671 users online (85 members and 586 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 53
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    19,173

    What the jury didn't hear: revealing articles about the accused

    Post articles here about "what the jury didn't get to hear" and discuss.

    Faulty warrant shielded Internet activity

    For three months leading to the murder of Victoria 'Tori' Stafford, Michael Rafferty searched the Internet for 'underage rape, real underage rape, real underage rape pictures, pre-teen nude, pre-teen model galleries and nude pre-teen.'
    He also accessed a 'how-to-guide' on raping children and dozens of child pornography videos, including some featuring incest and one purporting to be a "snuff movie" involving a child.
    On March 28, 2009, 10 days before the kidnapping, Rafferty watched a movie about a man using a story about his lost dog to abduct a blonde, eight-year-old girl walking home alone after school. She is taken away in the man's car and forced later to perform sexual acts.
    On April 23, 2009, after the kidnapping, he downloaded a movie about Karla Homolka.
    http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/r.../19741946.html

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    19,173


    ‘Eight years old, Mike . . . that’s pure evil’

    http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/r.../19741811.html

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    19,173
    Cop told accused lies in bid to get confession

    http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/r.../19741721.html

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    19,173
    Heartbreaking details jurors never heard

    http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/r.../19741681.html

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    19,173
    The story behind McClintic's about-face

    http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/r.../19741656.html

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    19,173

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    19,173
    Smyth calls Rafferty a psychopath, "pure evil" and a "sick puppy," at one point bringing McClintic herself into the room and challenging Rafferty to call her a liar to her face. McClintic had just confessed to the crime and implicated Rafferty.
    Rafferty does not look at her, but says she is a liar.

    http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/r.../19741946.html

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    sipping coffee at the Purple Rose Theatre
    Posts
    53,157
    thank you matou... this will help keep the articles in one place!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    19,173
    What the Jury Didn't Hear: Shocking Details About Rafferty's Character
    Data fragments on Rafferty's laptop indicate he had been downloading child pornography since 2005. The Hollywood movie
    ``Gardens of the Night,'' about the abduction of a young, blond girl -- which deviates substantially from what allegedly happened to Tori after the abduction -- was downloaded 11 days before she disappeared.
    The movie ``Karla,'' about Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo, was downloaded two weeks later.
    Investigators also said they found evidence on the laptop of videos ``depicting 'how-to' instructions for child sexual assault,'' and evidence ``of recent possession of 'snuff' films inclusive of one with a title suggestive of a child target.''
    Most of the videos depicted ``a variety of graphic and coercive images of violent sexual abuse involving children between one and eighteen years of age,'' the Crown documents say.
    http://www.am980.ca/channels/news/lo...spx?ID=1702061

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    19,173
    Christie Blatchford: The shocking child-porn evidence the Tori Stafford

    There was plenty of other evidence about Mr. Rafferty, chiefly that he had a penchant for sexual choking, that the jurors never heard because prosecutors didn’t try to have it admitted.
    They had lined up no fewer than 12 women — not counting Terri-Lynne McClintic herself — who would have testified about Mr. Rafferty’s fondness for choking out his partners.
    Not all of these episodes were consensual, prosecutors said in a so-called “bad character” factum that was filed with the court but never argued in full.

    Indeed, Mr. Rafferty actually had one of his reluctant partners sign a waiver, giving him consent to choke her. “I agree to what Mike and I are doing tonight, sexual choking and passing out and other things,” it read.
    The sexual choking had some real significance given Ms. McClintic’s evidence — in her first version of the killing, when she claimed it was Mr. Rafferty who did it — that she had heard a “gurgling” sound coming from Tori in the moments before her death.

    She interpreted that to mean the little girl was being choked, a practice with which she was not unfamiliar.
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...erty-evidence/


  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    19,173
    Bizarrely, an enduring difficulty with the Google searches was that if all of them were introduced — Mr. Rafferty had also searched for “naked girl seizing,” “seizures girl,” and “epileptic naked” — Mr. Derstine worried that Mr. Rafferty would appear a deviant, and if only the child-rape ones were allowed, it would appear he was interested only in sex with children, when he was in fact interested in sex with epileptics too.
    In any case, the judge found that because Ms. McClintic didn’t “adopt,” or agree with Mr. Derstine’s suggestions, they remained simply that. And because lawyers’ questions aren’t evidence, there was no evidence before the jurors, he said, to trigger any action on his part.
    In the result, jurors heard none of it.
    Mr. Rafferty didn’t testify.
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...erty-evidence/

    So did he know a little girl who had seizures or was epileptic? wow. JMO

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    sipping coffee at the Purple Rose Theatre
    Posts
    53,157
    guys.. it may not have been the warrant that was faulty after reading this!

