Long Easter Weekend Thread (Apr. 5, 6, 7, 8, & 9, 2012)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is the hair colour and Carol's prescriptions the same day, April 11, 2009. Doesn't really mean anything just kind of odd ...

Good eye! And weren\t Carol's prescrip receipts laid out on the bed at her place, and the hair coloring on the shelf?

What day did they pick up TLM on her parole violation? Do I recall correctly that MR didn't realize that TLM was in custody until he went to her place and Carol told him that she was back in the slammer....

I guess we don't know when the furniture etc. was delivered to Carol ... along with the hair color, the receipt was for water and a choc bar ...

Just wondering about the timeline here...
 
Nobody seems to know where Carol is. That's odd.
 
It's strange to me that Derstine even mentioned EOA, specially after we had discussed it the night before.




What happened when TLM said MR did it? He got arrested and charged.

Why would it would be any different if he had called the police to the grisly scene and proclaimed his innocence?

He is proclaiming his innocence now....and the Crown doesn't believe him.

Personally, I would have called police and hoped that a jury in the future would find me innocent..........but there is no guarantee of that result.



I really don't see that MR's lawyer is proclaiming his innocence. And he's not innocent. He may not have wielded the hammer, or abused Tori, but as mentioned by many posters already, he helped TLM clean up after the murder, left her abandoned in a lonely field in a pile of rocks, he could have provided closure to her family by leading them to her remains, he could have avoided a massive search for her remains, etc There are alot of things he could have done which he didn't do, and the word coward is way too mild to describe what he didn't do.


Also, AG, looking at those notes, I doubt it was his mother that wrote them. The one where it says 'things4Carol' notice the 4, that's instant messaging speak, in blackberry messenger and text messages people tend to type like that. I don't think older people like his Mom would type like that or write that waty. I have been using computers and the internet since 1994, and even after using a blackberry for 3 years, i don't even type like that. JMO
 
First of all, why didn't he stop it from happening, why didn't he scream for help, why didn't he call 911, why didn't he use his muscles to handle TLM, why didn't he drive to the MF police station, why didn't he run to the house at the end of the road for help. No, not because he was afraid of TLM and her hommies.

If he were an innocent man, had he immediately gone to LE, told them he needed a lawyer and told everything he knew, he would not be sitting where he is today.

And with TLM's criminal history, LE would have believed him over anything she would have had to say.


MOO

The problem with your assertions is that you are assuming LE would don the role of triers of fact and make a decision on guilt or innocence, which isn't their mandate.

If LE appeared at the scene of a grisly murder in a secluded place, they most certainly would have probable cause to affect the arrests of both TLM and MR.

If one accused (TLM) implicated the other accused (MR), I doubt LE or the Crown would not proceed against both of the accused. I have never heard of any case where one accused implicated the other accused and both didn't go to trial, but someone could correct me if I am wrong.

MR DID have the opportunity to advise LE of the crime immediately. He could have remained silent after the police arrived at the scene and retained legal counsel. Then he could have provided a written statement of all facts to LE....but that would have required the courage of putting himself in jeopardy.

Not doing so was such reprehensible conduct, that reaches the highest level of offensive behavior. It was a grievous display of self interest, cowardly conduct, and there are no words to describe the disgust for such behavior. There are no valid excuses for his conduct. Going to prison, going to court......it really doesn't matter what he was worried about.

Sometimes you have to suffer to do the decent and honorable thing.

But.......this trial isn't about MR's dishonorable choices or lack of moral sense. It is solely about the charges against him.

Is he guilty or not guilty?
 
What makes you think it's an old favourite???

Oh no, it's just a figure of speech lol! That stuff, Frost and Tip and its sister product Frost and Glow have been around for years and years despite newer and more sophisticated formulas coming on the market almost daily. It is prob one of the less expensive streaking kits - iirc both kits come with a soft plastic hat and a little crochet hook so the hair can be pulled thru the pre-set holes. Spent hours doing that - two daughters lol!
 
Re: Ardy's post ...

If one accused (TLM) implicated the other accused (MR), I doubt LE or the Crown would not proceed against both of the accused. I have never heard of any case where one accused implicated the other accused and both didn't go to trial, but someone could correct me if I am wrong.

Just a technicality, but TLM did not go to trial - she pleaded guilty on a bogus Statement of Facts implicating MR as the murderer, expressing regret for her contribution and asserting that she was now a better person. In light of her later admissions and testimony, she effectively threw MR to the wolves by remaining silent all that time that it was she who was the murderer. So yes, both were charged and while one confessed the other was brought to trial because of the Not Guilty plea.

