Trial Thread 4/12/2012

swedie said:

MR's mega woman list. More than likely using them all at the same time. Am I missing any women? Ten so far. HTH

-TLM - helped MR abduct Tori for sexual deviance
-Lane -
-<modsnip> - G/F at the time of his arrest
-Joy - met MR in GLF parking lot day of his arrest
-Amanda
-Kate
-BA ex lover, girly talks with MR, drug dealer
-Hodge
-T. Moore aka Tam Tam, met on Yahoo 2003. MR bought car in 2007, used car lot in TO
-M. LaBute, Staples described MR as needy.

Click to expand...

...ok thanks Matou ...here is another one to add Miss.____ think she said JW?....this is so confusing and TWISTED....robyhood

swedie said:

My post above #395. EVERYONE who has taken the stand and told their part; that is EVIDENCE. Including TLM stating MR wanted Tori so he could rape her. When you put everyone's testimony together like a puzzle, it tells the complete story. The testimony that TLM gave is the frame of the puzzle and everyone who now has testified has added their pieces. By the end of the Crowns case against MR we will have a complete puzzle. TLM would know exactly what happened that day because she was there and she knows the motive of why Tori was abducted just as LE knew. :moo:

TLM has nothing to lose by telling the truth and I don't know why some people still question her credibility because all the pieces are now fitting. I still have not been able to find any information in the MSM to show she is a chronic/habitual liar. MR's is another story. Seems everything out of his mouth now in evidence given by people who knew him, proves he's nothing but a habitual liar, who had some warped sexual dysfunction, troubles sustaining relationships with women, (I wonder if he had any male friends and if not, why?). One reason may be because most normal men don't like womanizers, cheaters and liars. Decent men are great at detecting idiots when they meet them. MR's was cheater plus many more characteristic flaws against this guy. He thought he could fool many women but seems most caught onto his BS. MR was probably feeling severely rejected by women just prior to Tori's abduction. Kindof like the "loser at love". Bottom line is all these testimonies/evidence does not paint a purdy picture of MR and the jury is getting it first hand. :moo:

Click to expand...

Also, LE investigate where leads take them but also on statistics. Just like they know statistically the odds of a child being found alive after a certain time; they know the statistics or profile of the suspect they would be looking for and how far away the body would be from the victim's home statistically etc etc.

Shasta said:

Who was the woman MTR was with when he was arrested?

Click to expand...

<Mod Snip> JW

Latole said:

Who is this woman???

Click to expand...

I did actually send a tweet to AM980.ca&#8207;@AM980_Court but I got no answer.


I hope MR got a psychological profile done after he was arrested and I hope we hear about it.

Ardy said:

JMO........The jury isn't reading forum pages or newspaper articles filled with speculation or condemnation of MR. They aren't reading opinions on his love life, employment choices, or living arrangements.

They are listening attentively to the evidence.

The evidence relating to the charge of sexual assault thus far is.............

Testimony from TLM.

No evidence of sexual assault from pathology report.

No evidence of sexual assault from DNA evidence.

I don't see any jury convicting on no evidence.

Click to expand...

I've been surprised once or twice when the jury's verdict is read.

Hello_Kitty said:

I did actually send a tweet to AM980.ca&#8207;@AM980_Court but I got no answer.


I hope MR got a psychological profile done after he was arrested and I hope we hear about it.

Click to expand...

or how about the LE profile of the type of person they would be looking for:what::twocents:

Macright said:

there is only one person so far who has testified that MR raped TS and that is the one who is convicted of murder and also confessed that it was she herself who swung the hammer...what other pieces of evidences are you talking about...can you list them...:what::moo: I may have missed something:banghead::banghead:

Click to expand...

To me, there are 4 things that point overwhelmingly towards sexual assault, or rather, rape. Sexual assault sounds so 'meh', doesn't it? Could be an unwelcome pat on the bum. This was rape; that word is less ambiguous.

In order of importance....

1. The absence of clothing on the lower extremities of the body - no pants, no underwear. Nudity = vulnerability; no amount of mental gymnastics results in a scenario where I would, mid-kidnapping, remove half of my clothing. Just no...NO. Perhaps this isn't self-evident to men?

Perhaps I had an accident, as someone suggested - nope, I'd sit in it as long as I had to. Had to go to the bathroom, so took off my pants? No, ask any woman - you either hike it and squat (skirt) or pull down to the ankles and squat. In no scenario (outside outside of the privacy of my bedroom) would I remove my clothes entirely because of urgent need or wet underwear. It defies reason and common sense.

