Dellen Millard: Innocent Dupe? Alternative Theories

Status
Not open for further replies.
As a "reader" with no more information than LE has given us, it is hard to prove anything without knowing the scientific findings. IMO

As far as "duping" or "alternate theories go", IMO, if it is a chop shop, there is a much larger circle involved. I doubt one mechanic does it all. So there are IMO a number of connected rats out there hiding.

Say you have a lot of friends with similar interests but you are the one that has access to huge amounts of money most individuals don't. Who would be most likely to be used? How convenient he had space, tools, trailer, a name and maybe even credit card to use when ordering product, access to the airport--everything a good criminal might need. All in exchange for camaraderie, rent, drugs, automotive assistance, who knows? Then enter leeches and wannabe gangsters and you have a bigger problem. You have ruthlessness.

As for "framing" it may not be outright framing as much as it is having a very good way of pointing to one fall guy.

As I read the comments here I see people say DM did this or that. Indeed, if the LE are completely sure it was him, then yes, but until they give us more than it was a tall guy with a tattoo and light brown hair, that is a problem IMO.

There's no doubt his facility and possessions were involved, and it may even be him that went truck shopping. It may be hard to believe a guy wouldn't know hot items were in his hangar, but maybe he was naive enough (or too hung over, busy sleeping (as one report says he never showed up for work until after 12, busy shopping for real estate, busy collecting rent cheques on the real estate he rented out (if he did), busy with his women (no doubt), to not question the parts brought in and what his supposed "buddies" were doing. There are a lot of auto wreckers with a lot of stuff and a lot of auto shops that sell stuff. It would be believable that a part was obtained from somewhere legit.

As hangar owner, I doubt he would verify every thing. I saw someone had posted a list of jobs Millardair had been advertising and one was "librarian". Maybe the librarian would have been in charge of listing what came in etc. But then again, at that point it wasn't to be an automotive plant.

So, these are just some things to think about in terms of additional theories. IMO
 
Another random theory that popped into my head--DM & whoever drive the truck, stop in a parking lot to look it over--their 3rd party in the Yukon shows up with his coffee in hand, DM & other guy get into the Yukon and leave, leaving TB to drive home alone. But there in the woods is someone else that does a car jacking kind of like that video people were showing here. By that point there are not only 3 parties, but several more. Just an invented theory.
 
Another random theory that popped into my head--DM & whoever drive the truck, stop in a parking lot to look it over--their 3rd party in the Yukon shows up with his coffee in hand, DM & other guy get into the Yukon and leave, leaving TB to drive home alone. But there in the woods is someone else that does a car jacking kind of like that video people were showing here. By that point there are not only 3 parties, but several more. Just an invented theory.

And that random person, somehow miraculously knew DM and burned Tim on DM's property, brought the truck in a trailer to his Mom's and used DM's burner phone???
 
And that random person, somehow miraculously knew DM and burned Tim on DM's property, brought the truck in a trailer to his Mom's and used DM's burner phone???

Not totally random person--connected in some way, and yes, could possibly have covered his/her own tracks by doing so.
 
Problem is how do you steal a truck if the owner is in it ? Seems your theory does not agree with itself. :trainwreck:

Best,
J.

as an option...

They could have stopped the truck and told TB to "get out or else.."
Or, once they had stopped to check out the truck, told TB to "get lost, we're taking your truck from here".

In either of those cases, TB could have jumped back in the truck and refused to get out, at which point DM and MS would have to either silence TB, or try to escape themselves, but by that time TB would have had a good look at both suspects. As far as DM and MS would be concerned at that point, they had to silence TB and take the truck.
 
It's hard to imagine the father of a new baby risking his life by jumping back into a truck driven by criminals, just to keep them from stealing the truck when he probably had insurance.
 
It's hard to imagine the father of a new baby risking his life by jumping back into a truck driven by criminals, just to keep them from stealing the truck when he probably had insurance.

and that's what makes this case so incredibly senseless and frustrating, that they killed TB at all. All I can ask is "why".

Maybe he jumped back in the truck to try and get AWAY from DM and MS...
 
It's hard to imagine the father of a new baby risking his life by jumping back into a truck driven by criminals, just to keep them from stealing the truck when he probably had insurance.

I don't think insurance would cover theft when you actually give the keys to the thief.
 
and that's what makes this case so incredibly senseless and frustrating, that they killed TB at all. All I can ask is "why".

RSBM

I suspect that, even once all the evidence is brought forward in a court of law, we will still never understand why because our minds don't work in that way - but we will better understand how.

As far as either of the accused being 'innocent dupes' - IMO, an innocent person, if somehow caught up in a scenario gone wrong that cost a truly innocent man's life, goes directly to LE & provides assistance in every way possible to apprehend and then convict the guilty party. No matter the 'cost' to him/herself.

