Bosma Murder Trial 05.20.16 - Day 53

[NoodlesMcgee]

You don't think it could just be another black RAM? You can't swing a dead cat in these parts without hitting a RAM.

It could be but it could also be a different RAM followed by a Yukon in the pass the crown showed. Just have to decide what you believe.

 

[cckp72]

You don't think it could just be another black RAM? You can't swing a dead cat in these parts without hitting a RAM.

I am from the area too and since this happened, I do notice all RAMS and yes, there are many here!

 

[ILoveDateline]

You don't think it could just be another black RAM? You can't swing a dead cat in these parts without hitting a RAM.

It seems to me Ianman used the same techniques for comparing the stills as the video expert did, except without recreating it with the actual vehicle. The spots where light reflects off the truck body and where the headlights and taillights cast light on the road in the two stills look identical IMO. I think that was the way the video comparison expert was able to conclude the second vehicle in the SS video was DMs Yukon.

That is enough to prove to me it's TBs truck. JMO. But its doesn't help me conclude who shot TB.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

You don't think it could just be another black RAM? You can't swing a dead cat in these parts without hitting a RAM.

IMHO, I think that if these were two different RAMs, the reflective lights showing on the side of the vehicles wouldn't be as similar as they are, because the chances of two different trucks being so clean, clean enough to reflect the light in the exact same spots, i.e. one truck not having more of a layer of dust/dirt than the other, are pretty slim.

MOO

 

[lanman]

You don't think it could just be another black RAM? You can't swing a dead cat in these parts without hitting a RAM.

Well it could be, but IMO the odds of another truck that looks so similar (in the video) just happening to go by twice during such a critical time period seems pretty darn slim.
It's not just a Ram, it's a Ram with chrome rims, chrome running boards, and running lights. If you were to go down to Super Suckers tonight at around 9 pm, what are the chances of a truck that looks like this driving by within, say, a 1/2 hour period ? Probably extremely slim.

 

[TOR]

DWO I am not disagreeing with you but I wanted to point out, for this EXACT reason there is a publication ban. We cannot allow a jury to know about un-convicted charges. In fact I was surprised about un-convicted MS charges coming out, I certainly hope those could not be grounds for mistrial for MS. Until we see exactly what evidence is presented in that case, we cannot assume that any of it has bearing on this case. Its about separating emotion with just the facts in this case.

I am in no way defending the accused but am simply saying we cannot prejudice our verdict with evidence that was not presented by the crown or brought out by defense. I want to see justice in this case whatever that outcome may be. Alot of us have made up our minds and alot of folks seem to be basing their opinions on revenge and/or a popularity contest. We all have an 'opinion' about the accused and I for one do not like either one of them. This trial is not being tried in WS, thank goodness, as I know even I have missed an important piece of evidence here or there, its easy enough to do in our environment here. I trust the jury and reporters and family who attend trial day in day out to have the WHOLE trial picture. I cannot possibly imagine sitting through all of this for 56+ days.

iirc ABRo enlightened us with the fact that not ALL evidence is necessarily put forward as some would be deemed merely chaff and draw out the trial longer, only pertinent evidence makes it into the trial or at least into the narrative. I realize the crown must be careful of omission as the defense can pounce on that and say 'this piece would have exonerated my client etc'. From what we saw today with the lighter, it sounds like defense HAS in fact at their disposal ALL evidence collected regardless whether or not it was presented. (someone in the know, correct me if I am wrong please) I also realize the crown will not testify a surety unless they can say 90-100% that something happened in a certain place or a certain way, they will just throw the evidence out there and let the jury decide. ie GSR drivers side roof vs YES a gun was fired from the driver side.

Great post. I totaly agree and seeing that this case went straight to trial with no prelim on the evidence on DM (again, little to no evidence on MS) gives me the feeling that MS' involvement the LB case is probably not so iron-clad. We know DM gave him an iPad, so I'm guessing it was her iPAD. Though I now wonder if CN and DM killed LB on the boat and in DM's twisted attempt to keep everyone under his thumb, he gave MS the iPad so he could one day use it against him if needed.

