Laura Babcock Murder Trial 11.23.17 - Day 21

[Grey-St]

Except then the Crown gets to cross examine her.

He might just be stupid enough to risk that. I don't think he can contain his narcissism on a good day.

 

[RezButt]

When he took the stand at TB's trial, MS showed he was no stupid clueless sidekick. He clung to his story for days, and many a times proved to be very quick with an answer. His Disney line along with I believe correcting a lawyer's mistep, showed me at least he was more than just street smart. MOO

His story was completely self serving, MOO.

The Disney line was said to Sachak about Millard.

 

[ABro]

He might just be stupid enough to risk that. I don't think he can contain his narcissism on a good day.

I am very curious as to what he will do.

 

[james9]

I think that's the part that is missing to me - I agree Smich was in on the 'grand plan', at least the vision DM was pitching at the time. But what was that grand plan? What was it? I never accepted that it was for a truck and I don't yet accept that it was for Laura. And, btw, who or what was in the incinerator in August? Someone or something new? I feel like there is a piece we are missing with the incinerator that would finally make things make sense.

The "grand plan" was for DM & MS to kill and incinerate people, steal their things, and use the proceeds to fund MS's rap career, and to get a sailboat for DM, and to get a gas truck to take to the Baja race in Mexico. The LB murder was to solve an annoyance, but also to steal her things (iPad, luggage and probably $3,000 in cash). They assumed because they were incinerating the bodies, there would be no evidence left and they would never get caught.

 

[bakingirl]

I am very curious as to what he will do.

Would she have to comply and appear, if she is in Poland?

 

[ABro]

Was the photo with bones made on 23rd? Or could it be made in August?

Do you seriously think Dungey would have neglected to ask if there was any possibility it was taken in August?

 

[Stumper]

I think that first part is definitely true, and as you say one has to consider that it is very likely an illusion. But I'm still grappling with your second part. What either of them did after is not proof of the facts of her murder. Either man could have been willing to help the other cover a murder or accidental death he wasn't responsible for. The planning with the incinerator before could be evidence of premeditation, but only if it can be proven it was intended for Laura and MS knew that and aided in the plan by researching and testing the incinerator.

I agree with your reasoning for the most part. This is the point where I think we differ. IMO and I also believe legally speaking, I do not think it matters that MS had Laura in mind specifically. I think that if it’s excepted that MS was involved in planning a killing and incineration, and then someone was killed and incinerated according to plan, and MS was present for both events I don’t believe it has to be proved he preplanned for that specific individual to be the victim. Or which specific accused did the deed so to speak. Just like TB was randomly picked could have been anyone with a nice diesel ram for sale but was still M1 for both because it was planned.

In almost any murder there is going to be a blackout period that only the perpetrators and victims can ever know what exactly happened. Convictions have to come from the totality of evidence from before and after that period of the unknown or it becomes almost impossible to convict anyone

Hope that makes sense as to where I am coming from

 

[ABro]

Would she have to comply and appear, if she is in Poland?

If she wants to come back to Canada without being arrested, she would have to comply.

 

[bakingirl]

Interesting, thank you!

If she wants to come back to Canada without being arrested, she would have to comply.

 

[don_quixote]

Do you seriously think Dungey would have neglected to ask if there was any possibility it was taken in August?

I'm sure he wouldn't miss it. It could also be inconclusive.

 

[james9]

Not every piece of evidence has to be a smoking gun. Plus, if Millard testifies the Crown can ask him about the mattress.

Agreed, Ann. It will probably also help the Crown's narrative in their closing arguments. A lot of things that are coincidental and may seem insignificant in isolation will come together to tell the story and build the Crown's theory.

 

[JPC]

I can’t see how CN would be a good witness for anyone.

For the Crown and TD she would have been as reliable and forthcoming as MWJ. To me those two are the same person in a different body. We witnessed this in the TB trial.

