was not presented in court?