Babcock Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #6

[andreww]

Also, the lawyer who withheld the tapes from police all during that time, got off with barely a slap on the wrist. If the tapes had never been made, or he'd destroyed them, no one would care about Homolka. It was his hiding them and then passing them on to a more ethical lawyer that caused this endless angst about her.

Exactly. Homolka did exactly what any Canadian would do, she got a good lawyer and had him do his best in her interests. She was very lucky that Millards lawyer was just as shady as he was and hid those tapes. I'm sure it came down to it being one of the highest profile cases in Canadian history and the lawyer simply didn't want to recuse himself.

 

[Tilly23]

Exactly. Homolka did exactly what any Canadian would do, she got a good lawyer and had him do his best in her interests. She was very lucky that Millards lawyer was just as shady as he was and hid those tapes. I'm sure it came down to it being one of the highest profile cases in Canadian history and the lawyer simply didn't want to recuse himself.

RBBM

As a Canadian, I gotta object here. Yes, she had a right to get a lawyer and have him protect her. BUT, she knew that she was guilty and she knew that she was lying about her involvement. I for one, would not have been able to do what she did. Well, I definitely couldn't have participated in the criminal acts she was involved in, but I also would not have been able to go along with the "deal" that was based on serious lies - even to save myself from prison time.

MOO

 

[andreww]

RBBM

As a Canadian, I gotta object here. Yes, she had a right to get a lawyer and have him protect her. BUT, she knew that she was guilty and she knew that she was lying about her involvement. I for one, would not have been able to do what she did. Well, I definitely couldn't have participated in the criminal acts she was involved in, but I also would not have been able to go along with the "deal" that was based on serious lies - even to save myself from prison time.

MOO

Most Canadians wouldn't do what she did. I guess I should have said she did what every Canadian criminal would do.

 

[musicaljoke]

Is it tomorrow when we will hear from DM?

I predict that we will hear:
How he bought presents for people because he's a nice guy like that,
How he has had sex with lots of women,
How he has lots and lots of money, (but not so much that he couldn't apply for legal aid),
How he had plenty of guns, all kinds of guns because he's manly like that,
How he provided drugs for his bff and really cool parties,

Hmmmm ... what am I missing


And ... probably we'll hear some new incriminating evidence.

 

[andreww]

Is it tomorrow when we will hear from DM?

I predict that we will hear:
How he bought presents for people because he's a nice guy like that,
How he has had sex with lots of women,
How he has lots and lots of money, (but not so much that he couldn't apply for legal aid),
How he had plenty of guns, all kinds of guns because he's manly like that,
How he provided drugs for his bff and really cool parties,

Hmmmm ... what am I missing


And ... probably we'll hear some new incriminating evidence.

We'll hear a lot more than that. He has to construct a narrative using the evidence to tell the jury exactly what happened that night. It'll kinda be like what his lawyer did in the TB trial, telling the jury that it was Smich that unexpectedly shot TB while he was driving on the highway.

 

[andreww]

Millard has told so many lies that it is almost impossible to even explain the situation in fiction. She died accidentally? Smich killed her? She drove her to the lake and that was the last he saw of her? My guess is that he'll go with the accidental death during rough sex route, but we'll see tomorrow.

 

[Jealoushe]

Millard has told so many lies that it is almost impossible to even explain the situation in fiction. She died accidentally? Smich killed her? She drove her to the lake and that was the last he saw of her? My guess is that he'll go with the accidental death during rough sex route, but we'll see tomorrow.

I think he will claim she is still alive.

 

[Inspector_North]

I think he will claim she is still alive.

I wondered if he limited his story telling by putting that witness on the stand. DM's witnesses didn't have a good day in the court room. But if you look at DM's witnesses collectively, they were all there to deny LB was murdered or cremated.

Expert witness - He was supposed to cast doubt on the bones being human.
LW (bookkeeper) - Eliminator was not hidden from the books, and the Millard's were involved in legitimate activity that could use the incinerator.
Dad of LB's ex BF - Is pretty sure he saw her alive after she was reported missing.


If it wasn't for the letter, he could have possibly spun a story worthy of Disney. MOO

 

[andreww]

I wondered if he limited his story telling by putting that witness on the stand. DM's witnesses didn't have a good day in the court room. But if you look at DM's witnesses collectively, they were all there to deny LB was murdered or cremated.

Expert witness - He was supposed to cast doubt on the bones being human.
LW (bookkeeper) - Eliminator was not hidden from the books, and the Millard's were involved in legitimate activity that could use the incinerator.
Dad of LB's ex BF - Is pretty sure he saw her alive after she was reported missing.


If it wasn't for the letter, he could have possibly spun a story worthy of Disney. MOO

Thats the thing, the letter. Why is he telling his girlfriend to say she saw her ALIVE before he was even charged with her murder. If he had in fact dropped her off somewhere, why would he be crafting an alibi?

 

[Inspector_North]

Thats the thing, the letter. Why is he telling his girlfriend to say she saw her ALIVE before he was even charged with her murder. If he had in fact dropped her off somewhere, why would he be crafting an alibi?

