Christina Noudga Trial Thread 11.22.16

I don't think the evidence was weak for the AG to allow the Crown to proceed by direct indictment in Laura's case.

I don't think the evidence was weak for the AG to allow the Crown to proceed by direct indictment in Laura's case.

In theory, the standard of 'a reasonable prospect of conviction' applies to proceeding with any prosecution - both by direct indictment and prelim. So while I agree that the case is unlikely to be weak, the direct indictment doesn't indicate it is necessarily unusually strong either. The Crown policy manual makes the point that a 'reasonable prospect of conviction' does not indicate a conclusion that a conviction is more likely than not. In other words, a reasonable prospect does not rise to the level of even being a probability, which is interesting.

Whatever the evidence is it would be nice if it was a bit less subjective than some of the Tim Bosma evidence was. All these months later I still can't shake the sense that the convictions should have perhaps been for second degree murder. Unpopular opinion, I know. :)
 
Tim Bosma's family supports prospective Noudga plea deal
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/bosma-family-1.3857696

Faced with the prospect of sitting through weeks of grueling details for the second time about how Tim Bosma died, the Hamilton man's family says it welcomes the idea of Christina Noudga taking a plea deal on lesser charges.

"Everybody feels pretty good about it," Bosma's father Hank told CBC News.

"Three weeks of trial — we don't want to go through all that again."
 
I'm surprised that Tim's parents would "feel good" about a deal with Noudga. JMO
 
If there was a pretrial day in court for Noudga without any media there, wouldn't we know today if she made any deal?
 
Tim Bosma's family supports prospective Noudga plea deal
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/bosma-family-1.3857696

I can totally understand how the Bosma family feels about attending another trial, and running into Noudga in the courthouse. To have to hear the horrific details once again would tear open wounds that have barely begun to heal. I would also imagine that it would feel good to hear Noudga plead 'guilty' in spite of it being the result of a plea bargain.

From the article, I got the feeling that it is all but a done deal. Maybe we just have to wait to see what the details are if its a deal that the family can feel good about.

In my opinion, she is a vile and despicable creature and my hope is that her involvement in this tragedy follows her for the rest of her days in some form.
 
I can totally understand how the Bosma family feels about attending another trial, and running into Noudga in the courthouse. To have to hear the horrific details once again would tear open wounds that have barely begun to heal. I would also imagine that it would feel good to hear Noudga plead 'guilty' in spite of it being the result of a plea bargain.

From the article, I got the feeling that it is all but a done deal. Maybe we just have to wait to see what the details are if its a deal that the family can feel good about.

In my opinion, she is a vile and despicable creature and my hope is that her involvement in this tragedy follows her for the rest of her days in some form.

Well said and I totally agree.
 
If there was a pretrial day in court for Noudga without any media there, wouldn't we know today if she made any deal?

i don't think so, because at this point it is only a 'deal' between Crown and accused.. it must be presented to the court. As I understand it, the judge will not even know the details until they get presented, likely in court tomorrow. I'm not sure if the judge then has to immediately make a decision on whether to accept it or if he is allowed time to consider the details more fully? Does anyone know? Are any of us attending tomorrow morning?
 
According to CTV reporter Nicole L, SB will not be attending Tuesday nor CN's trial but Hank and Mary B will be attending regardless.

IMO this is an eleventh hour, last minute ditch effort on Greenspan's part to try and get a reduced sentence for his client, who BTW was not in the courtroom Monday. Not a rare move at all in these types of cases actually. BUT doesn't mean the Crown will accept the deal Greenspan has proposed to the Crown. If the Crown knows or believes they have evidence to prove CN was aware she was helping to cover up a murder, they will turn down the deal Greenspan has placed on the table. My gut tells me CN's trial will commence, no deal. Guess we will just have to wait a bit longer to find out what's in store for this unsavoury, young lady. JMO.

http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/tim-bos...l-for-christina-noudga-set-to-start-1.3170528
 
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.

Both LB and WM's deaths occurred in 2012, so DM and MS may in fact spend more time in prison based on the new "Protecting Canadians by Ending Sentence Discounts for Multiple Murders Act" which came into effect in 2011.

from:
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/AnnualStatutes/2011_5/page-1.html


745.21 (1) Where a jury finds an accused guilty of murder and that accused has previously been convicted of murder, the judge presiding at the trial shall, before discharging the jury, put to them the following question:

You have found the accused guilty of murder. The law requires that I now pronounce a sentence of imprisonment for life against the accused. Do you wish to make any recommendation with respect to the period without eligibility for parole to be served for this murder consecutively to the period without eligibility for parole imposed for the previous murder? You are not required to make any recommendation, but if you do, your recommendation will be considered by me when I make my determination.