    Stripped to the core, the judge said that though the police had acted legally in getting search warrants for Mr. Rafferty’s home and car, and though they honestly believed that was sufficient to allow for a forensic examination of the hard drive, BlackBerry and laptop found therein, and though the law on such searches was then evolving, the police should have anticipated how it might change and sought another warrant to look at the devices.

    In essence, Judge Heeney said, the police were good cops but bad lawyers.

    As a “remedy” for what he called their carelessness, he deemed the search a violation of Mr. Rafferty’s Charter-guaranteed right against unreasonable search and seizure and threw the evidence out.
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...erty-evidence/

    another snip

    In pre-trial arguments, Mr. Rafferty’s lawyer, Dirk Derstine, challenged almost everything about the search in trying to get the evidence tossed.

    But Judge Heeney found the police had been honest and acted properly and legally — except that they sent the hard drive seized from Mr. Rafferty’s house and the BlackBerry and laptop found in his car to an OPP forensic examiner without getting a secondary warrant.

    The law governing computer and electronic searches was then very much in a state of flux.

    There had been judicial hints that without a secondary warrant, such searches might not survive a Charter challenge, but the matter simply wasn’t settled yet.
    unbelievable... utterly

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    sipping coffee at the Purple Rose Theatre
    Posts
    53,157
    guys.. it may not have been the warrant that was faulty after reading this!

    Stripped to the core, the judge said that though the police had acted legally in getting search warrants for Mr. Rafferty’s home and car, and though they honestly believed that was sufficient to allow for a forensic examination of the hard drive, BlackBerry and laptop found therein, and though the law on such searches was then evolving, the police should have anticipated how it might change and sought another warrant to look at the devices.

    In essence, Judge Heeney said, the police were good cops but bad lawyers.

    As a “remedy” for what he called their carelessness, he deemed the search a violation of Mr. Rafferty’s Charter-guaranteed right against unreasonable search and seizure and threw the evidence out.
    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...erty-evidence/

    another snip

    In pre-trial arguments, Mr. Rafferty’s lawyer, Dirk Derstine, challenged almost everything about the search in trying to get the evidence tossed.

    But Judge Heeney found the police had been honest and acted properly and legally — except that they sent the hard drive seized from Mr. Rafferty’s house and the BlackBerry and laptop found in his car to an OPP forensic examiner without getting a secondary warrant.

    The law governing computer and electronic searches was then very much in a state of flux.

    There had been judicial hints that without a secondary warrant, such searches might not survive a Charter challenge, but the matter simply wasn’t settled yet.
    unbelievable... utterly

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    ElePhEr
    Posts
    6,094
    The jury also did not know that in January 2009 a woman Rafferty met on dating website Plenty of Fish, where he met most of the other women he dated, invited Rafferty over to her house to watch a movie. According to a police complaint, he arrived with an already opened bottle of wine, poured her some, but did not drink any himself.

    She told police she started to feel "fuzzy," the room started to spin and Rafferty climbed on top of her on the couch. He started choking her, removing her clothes and tying her hands behind her back, according to the police report, which was cited in court documents. She started vomiting, and Rafferty anally raped her while still choking her, she alleged.
    http://www.680news.com/news/national...ty-s-character

    Oh my ... it just keeps coming out.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    dillon
    Posts
    1,979
    Quote Originally Posted by elepher50 View Post
    http://www.680news.com/news/national...ty-s-character

    Oh my ... it just keeps coming out.
    From the article you linked:

    When police legally searched Rafferty's car and found the two devices, they should have obtained another search warrant to examine their contents, Heeney ruled — even though at the time there was no binding authority upon them to do so.
    The first court decision to spell out that a secondary search warrant is necessary under such circumstances wasn't released until several weeks after investigators began poring through Rafferty's laptop.

    Based on this, article, I would say the judge erred in his decision.

    Can the Crown appeal the verdict, based on this? ETA: If the verdict isn't 'guilty on all counts.'

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. List - What didn't the jury hear?
    By Irish_Eyes in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 07-11-2011, 12:40 AM

Tags for this Thread