Sometimes the courts will try accused separately - as in this case because of the diff in their pleas ... sometimes it is a huge trial of more than one accused (the Bandidos trial, which yes, Derstine was involved in - acting for Mathers), and the current trial in Hamilton of three accused charged with Murder One in the shooting death of the one accused's wife - both of these cases all of the accused had the same plea - not guilty (in the Hamilton trial all three have turned on each other so it will be a case of who the jury believes, limited forensics, an uncover sting and the jury's common sense.)

But you are correct, no one gets a free pass or leaves unscathed or without penalty of law ...

Coincidently, Derstine has an impressive track record with cases of this type - where the witness is unreliable ... its on their website ... and also a number of appeals under their belt. Which reminds me, the reason for the days spent with legal arguments with the jury not present is for the lawyers to present their reasonings for the admission of certain evidence and points of law for the judge to consider so that the verdict is not overturned on appeal for a legal technicality as to whether evidence was improperly obtained, the jury not instructed correctly, whatever. The point being that if MR is convicted of Murder 1 - whatever - he can still start the appeals process for a new trial if there are points at law that were mishandled that may have affected his rights. Whew!!! Just saying that criminal law is complex....
 
Nobody seems to know where Carol is. That's odd.

It is odd, but if I recall correctly (where did I see that???) she attended at TLM's sentencing ... wowsa! She may be on the witness list tho - and then LE will find her unless .... ya dont think she died do you? Its been a while since TLMs sentencing...
 
It is odd, but if I recall correctly (where did I see that???) she attended at TLM's sentencing ... wowsa! She may be on the witness list tho - and then LE will find her unless .... ya dont think she died do you? Its been a while since TLMs sentencing...

I don't know; I've been wondering that myself. But if she died, you'd think somebody'd be able to find record of it. So I don't think so.
 
Thanks for that informative post.

I stand corrected. TLM didn't stand trial because of her plea.
 
KNOCK OFF THE BICKERING NOW! I will be going through this thread in the morning to clean it up. All posters in this thread should be aware that there is a zero tolerance policy for bickering and derailing the thread.... so if you have posts like that, you better clean them up before I get to them.

Thanks,

Salem
 
Re Kamille post.........

If he had called police to the scene, according to his version of the story, they would not have found any evidence of a sexual assault by him and they would have found a crazed drug addict standing there with a hammer with her prints all over it. And they would have found a very scared, dazed and confused man wondering WTH happened.

An excellent recounting of how MR would have benefited himself by doing what he should have done, what most any of us would have done, and what he may now wish he had done. (if in fact he didn't have any knowledge of what was really going on)

But for whatever (unjustifiable) reason, he chose not to do ......JMO
 
Thank you to all for keeping the Victoria Stafford threads updated and giving so much food for thought. I've followed this case from the beginning. I'm now living and working in Saudi Arabia and because of internet connectivity interruptions, couldn't possibly follow if it were not for the updates on WS by the excellent sleuthers.

We may not all agree on what's being presented, but we are all united in our wish to do the right thing for Victoria Stafford. Too little, too late, for sure, and no relief EVER for the poor family. By closely scrutinizing this trial, by giving feedback to systems of justice in Ontario, we can ensure our politicians know the public will not tolerate this level of violence against children.

I'm not sure I agree with the death penalty; living in Saudia Arabia close to "chop-chop square," in a city where I could get my head cut off for not wearing a hijab because it is a sexual temptation to men (and therefore a punishable crime) provides unique perspective on implications of the death penalty. But I hope Canada will have a death penalty debate, a dialogue to emphasize and underscore to our justice system that violence at this level, especially against children is intolerable and will be prosecuted fairly but with the full weight of the law.
 
About the hair dye...

My understanding is that the actual box of hair dye from TLM's room was presented at trial - not just a photo, although a photo of the SKU was posted.

So I went to peek, thinking OMG no way a box of hair dye is going to turn TLMs hair from brown to blond ... and the hair "dye" isn't exactly as described in court - it is a highlighting kit - so that strands or sections or chunks of hair can be lightened to a somewhat blonde tone.

http://www.lorealparis.ca/haircolour/all-over-colour/feria/C100-extra-light-blonde.aspx

So then I wondered if perhaps MR had picked up the highlighting kit for Carol? Mini-makeover time? Did he perhaps pick it up as part of an errand,and while he was there chose a product for himself? Is that why the receipt was still at his mom's house? Was Carol going to reimburse him for the hair color? Last known photo of Carol has her hair brown - so obviously she dyes it.

For himself, MR chose an old favorite, Frost & Tip, which is apparently only sold in Canada.

This guy was obviously not a master of disguise, but a peacock ...