That is what a good and moral person with basic human decency does - no excuses, no questions asked - they just do the right thing because it IS right.

DM's silence speaks volumes, IMO - and drowns out the many attempts his lawyer or others make to seed doubt or excuse him.

Just MOO.
 
I don't think insurance would cover theft when you actually give the keys to the thief.

If you are robbed/carjacked/duped potentially with weapons, you bet your *advertiser censored* insurance will cover it.

They will obviously require a police report and hopefully 911 records of you reporting the carjacking but there is no way its not covered.
 
Human nature is funny thing, we tend naturally, to like people, to not think bad of people, to trust in our hearts that when someone knocks on our door in regards to an ad for a truck, that all is well. Heck, it's just a truck. I can see why T. B. got in the truck with the two of them, he was hoping to sell his truck to someone. Period. Sadly, we learn our lessons' through the acts of Tim, be aware at all times despite the circumstances.

What got to me first off, was the timing of the visit. If one were to view a vehicle you would think they would arrive during the daylight hours not dusk/night. It's too bad the B's didn't notice a vehicle in which they would have arrived in, in their driveway....? The excitement of showing the truck and possible sale of it, I suppose took away some awareness... to a degree.

As far as DM not talking. Just because MSM isn't posting of late doesn't mean he has not talked to some degree but here in Canada, we may not hear till the trial. And, DM is probably waiting to hear about MS and what they know about his end of the deal.

I trust that it will indeed all come out but for us, the waiting is hard.
 
If you are robbed/carjacked/duped potentially with weapons, you bet your *advertiser censored* insurance will cover it.

They will obviously require a police report and hopefully 911 records of you reporting the carjacking but there is no way its not covered.

It would depends on what kind of coverage he had with his insurance policy. Not all policies will cover this kind of event. Maybe he didn't have the necessary coverage, so he went on the test drive. Also, If DM got into an accident while driving TB's truck, TB's insurance policy would likely only cover the damage caused to the other vehicle and not TB's. I think TB went on the test drive to make sure the other two didn't try any shinanigans with his truck. But to say his policy would cover theft under those circumstances isn't that black and white.
 
Generally speaking, a vehicle with a lien from a bank for example, would require the owner to carry comprehensive, including theft. IMO

If there was no lien, and the owner(wholly owned) was accepting his own "risk" with regards to theft, he likely wouldn't have theft coverage.

I have no information either way concerning TB's insurance coverage and his truck.
 
It would depends on what kind of coverage he had with his insurance policy. Not all policies will cover this kind of event. Maybe he didn't have the necessary coverage, so he went on the test drive. Also, If DM got into an accident while driving TB's truck, TB's insurance policy would likely only cover the damage caused to the other vehicle and not TB's. I think TB went on the test drive to make sure the other two didn't try any shinanigans with his truck. But to say his policy would cover theft under those circumstances isn't that black and white.

You are right in the sense that there are various insurance coverage options, but "fire & theft" is some of the most basic coverage you can get. It's a very low premium so highly unlikely that TB didnt have that on his truck.

I have sold several vehicles over the years and even when i wasn't driving one of them, i kept "fire & theft" on there because it was ~$35/month or less.

Chances are for a truck worth $20k+, TB would have fire and theft. If they went on a test drive and did not return he would be covered under theft.

The fact that TB went on the test drive is more than likely just normal behaviour. Noone wants their car messed with by some joyriders and i would venture to say that 80+% of owners would go with their vehicle or drive the "buyers" vehicle in close proximity.

Based on a quick internet search it seems that "car-jackings" qualify under the "accident benefits" of an insurance policy. Therefore, if TB was car-jacked and released alive, he would be entitled to an accident insurance claim.

Anyhow, we don't know TBs insurance status for this vehicle so this is speculation, but i learned something new from this discussion so thats always good.
 
Reposting this video as nobody seems to have followed up on it and it just seems way too suspicious not to be connected:

-Same time frame as the car jacking
-Same type of car
-Same province
-Suspect is wearing a red hoodie which is what LE said suspect 2 was originally wearing

All of the above are very fishy and might hint that DM and MS may have been setup

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1bQDFhOLkk"]Not so nice Canadians - Guys trying to pull driver out a pickup truck - YouTube[/ame]
 
I don't see how it means anyone was set up, but there's a thread about the video over here:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=209832"]Youtube Video: "Not So Nice Canadians" Relevant? - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]
 
Because it's too similar of a crime and if the date stamp is correct DM and MS were in jail at that point.
 
Because it's too similar of a crime and if the date stamp is correct DM and MS were in jail at that point.

At best I'd say it was a copycat crime (without the sad and fatal ending), since the Bosma story was in the news,and thats the most one had to do
with the other IMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
2,665
Total visitors
2,769

Forum statistics

Threads
595,433
Messages
18,024,535
Members
229,648
Latest member
kelc3769
Back
Top