If they removed clothing to prevent DNA evidence, why wouldn't they remove all clothing? Anyone over the age of about 16 knows, tops are easy to remove, bottoms - a bit harder. Legs are heavy compared to arms.


2. The uncanny accuracy of her statement. The description of the location, how the statement ties in with video (school, Home Depot, gas stations) and witness evidence (the percocet seller), the absence of the back seat, the description of the knife she used to cut the seat, the fact that a piece of the seat was found on the floor with DNA. Bottle caps with the remains and the use of water bottles to 'clean up'. Etc, etc, etc...it just goes on and on.

Despite the appearance that she is clearly an irrevocably damaged and twisted human being, her story is backed by evidence at every turn. On top of that, it rings true to me in a horrible way.


3. Motive - If TLM was a scorned woman, hell-bent on revenge, why would she change her statement and admit that she did the killing?

Conversely, if she is lying out of some sense of loyalty, to protect him, why wouldn't she recant her statement that a rape had occurred?

I can't see a motive to lie about the rape but change her statement to admit that she committed the murder - can anyone else?


4. The CSI generation - we've been raised on a diet of CSI and Law & Order. We have to assume that any criminal will attempt to destroy evidence, and they clearly did - tire tracks interfered with, shoes discarded (evidence), car wash, hair dye (evidence), discarded seat (evidence), new cell phone (evidence) when they started to close in, etc, etc.. again, it just goes on and on.

Even the fact that the blood was found on the door frame rings true - I always forget to clean there when I wash my car.

Would you, in a juror's shoes, discard everything you know about the world today and expect evidence to be handed to you on a silver platter? I would expect that proof would have to come in the form of numerous pieces of circumstantial evidence that ultimately combine to present the overall picture.

I find the evidence of rape overwhelming.

It breaks my heart that it just happened to be land belonging to a farmer who, because of his religion, avoided media - what a terrible coincidence. If it weren't for that, the search may have ended much sooner, perhaps in time to have incontrovertible evidence.

robynhood said:

...ok thanks Matou ...here is another one to add Miss.____ think she said JW?....this is so confusing and TWISTED....robyhood

Click to expand...

He also lived in Guelph, in an apartment with DM. I posted video of her being interviewed a few weeks back.

Ardy said:

JMO........The jury isn't reading forum pages or newspaper articles filled with speculation or condemnation of MR. They aren't reading opinions on his love life, employment choices, or living arrangements.

They are listening attentively to the evidence.

The evidence relating to the charge of sexual assault thus far is.............

Testimony from TLM.

No evidence of sexual assault from pathology report.

No evidence of sexual assault from DNA evidence.

I don't see any jury convicting on no evidence.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, if the majority of jurors thought this way then there would be an awful lot of rapists and murderers walking free amongst us.

What you're basically saying is that because the body of the victim wasn't found in time for any forensic evidence to be present due to decomposition and because the defendent destroyed evidence, then he must be innocent.

And no one should ever be convicted on direct or circumstantial evidence.

MOO

Ardy said:

JMO........The jury isn't reading forum pages or newspaper articles filled with speculation or condemnation of MR. They aren't reading opinions on his love life, employment choices, or living arrangements.

They are listening attentively to the evidence.

The evidence relating to the charge of sexual assault thus far is.............

Testimony from TLM.

No evidence of sexual assault from pathology report.

No evidence of sexual assault from DNA evidence.

I don't see any jury convicting on no evidence.

Click to expand...

:thud:

...qUESTION ...NOW WAS mISS. wOODS ..JW...the woman who had a young child and who was friend's with Tori?.....or am I getting confused ....there was a reference in that LE first interview that MR had and MR mentioned a mom who MR dated briefly and who was telling him about Tori's abuction ( as if he did not know...OMG ) ....IMO this is getting really TWISTED !...robynhood ...please someone clarify >>>>??????

Hello_Kitty said:

I did actually send a tweet to AM980.ca&#8207;@AM980_Court but I got no answer.


I hope MR got a psychological profile done after he was arrested and I hope we hear about it.

Click to expand...

I believe only the defense can call for that and even if they did and it was unfavourable to him we would not hear about it.

MOO

robynhood said:

...qUESTION ...NOW WAS mISS. wOODS ..JW...the woman who had a young child and who was friend's with Tori?.....or am I getting confused ....there was a reference in that LE first interview that MR had and MR mentioned a mom who MR dated briefly and who was telling him about Tori's abuction ( as if he did not know...OMG ) ....IMO this is getting really TWISTED !...robynhood ...please someone clarify >>>>??????