 

[TOR]

I am curious to see whether a first degree conviction hinges on forcible confinement, planning/deliberation, or either one. Staff Sgt Matt Kavanagh stated that the first degree murder charges were laid based on forcible confinement. As he stated to the press, "Mr. Bosma entered his vehicle of his own free will but he was not allowed to leave, and therefore first degree is the appropriate charge." If this holds for the trial, then in order to convict both DM and MS the jury will have to conclude that they acted jointly to forcibly confine TB. This may (or may not) require that both of them were in the vehicle when TB was killed.

If planning and deliberation is the qualifier, then in order to convict them both of first degree murder the jury must conclude that they acted jointly in the planning of a murder. If the jury concludes that DM and MS jointly planned and carried out the murder, then it matters not who was in the vehicle or who pulled the trigger, they will both be guilty of first degree murder.

It looks like MS never spoke to police before getting on the stand so everyone is hearing his side of the story for the first time, including the crown. I'm curious to see how much, if at all, the crown's cross is affected by the new evidence (MS' testimony)

 

[Georgeo]

Is it necessary to prove DM went for gas? MS and DM both seem to acknowledge that. To me, the only reason it would be significant is if he actually left for other reasons, like to sing songs to his gf from a pay phone [emoji12].

A trip to the gas station should be easy to prove with credit or debit records and security videos.

Sachak claimed DM went to cool off after a huge argument with MS.... if MS can prove DM went to get gas, it disproves that DM left to "cool off". I guess at this point it doesn't matter.... lies from both of them it seems...

 

[TOR]

The problem I have with MS is why wait until the end of the trial to "tell the truth". If he's the innocent man he claims to be, why risk going to trial and being charged with Murder1? It would seem exceptionally logical to contact a lawyer (Dungey) first, and figure out the best way to "cut a deal" with police. Smich had disclosure, he knew the evidence well before trial. Surely he knew the evidence was damning. A logical, "innocent" man would have talked to police and cut a deal.

The only logical reason for Smich not going to police is that he was the shooter. Why else bury the gun?

I've always believed this was his grand opportunity to score a hit. Kill a man. Earn his street cred. Officially a Gangsta now.

Nobody should have any empathy for DM or MS. Both guilty as charged. Lock 'em both up for 25+.

Or the police were so set in their tunnel vision that he's the killer that they refused to work with him on a deal - which would also explain why people at trial reported seeing the crown passing otes to NS during questioning - they dont want to be proven wrong!

 

[Ontario Mom]

You don't think it could just be another black RAM? You can't swing a dead cat in these parts without hitting a RAM.

I can't recall who, but there is at least one member here who has said there is another truck, almost identical to Tim's, in the very same area. It could be another truck, or it could be Tim's and MS is lying like a rug. We can't know for sure.

CLARIFYING: if the SS time stamp is off by 3 hours and 10 minutes (give or take) then it's possible the first truck was Tim's.

moo

 

[sleuther76]

I AGREE !!!.... first time I have seen this version of the SS video .... previously I saw only the Yukon going south at 8:46 and the Yukon and truck going north at 9:20. This changes everything and I have changed my mind AGAIN and no longer believe the MS version where he got dropped off right away.

Remember that those two videos were submitted by DM's team, not the crown. At first I thought they were doing it to say, "look there are loads of pickups in that area" which didn't make much sense to me. However, now it is clear that they entered those two videos to discredit MS's story, even before he gave it ... which IMO gives even more credit to MS's story being the truth.

 

[Jug Up]

Thank you for doing this!

Totally agree. That is amazingly similar, even the reflection of light from the SS (I assume) the same. Obviously, the truck(s) were very clean.

I don't care if it is relevant to the Crown, or the jury. I am not the one deciding their fate.

IMO, that is the same truck, making MS an outright liar about what happened that night.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6565226-clairmont-fatigue-at-the-bosma-trial/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[ILoveDateline]

Sachak claimed DM went to cool off after a huge argument with MS.... if MS can prove DM went to get gas, it disproves that DM left to "cool off". I guess at this point it doesn't matter.... lies from both of them it seems...