I see what you're saying, and that is a possibility, but really, how likely is it that a man is going to think about how nice a makeover would be for a woman and then go out and buy them a frosting kit? And it just so happens that at the time the hair color was purchased TLM was needing to change her appearance and had already taken extreme measures to do so by cutting her hair. Maybe it is a coincidence though.

Or maybe it's a coincidence that TLM's mom's hair is lighter now than it used to be. :moo: I think this is more likely to be a coincidence because it's just difficult for me to see a man initiating a hair color makeover for his girlfriend's mom. It just doesnt seem like a realistic scenario. :moo:
 
Regarding the issue of what evidence the defence has that could prove MTR's innocence, I'm not sure if it has been pointed out that especially when it comes to physical evidence it is in the defence's best interest that the Crown is aware of everything the defence has.

For example when it comes to physical evidence if evidence is not collected by LE and presented by the defense, there would be serious chain of custody issues and it would be very easy for the Crown to bring up the issue of tampering with evidence.

One of the main reasons forensic and other physical evidence collected by LE is such strong circumstantial even when compared to direct testimony evidence is that the evidence is collected and processed by those qualified to do so without prejudice according to strict protocols in place to insure that evidence is not tampered with.

And then when it comes to a person that could testify, if the witness only goes to the defence with information regarding a case that witness might look less credible, since I would think the Crown would question why the individual did not go to LE who could have then investigated the accuracy of whatever it is they have to say.
 
Good eye! And weren\t Carol's prescrip receipts laid out on the bed at her place, and the hair coloring on the shelf?

What day did they pick up TLM on her parole violation? Do I recall correctly that MR didn't realize that TLM was in custody until he went to her place and Carol told him that she was back in the slammer....

I guess we don't know when the furniture etc. was delivered to Carol ... along with the hair color, the receipt was for water and a choc bar ...

Just wondering about the timeline here...

The date on the hair color receipt is 4.11 evening. I can't see the date on the prescription receipts from TLM's, but TLM went to Genst on 4.12.

The receipt for the hair color says it was purchased at Walmart. I can't see the store logo on the prescription receipts very clearly, but I've used Walmart's pharmacy and I don't think it's a match. :moo:

One of the prescription bottles at MTR's had a red Shoppers label on it though, and the logo on the prescription receipts at TLM's is red.
 
The Ipod didn't kidnap, rape and kill Victoria. Neither did any of the musicians whose music is on that Ipod.

Explicitly bad and disgusting hip hop music is not the motive here.

They had the guy who was there at the scene in their "possession" too. He could have led them right to her.

But he didn't.

MOO

Exactly. It's like saying video games like World of Warcraft and Grand Theft Auto cause people to murder. Ridiculous and ignorant defence, imo.

Total irrelevant to his client's charges of kidnapping, sexual assaulting and murdering an 8 year old little girl!
 
maybe not his dept. but as a LE is SHOULD know of the gangs in the area...doesn't say much for the LE in that area..:moo:

No it says to me that the question was totally irrelevant to his area of expertise. He was too busy looking at forensics in a case of a murdered child in which a gangsta wannabe and Necro songs on an IPOD had nothing to do with it. As far as I know, there was no evidence presented by the Crown that TLM or the accused child kidnapper/rapist/murderer had anything to do with street gangs. The evidence presented so far was a child unknown to both was kidnapped/sexually assaulted and murdered for no apparent reason. It could have been sexually motivated or a thrill kill.

Frankly, I don't care how many street gangs there are in London or Woodstock, Ontario. It has nothing to do with this trial.
 
I completely agree. IMO, we just want all the details and we want them now. We are impatient and hate having to wait for what could be 3 months to see what the total picture is. Patience is being tested here, but I think it is important to realize the LE did their job and did it well, making sure not too much was revealed prior to the trial to ensure MR gets a fair trial, also assuring the public that someone won't be walking free due to a mistrial.

Well said and you are 100% spot on. It's taking a long time for justice but I have faith that they have dotted all their i's and crossed all their t's and justice will prevail for Victoria Elizabeth Marie Stafford at the end of this trial.
 
I have no problem with ident officers not knowing who's who in gangland. Just like the gang unit doesn't know everything about forensics.

Ident officers are not patrolling the street or working in organized crime units.

As for being too busy going around the moon. I would hope that nothing ever happens to a member of my family and if they do I would hope LE goes to the moon and back for my loved ones.

Amen!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
175
Guests online
2,417
Total visitors
2,592

Forum statistics

Threads
589,983
Messages
17,928,644
Members
228,031
Latest member
washingtonsupersleuth
Back
Top