Christina Noudga Trial Thread 11.22.16

New Posts

139 (1) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice in a judicial proceeding,

(a) by indemnifying or agreeing to indemnify a surety, in any way and either in whole or in part, or

(b) where he is a surety, by accepting or agreeing to accept a fee or any form of indemnity whether in whole or in part from or in respect of a person who is released or is to be released from custody,

is guilty of

(c) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or

(d) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Marginal note:Idem

(2) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner other than a manner described in subsection (1) to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.

Marginal note:Idem

(3) Without restricting the generality of subsection (2), every one shall be deemed wilfully to attempt to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice who in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed,

(a) dissuades or attempts to dissuade a person by threats, bribes or other corrupt means from giving evidence;

(b) influences or attempts to influence by threats, bribes or other corrupt means a person in his conduct as a juror; or

(c) accepts or obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain a bribe or other corrupt consideration to abstain from giving evidence, or to do or to refrain from doing anything as a juror.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-139.html

So it appears that basically the "wilfully destroying evidence" is inclusive in the obstruction of justice charge according to the following link...

http://www.duhaime.org/LegalResources/CriminalLaw/LawArticle-117/Obstruction-of-Justice.aspx
 
What's the jail term for accessory after the fact?

found it:

[h=6]Accessory after fact to murder[/h][FONT=&quot]240 Every one who is an accessory after the fact to murder is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
  • R.S., c. C-34, s. 223.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-53.html#s-240


[/FONT]
 
matou said:
Oh I'm sure she knew he killed Wayne and Laura too. Disgusting. JMO
Click to expand...

Aha!!!! I was wondering if a plea deal might include testifying against DM/MS re: Laura Babcock. It could very well be that the Crown has enough to convict CN however, she was on the scene when LB went "missing". If evidence against DM and MS is weak on the Laura Babcock case, CN's co-operation might prove invaluable to ensuring that DM and MS never see the light of day ever again.

So, plead guilty to a lesser offence and essentially walk AND pony up and testify at the LB trial.

I know we all despise this and CN, for her part in all of this, but DM and MS are definitely the bigger fish.

Just a thought....MOO
 
Tealgrove said:
Aha!!!! I was wondering if a plea deal might include testifying against DM/MS re: Laura Babcock. It could very well be that the Crown has enough to convict CN however, she was on the scene when LB went "missing". If evidence against DM and MS is weak on the Laura Babcock case, CN's co-operation might prove invaluable to ensuring that DM and MS never see the light of day ever again.

So, plead guilty to a lesser offence and essentially walk AND pony up and testify at the LB trial.

I know we all despise this and CN, for her part in all of this, but DM and MS are definitely the bigger fish.

Just a thought....MOO
Click to expand...

sounds familliar... (cough) Homolka!
plea deal is just wrong in my opinion.
 
I hope there's enough evidence for all of the cases and no plea deal. I just don't like that woman. Not a good person.
 
Tealgrove said:
Aha!!!! I was wondering if a plea deal might include testifying against DM/MS re: Laura Babcock. It could very well be that the Crown has enough to convict CN however, she was on the scene when LB went "missing". If evidence against DM and MS is weak on the Laura Babcock case, CN's co-operation might prove invaluable to ensuring that DM and MS never see the light of day ever again.

So, plead guilty to a lesser offence and essentially walk AND pony up and testify at the LB trial.

I know we all despise this and CN, for her part in all of this, but DM and MS are definitely the bigger fish.

Just a thought....MOO
Click to expand...

I think this could be the best scenario. MOO
 
Tealgrove said:
Aha!!!! I was wondering if a plea deal might include testifying against DM/MS re: Laura Babcock. It could very well be that the Crown has enough to convict CN however, she was on the scene when LB went "missing". If evidence against DM and MS is weak on the Laura Babcock case, CN's co-operation might prove invaluable to ensuring that DM and MS never see the light of day ever again.

So, plead guilty to a lesser offence and essentially walk AND pony up and testify at the LB trial.

I know we all despise this and CN, for her part in all of this, but DM and MS are definitely the bigger fish.

Just a thought....MOO
Click to expand...

This may be exactly what is happening..... I'm sure that society will not let CN forget what she did, and her future life choices will be impacted by this. Ie. medical school in Ontario/Canada, ability to leave in relative privacy, as well as her family and siblings... their lives have all been interrupted with her involvement in these crimes.
 
Tealgrove said:
Aha!!!! I was wondering if a plea deal might include testifying against DM/MS re: Laura Babcock. It could very well be that the Crown has enough to convict CN however, she was on the scene when LB went "missing". If evidence against DM and MS is weak on the Laura Babcock case, CN's co-operation might prove invaluable to ensuring that DM and MS never see the light of day ever again.

So, plead guilty to a lesser offence and essentially walk AND pony up and testify at the LB trial.

I know we all despise this and CN, for her part in all of this, but DM and MS are definitely the bigger fish.

Just a thought....MOO
Click to expand...

I totally see where you're coming from, and agree. Except, with concurrent sentences in Canada, DM and MS are probably already gone away for a long as they can be. I'd rather see CN do some significant time, than another concurrent sentence for the other two. That said, I still want them convicted on WM and LB murders, so they have to wear it for the rest of their lives. Just my 2c.
 