For DM, she is a bit unreliable and could go either way. I could see him calling on her for no other reason than to degrade her for not destroying the letters.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[james9]

When he took the stand at TB's trial, MS showed he was no stupid clueless sidekick. He clung to his story for days, and many a times proved to be very quick with an answer. His Disney line along with I believe correcting a lawyer's mistep, showed me at least he was more than just street smart. MOO

MS also had his own crew in Oakville where he was the leader and he had sidekicks that looked up to him. That was ultimately what he wanted, and DM gave him a means to have 'gangsta' / badass things to brag about to his own crew.

 

[Grey-St]

It doesn't matter if he came up with it by himself.

And for the record, I don't think he's a stupid clueless sidekick. He had his share of power in the relationship. It was just a different type of power.

I like where you're going with this, ABro. Care to elaborate or expand?

 

[MsRyber]

Well he knew there was a night she went missing, and he's asking CN to provide cover eventually. Doesn't say anything about what she actually knew.

And if he told SM he didn't know where she was (after last 7 calls to him), how would he know specifically that she went missing at night, as he now tells CN?

 

[ABro]

I'm sure he wouldn't miss it. It could also be inconclusive.

Inconclusive would have been a help to Dungey. He didn't ask because the photo was taken the night the Crown alleges the body was incinerated. That's the evidence as testified to by Jim Falconer.

 

[inbetweendoors]

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-231.html

If it could be proven that her OD was planned and deliberate, then a charge of M1 would be applied.
If it could not be proven that her OD was assisted, it would not.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-51.html#h-74

Covering it up may qualify as Criminal Negligence / Homicide.

I'm sure there's other charges persuant to the concealment of a dead body.
I'd have to look a little deeper.

Thank you!

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

 

[JuneBug67]

I agree with your reasoning for the most part. This is the point where I think we differ. IMO and I also believe legally speaking, I do not think it matters that MS had Laura in mind specifically. I think that if it’s excepted that MS was involved in planning a killing and incineration, and then someone was killed and incinerated according to plan, and MS was present for both events I don’t believe it has to be proved he preplanned for that specific individual to be the victim. Or which specific accused did the deed so to speak. Just like TB was randomly picked could have been anyone with a nice diesel ram for sale but was still M1 for both because it was planned.

In almost any murder there is going to be a blackout period that only the perpetrators and victims can ever know what exactly happened. Convictions have to come from the totality of evidence from before and after that period of the unknown or it becomes almost impossible to convict anyone

Hope that makes sense as to where I am coming from

It does, and I agree with that line of consideration. It's just not clear to me what the legal reality would be if MS was actively involved in the setting up of circumstances intended to facilitate the disposal of bodies with criminal intent - maybe bodies you create, maybe as rake guy in an incinerator-for-hire scheme, maybe this, maybe that, maybe, maybe, maybe. It strikes me that DM needs literally nothing from MS to murder Laura. Aside from the initial hook up with Ish via MS, DM did his own negotiating for his gun and his bullets - if they were even relevant to this crime. He doesn't need MS to lure her to Maplegate, or subdue her, or make her stay. He doesn't need or request any help disposing of her phone, rolling her in a tarp, or driving her to his farm. He appoints himself the Lord of her possessions and hands them out over time. He only appears to need him for the incineration where he snaps pictures of MS generously, and keeps them for himself. Maybe for a rainy day.

MS is the guy that wants to "run wars" directly after incinerating a human being. Is that because he's a callous, unfeeling killer? Or because more or less, his conscience is clear?

 

[Typhoo1961]

And what's with all the baths with this group?

Haven't you ever showered/bathed with a lover? It can be part of foreplay.

 

[Grey-St]

When Alex Pierson covered the TB trial for 900CHML she said to Scott Thompson, ‘one day I’ll be able to tell you how those letters got out and you’ll fall off your chair.’

I get that it’s easy to smuggle things in and out of jail. Drugs are as readily available if not more in jail than on the street. I’m just curious if DM greased a guard or janitor a few bucks to pass them off.

I had to bring this back up because I find it SO intriguing. I never heard this interview.

I always thought it was Rabbit, visiting with DM in jail, and passing on his letters. That's how CN's testimony suggested it to be. There was also talk of his lawyer as well. But now it's being said that DM was denied contact visits. Do we know this to be true?