I agree but I thought both DM and MS agreed DM went to get gas but that sachak says the gas trip was prompted by a need for a cool off period. Same thing. He left. I don't believe there was an argument. I don't see why MS would have denied if there was one. It would have proved, 1) DM was angry and lunatic-y and 2) perhaps there was a reason to fear DM and do what he was told. Added: I say this meaning the argument could be from either side; DM angry and questioning MS, or the other way around.

It also contradicts sachaks own questions of MS, why didn't you call the police while he was out for gas? DM could have called police on MS while out for gas.

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

Remember that those two videos were submitted by DM's team, not the crown. At first I thought they were doing it to say, "look there are loads of pickups in that area" which didn't make much sense to me. However, now it is clear that they entered those two videos to discredit MS's story, even before he gave it ... which IMO gives even more credit to MS's story being the truth.

I suspect they introduced that video to show the crown and police didn't fully look at the video. He asked if plaxton had seen it before.

Then they pivoted to use it again to discredit MS testimony. They wouldn't have known he was going to testify back then.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Or the police were so set in their tunnel vision that he's the killer that they refused to work with him on a deal - which would also explain why people at trial reported seeing the crown passing otes to NS during questioning - they dont want to be proven wrong!

Wait, what?

 

[Jug Up]

I suspect they introduced that video to show the crown and police didn't fully look at the video. He asked if plaxton had seen it before.

Then they pivoted to use it again to discredit MS testimony. They wouldn't have known he was going to testify back then.

Another theory could be the same one bandied about here, that it is a different truck because it wasn't being followed by the Yukon. <shrug>

As ABro says, I don't think that other truck was relevant in the Crown's case, because they had all the evidence they needed from Super Sucker (with the Yukon arriving at 8:46, and following TB's truck at 9:20).

Now that MS has taken the stand and ratted out DM, I think the other truck is quite relevant in determining if MS is lying or telling the truth. May not mean much in deciding DM's fate, but I think it has a lot of implications of how the jury rules on MS.

 

[JuneBug67]

IMHO, I think that if these were two different RAMs, the reflective lights showing on the side of the vehicles wouldn't be as similar as they are, because the chances of two different trucks being so clean, clean enough to reflect the light in the exact same spots, i.e. one truck not having more of a layer of dust/dirt than the other, are pretty slim.

MOO

The Yukon reflects light in a similar way as well on the way past, and we don't know the state of its cleanliness on that night. I wouldn't feel confident concluding that it would be highly unusual to have the surfaces of different vehicles reflect light in a similar way at night.

Just as a general comment, it's interesting to see this video of course but none of it is new information. Plaxton agreed on the stand that the trucks couldn't be distinguished from each other. It's a matter of which unusual occurrence you feel you can embrace. A highly coincidental truck sighting or two separate people who appear to err on a time observation in a very similar and very material way? And how accurate is the 9:05 phone time we're using as a reference point? As a juror, I don't think I could get beyond a reasonable doubt. I would have to class MS's claim of leaving right away as possible.

 

[JuneBug67]

Remember that those two videos were submitted by DM's team, not the crown. At first I thought they were doing it to say, "look there are loads of pickups in that area" which didn't make much sense to me. However, now it is clear that they entered those two videos to discredit MS's story, even before he gave it ... which IMO gives even more credit to MS's story being the truth.

They would have had the Plaxton report in disclosure, and it would have been clear that a case would our could be made that MS got in the Yukon just past Tim's driveway. That would have left a much smaller window for MS to shoot Tim, and in that it was worth disputing for DM's team regardless of what Mark might or might not say later.

 

[Bellbaby]

Did AM testify and agree to the quote below?

https://www.thestar.com/news/crime/...illards-lawyer-at-tim-bosma-murder-trial.html

2. Sachak said Smich also asked Michalski to get him “the thing” that another friend Matt Hagerman had.

Smich has consistently denied asking for – and knowing about – the toolbox containing a gun that Millard had dropped off to Hagerman the morning of his arrest.