Yes he sort of limited his alibi by providing CN a covert story about LB dying at the hands of MS. And ending it with "destroy this letter to protect me". MOO

 

[Oreck]

Thats the thing, the letter. Why is he telling his girlfriend to say she saw her ALIVE before he was even charged with her murder. If he had in fact dropped her off somewhere, why would he be crafting an alibi?

Possibly because no one ever saw her again, after he dropped her off that day and he thought he might be suspect.

 

[Inspector_North]

How do others interpret the RAP lyrics?

“The *advertiser censored* started off all skin and bone, now the *advertiser censored* lay on some ashy stone, last time I saw her outside the home and if you go swimming you can find her phone.”

Is he saying the last time he saw her outside the home she was lying on ashy stone? Or was he saying the last time he saw her (alive) she was outside the home?

Just wondering what he meant by ashy stone? Could it be a reference to the inside of the Eliminator since it is lined with fire bricks. He did tell the boys in the garage that her remains were thrown in a lake. And he also crafted this RAP while she was in the Eliminator.

 

[don_quixote]

Millard has told so many lies that it is almost impossible to even explain the situation in fiction. She died accidentally? Smich killed her? She drove her to the lake and that was the last he saw of her? My guess is that he'll go with the accidental death during rough sex route, but we'll see tomorrow.

Does he need to present any version of events? He can aim to discredit each evidence separately hoping to dismantle the whole case that way. Isn't that what he tried to do with his witnesses?

 

[Night_is_Mine]

Possibly because no one ever saw her again, after he dropped her off that day and he thought he might be suspect.

Yup. That's my thinking too

 

[XFP]

How do others interpret the RAP lyrics?

“The *advertiser censored* started off all skin and bone, now the *advertiser censored* lay on some ashy stone, last time I saw her outside the home and if you go swimming you can find her phone.”

Is he saying the last time he saw her outside the home she was lying on ashy stone? Or was he saying the last time he saw her (alive) she was outside the home?

Just wondering what he meant by ashy stone? Could it be a reference to the inside of the Eliminator since it is lined with fire bricks. He did tell the boys in the garage that her remains were thrown in a lake. And he also crafted this RAP while she was in the Eliminator.

This is what I hear:

..., lay on some ashen stone...
...last time I saw her uz outside the home...

Gaming culture actually introduces a wide range of words, in high fantasy games they may be old English, and war games use military lingo. That's my argument for ashen - but I won't debate it, it you disagree, then I'd go with ash and stone, same diff. Also the word ashen could be in the instruction manual-no way to say. But there is a distinctive *uz* which I interpret as *wuz* before *outside the home.*

So, yes, I believe he is rapping that the last time he saw her was outside the home, and that *now she lay on some ashen stone* which could well refer to the cement tubes. It does not say if she was alive or dead the last time he saw her. She could have been either. Since DM wanted him out of site, it is more likely she was deceased.

 

[don_quixote]

Yes he sort of limited his alibi by providing CN a covert story about LB dying at the hands of MS. And ending it with "destroy this letter to protect me". MOO

And this is what's gonna get them a new life (sentence). I'd simplify this. If the jury is convinced that LB deceased at Maple Gate, then they'll convict. The three major clues are MS's garage admission, the rap, and DM's letter.

 

[Grey-St]

Yup. That's my thinking too

Or maybe, he killed her.

 

[don_quixote]

This is what I hear:

..., lay on some ashen stone...
...last time I saw her uz outside the home...

Gaming culture actually introduces a wide range of words, in high fantasy games they may be old English, and war games use military lingo. That's my argument for ashen - but I won't debate it, it you disagree, then I'd go with ash and stone, same diff. Also the word ashen could be in the instruction manual-no way to say. But there is a distinctive *uz* which I interpret as *wuz* before *outside the home.*

So, yes, I believe he is rapping that the last time he saw her was outside the home, and that *now she lay on some ashen stone* which could well refer to the cement tubes. It does not say if she was alive or dead the last time he saw her. She could have been either. Since DM wanted him out of site, it is more likely she was deceased.

Problem is that this is all open for interpretation. Literally, it doesn't say that she wasn't alive when she was lying on the said stone. It also says say that it was last time he saw her. Doesn't say that nobody saw her after. Skin and bone? Was she malnourished?

The phone reference is probably the clearest one.

But as one part of the bigger picture, it's implicating. And that's the way the jury will see it.

 

[ABro]

Does he need to present any version of events? He can aim to discredit each evidence separately hoping to dismantle the whole case that way. Isn't that what he tried to do with his witnesses?

Nitpicking the evidence doesn't work when there's a mountain of evidence against you. You need a plausible narrative that explains things.

 

[don_quixote]

Nitpicking the evidence doesn't work when there's a mountain of evidence against you. You need a plausible narrative that explains things.

Makes sense. It would be really interesting to see a pro analysis of the points he'd need to address.