Marginal note:Application

(2) Subsection (1) applies to an offender who is convicted of murders committed on a day after the day on which this section comes into force and for which the offender is sentenced under this Act, the National Defence Act or the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act.


5. The Act is amended by adding the following after section 745.5:


Marginal note:Ineligibility for parole — multiple murders

745.51 (1) At the time of the sentencing under section 745 of an offender who is convicted of murder and who has already been convicted of one or more other murders, the judge who presided at the trial of the offender or, if that judge is unable to do so, any judge of the same court may, having regard to the character of the offender, the nature of the offence and the circumstances surrounding its commission, and the recommendation, if any, made pursuant to section 745.21, by order, decide that the periods without eligibility for parole for each murder conviction are to be served consecutively.
 
So I wonder if we will be seeing a pair of scarves sauntering down Main street this morning?
 
According to CTV reporter Nicole L, SB will not be attending Tuesday nor CN's trial but Hank and Mary B will be attending regardless.

IMO this is an eleventh hour, last minute ditch effort on Greenspan's part to try and get a reduced sentence for his client, who BTW was not in the courtroom Monday. Not a rare move at all in these types of cases actually. BUT doesn't mean the Crown will accept the deal Greenspan has proposed to the Crown. If the Crown knows or believes they have evidence to prove CN was aware she was helping to cover up a murder, they will turn down the deal Greenspan has placed on the table. My gut tells me CN's trial will commence, no deal. Guess we will just have to wait a bit longer to find out what's in store for this unsavoury, young lady. JMO.

http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/tim-bos...l-for-christina-noudga-set-to-start-1.3170528

You know, if CN had even just pretended to be somewhat humble or slightly remorseful, maybe even a bit scared, most of us wouldn't be so eager for her to stand trial. She's so full of herself that she couldn't even do that. So now it seems unjust for her to thumb her nose at the court in the TB trial and then get away with not standing trial for her own actions. We want her to suffer and it's her own fault.
 
You know, if CN had even just pretended to be somewhat humble or slightly remorseful, maybe even a bit scared, most of us wouldn't be so eager for her to stand trial. She's so full of herself that she couldn't even do that. So now it seems unjust for her to thumb her nose at the court in the TB trial and then get away with not standing trial for her own actions. We want her to suffer and it's her own fault.
So very true, we're all perceiving her in a certain way because of the snarky comments, attitude and generally just the way she carried herself. She did it on purpose!

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk
 
So very true, we're all perceiving her in a certain way because of the snarky comments, attitude and generally just the way she carried herself. She did it on purpose!

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

Think she'll show up in the red shoes today? [emoji151]
 
You know, if CN had even just pretended to be somewhat humble or slightly remorseful, maybe even a bit scared, most of us wouldn't be so eager for her to stand trial. She's so full of herself that she couldn't even do that. So now it seems unjust for her to thumb her nose at the court in the TB trial and then get away with not standing trial for her own actions. We want her to suffer and it's her own fault.

I think it is possible that she's already suffering for her repellant personality because these charges may not even exist but for it. It's possible that her haughtiness, seeming indifference and lack of cooperation got her charged in the first place where others like MB and MH were not. So I don't look at a deal as some kind of walk for her. I look at it as an uncomfortable and still humiliating compromise forced on her by an intimidating system that she's been ground around in the cogs of for a few years. A system she probably would have sidestepped had she been a decent person in the first place.
 
You know, if CN had even just pretended to be somewhat humble or slightly remorseful, maybe even a bit scared, most of us wouldn't be so eager for her to stand trial. She's so full of herself that she couldn't even do that. So now it seems unjust for her to thumb her nose at the court in the TB trial and then get away with not standing trial for her own actions. We want her to suffer and it's her own fault.

Unfortunately although we all find her morally repugnant she has right to plead to a lesser charge and if the deal is accepted she can move on with her life. She can change her name, go to an out of country med school and be free to live her life a la Karla Homolka aka Karla Teale, Leanne Teale, Leanne Bordelais. As a prerequisite to enter the medical field in North America she would need a criminal background check but that may not be the case in other countries. RIP Tim Bosma.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Some jail time with any plea deal would be appropriate. Given the serious nature of the crime and given the flippant, condescending, unrepentant, compassionless and disgusting behavior she displayed in the previous trial. A plea deal I can accept but a slap on the wrist is just so wrong.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
142
Guests online
2,749
Total visitors
2,891

Forum statistics

Threads
592,514
Messages
17,970,176
Members
228,791
Latest member
fesmike
Back
Top