Georgeo said:
This may be exactly what is happening..... I'm sure that society will not let CN forget what she did, and her future life choices will be impacted by this. Ie. medical school in Ontario/Canada, ability to leave in relative privacy, as well as her family and siblings... their lives have all been interrupted with her involvement in these crimes.
Click to expand...

Plus, I'm sure her parent's finances are severely hurt by all the legal fees. Her parents probably had a few bucks, but good chance they've been wiped clean by this.
 
Can't help thinking about worst-case scenario: CN exits with slap on wrist and then gets book-and-movie deal. Guess I need to trust in the process! :deepbreaths:
 
KinseyWannabe said:
Can't help thinking about worst-case scenario: CN exits with slap on wrist and then gets book-and-movie deal. Guess I need to trust in the process! :deepbreaths:
Click to expand...

Oh Man, I hope not!
 
Hi WS-ers! I've been following along silently since the Smich and Millard verdicts... I am also saddened to hear that she may be accepting a plea that will keep her out of jail. Accepting this deal is an admission of guilt to what was implied during the Smich/Millard trial - she knew what was going on and helped cover it up. It will be unfortunate to not gain some more insight through her trial. On the flip side, I was happy to read that Sharlene Bosma will not be attending this trial (if there is one). Glad that she is able to start moving on and "re-building", as she gently puts it...
 
Just some questions - if anyone knows answers, please respond...
1. If a plea bargain is reached, will the details of what CN knew be made public?
2. The publication bans relating to CN's trial - will this info now be made public?
I hope she doesn't get to move on as if nothing happened, and not be impacted as a result of her horrid behavior, snarky attitude, lack of compassion for the victim, etc.... at the DM/MS trial.
 
Georgeo said:
Just some questions - if anyone knows answers, please respond...
1. If a plea bargain is reached, will the details of what CN knew be made public?
.
Click to expand...

If no trial takes place, there will be no evidence introduced as to what CN may or may not have known. Difficult in any case to prove what she knew, unless they have texts or notes saying, hey, how was the murder or similar things. Admittedly, the "mission digestion" line was pretty much insinuating she did know something, but it isn't proof that she did.

She may or may not have known about DM's intimate relationship with LB, though she must have known OF LB and possible seen her on various occasions, but might simply have thought of her as a drug buddy. It did appear DM kept his women ignorant of his polyamorous dallyings. Since others who knew DM pretty well seemed to think he was incapable of murder, it's not a slam dunk that she knew he was one.

With no trial, and no evidence introduced into the public record, there will be no way for the public to know what the evidence against her was, unless there are "leaks" from one source or another.

Police must have texts and possibly other data that has never been released, but they won't be releasing that if it isn't introduced into evidence.

I'd like to see her go to the slammer for a looooong time, but even with a conviction of AATF that wouldn't happen (a typical sentence is 4-5 years, meaning she would be out on parole in less than half that). Unfortunately, being a thoroughly despicable human being isn't something the courts can properly punish.
 
I don't think the evidence was weak for the AG to allow the Crown to proceed by direct indictment in Laura's case.

Tealgrove said:
Aha!!!! I was wondering if a plea deal might include testifying against DM/MS re: Laura Babcock. It could very well be that the Crown has enough to convict CN however, she was on the scene when LB went "missing". If evidence against DM and MS is weak on the Laura Babcock case, CN's co-operation might prove invaluable to ensuring that DM and MS never see the light of day ever again.

So, plead guilty to a lesser offence and essentially walk AND pony up and testify at the LB trial.

I know we all despise this and CN, for her part in all of this, but DM and MS are definitely the bigger fish.

Just a thought....MOO
Click to expand...
 
I know it was just a suggestion on here but I sure hope CN doesn't get a deal in return for testifying in future trials against MS and DM.

Reason why is with her performance at the last trial, who is to know that she won't just do that again. She could agree right now to testify in a year or two and then pull her same tricks when called to the stand. She is so untrustworthy, IMO.
 
Just thinking here....

As we know, Karla Homolka made a deal and was required in court to detail what she did. We didn't get the details until after the Paul Bernardo trial when all the publicity bans were lifted. Russell Williams didn't cut a deal however he did plead guilty and again, all evidence was read into the record.

Perhaps we will find out what CN knew and did.

It will be very interesting to see what happens tomorrow.
 
CN basically tagged around with DM on the last day before his arrest and then kept her mouth shut.

I the letters, DM asked her to talk to AM and get him to change his story - she didn't. He asked her to testify that MS often borrowed his phone - she didn't. And so on. She was a very passive helper: she listened, she kept quiet, but she did little more than that.

She did somewhat help the Crown in its case by keeping rather than destroying most of DM's letters. Perhaps she hoped to blackmail him, as she wrote in notes to herself. In the end, though, she never benefited, and the Crown was given evidence to use against DM in the Bosma and perhaps other trials.

CN, MB, DM and MS still face a multi-million-dollar civil suit.

I only wonder, if there is an award to the Bosmas that CN must pay, can she get out of it by declaring bankruptcy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 53 more.
Total: 3,698 (members: 54, guests: 3,644)

Online statistics

Members online
54
Guests online
3,645
Total visitors
3,699
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,548
Messages
17,970,843
Members
228,807
Latest member
Buffalosleuther
Back
Top