Click to expand...

in audio with LE, MTR said he dated Amanda who's daughter was best friends with the girl who went missing (his words).:twocents:

With all the discussion over MR's long list of female acquaintances......here is a quote from an April 5th article by Christie Blatchford, that may explain all the female interest in MR.

For whatever the differences between the homes are worth, they lend heft to a vignette Ms. McClintic told the jurors.

She was in custody, and Mr. Rafferty, with his conventional good looks and appearance, came to visit. When he left, one of the staff asked who he was and when she replied, &#8220;My boyfriend,&#8221; the staff member said, &#8220;Way to go Terri.&#8221;
JMO

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...ship-raises-questions-at-tori-stafford-trial/

robynhood said:

...qUESTION ...NOW WAS mISS. wOODS ..JW...the woman who had a young child and who was friend's with Tori?.....or am I getting confused ....there was a reference in that LE first interview that MR had and MR mentioned a mom who MR dated briefly and who was telling him about Tori's abuction ( as if he did not know...OMG ) ....IMO this is getting really TWISTED !...robynhood ...please someone clarify >>>>??????

Click to expand...

MR said Amanda had daughter that was friends with TS. He also said he didn't know Amanda's last name or her daughter's name, but that Amanda would visit TM's home to comfort the family. MR said Amanda lived on a street that started with a "B" on the way out of Woodstock. Per his police interview. MOO and MO interpretation of the interview.

snoofer said:

in audio with LE, MTR said he dated Amanda who's daughter was best friends with the girl who went missing (his words).:twocents:

Click to expand...

And he dated her for a couple of weeks and I believe he stated that he didn't even know her daughter's name. Find that hard to believe. :waitasec:

MOO

Kamille said:

Two possibilities. He did remove the seat that day to install the speaker in his trunk but replaced it shortly after. Or the neighbour is mistaken about the day he saw MR remove the seat, it was the Sunday after the crime, and that was the excuse he was given when he asked about it.

I wouldn't say that one person's witness testimony that the seat was removed on the 29th, testimony given almost two months after the fact, is enough to determine that the seat was not in the car after that date.

Remember the woman who found the sneakers couldn't even remember what month she found them in.

MOO

Click to expand...

There has been no testimony to support that the seat was put back in either. At the end of it all, it doesn't really matter, except to be used towards TLM's credibility, seeing as it was never located and therefore there was never any forensic testing done. it really is redundant and no one, other than one witness can recall whether chunks of fabric were cut out or not. JMO

Just because the woman who found the sneaker can't remember when she found it, doesn't mean the witness who saw the seat removed in March is incorrect. He could have an excellent memory, there are people out there that remember everything, so it isvery possible. JMO

For me this creates reasonable doubt on what TLM said regarding the seat. Again, JMO

Ardy said:

With all the discussion over MR's long list of female acquaintances......here is a quote from an April 5th article by Christie Blatchford, that may explain all the female interest in MR.

For whatever the differences between the homes are worth, they lend heft to a vignette Ms. McClintic told the jurors.

She was in custody, and Mr. Rafferty, with his conventional good looks and appearance, came to visit. When he left, one of the staff asked who he was and when she replied, “My boyfriend,” the staff member said, “Way to go Terri.”
JMO

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...ship-raises-questions-at-tori-stafford-trial/

Click to expand...

He was picking them up from online dating sites. Of course they were interested in meeting him or why else would they be signed up to a dating site? Point is he was picking them up in multiples at the same time and they were dumping him in quick order for reasons that only they can provide. And it appears that none of them knew about each other.

MOO

roseofsharon said:

So, I wonder which one of these women was the one he lived with in Oakville, the one that got him lots of jobs?? MOO

Click to expand...

he mentioned on the audio with LE...told LE we will just call her "Leslie" for some reason i am thinking that is the oakville one:twocents:

Sailor Bug said:

Just had to add to the list of "jobs" Rafferty said he had or is believed to have had
Can't wait to hear what he actually did do as a living
-Contractor
-Landscaper
-worked a better beef in Guelph
-Dance Instuctor
-was said to be in college working towards a Veterinary Assistant
-Caretaker (for his Mother) & TLM's Mother
-Possible drug traffic
-As MR stated in the LE interview, he also worked at Glen Abbey.
-And I believe he was a chef, trained at George Brown.
-working under the table
-Glen Abbey
-Dance Instructor
-Had his own Contracting Business
-Snow Plower
-HR-hiring person for construction sites

Click to expand...

You missed professional gigolo.