General Discussion and Theories #3

[Sillybilly]

So someone said to DM and MS, do what I say or I will kill a complete stranger you have absolutely no links to and blame it on you (somehow)?

I think I would blow them off. Do your worst. It would never stick.

Yep, would make much more sense to say "do as we say cuz we know where yo mamma lives". Case in point in BC, gangsta in prison sends letter to the effect "remember, your grandma and mine are in the same nursing home".

 

[Sillybilly]

Some misunderstandings
I was not implying a few chop shop parts leads directly to murder
I was implying how a small association with CE (years ago) can eventually draw a person deeper than they ever wanted to go.
Point being it is hard to get out of those clutches.
I think that is what Snoofo was trying to say
And I agree .

CE often try to target those with money and resources.
Sometimes it works.
Sometimes it leads to deadly consequences.

regards
AM

And sometimes it's as simple as those CE small associations leading to bigger CE associations, and when you're in thick as thieves, running a chop shop, raking in the dough, maybe you just want a Dodge truck and to hell with whatever gets in your way.

 

[Juballee]

Well he did write that letter that starts with a whopper (The prisoners here call me Big D)...isn't he in solitary away from all the others?

How do we know that is a lie? Are we to assume he doesn't pass within earshot of other prisoners When being transported to spend his half an hour outside? Or it is possible that a guard may have told him, 'The boys have taken to calling you Big D.' How do we even know he wrote that letter, has it been verified?

 

[skatergirl]

How do we know that is a lie? Are we to assume he doesn't pass within earshot of other prisoners When being transported to spend his half an hour outside? Or it is possible that a guard may have told him, 'The boys have taken to calling you Big D.' How do we even know he wrote that letter, has it been verified?

Either scenario could be accurate wrt to how he became aware of how other were/are referring to him IMO, or he could be making the reference falsely in an effort to exert his control of his 'fan' JMO

Regarding the letter, AB did say she authenticated it, and I know not everyone here agrees with her blog/opinions etc, and I am in no way saying I take her word as gospel either, but it does seem she is continuing on the hunt for information in this case(the same as we are here on WS in a sense), where other reporters seem to only be following along with the court appearances and such. JMO

 

[MsSherlock]

Some misunderstandings
I was not implying a few chop shop parts leads directly to murder
I was implying how a small association with CE (years ago) can eventually draw a person deeper than they ever wanted to go.
Point being it is hard to get out of those clutches.
I think that is what Snoofo was trying to say
And I agree .

CE often try to target those with money and resources.
Sometimes it works.
Sometimes it leads to deadly consequences.

regards
AM

Yes Arnie, I agree. But, IMO, that is not a defense to murder. However,IMO it could actually be used against the accused as being a motive for committing such a crime. MOO

 

[MsSherlock]

IMO, even though I understand and truly do respect DM's Constitutional Right to remain silent, I'm perplexed as to why, when LE discovered the truck in Kleinburg, DP indicated that there was more to the story, yet DM didn't make a statement thru DP about the Ayr farm and what they may find ie) incinerator, equipment etc. IMHO, right then, for that brief 24 hours, the defense did have an opportunity to put out the "Bad guys are after my client" theory, not simply a "there's more to the story" statement. JMHO, DM knew that TB was dead and laying in the incinerator, otherwise, just like everyone else, he would have held out hope that TB would be found alive and would have been assisting LE every single way possible to find him. Instead, DM, knowing TB was very dead, remained silent, hoping and praying that they'd never find the farm or the secrets it held until he could post bail on the Wednesday at which time he may be able to tidy things up! MOO

 

[skatergirl]

IMO, even though I understand and truly do respect DM's Constitutional Right to remain silent, I'm perplexed as to why, when LE discovered the truck in Kleinburg, DP indicated that there was more to the story, yet DM didn't make a statement thru DP about the Ayr farm and what they may find ie) incinerator, equipment etc. IMHO, right then, for that brief 24 hours, the defense did have an opportunity to put out the "Bad guys are after my client" theory, not simply a "there's more to the story" statement. JMHO, DM knew that TB was dead and laying in the incinerator, otherwise, just like everyone else, he would have held out hope that TB would be found alive and would have been assisting LE every single way possible to find him. Instead, DM, knowing TB was very dead, remained silent, hoping and praying that they'd never find the farm or the secrets it held until he could post bail on the Wednesday at which time he may be able to tidy things up! MOO

Yes MsS! And there is this statement-UBM

Paradkar said Millard is staying silent until the police complete their investigation. Millard is set to attend a bail hearing Wednesday, but Paradkar said they will hold off on requesting bail until the Crown can provide them with more information on the case.

This tells me that DM had gone into some detail with DP about the situation, and therefore would wait on requesting bail, knowing TB was dead, and if his body was not discovered before the bail hearing, that TB would be discovered in the near future, only to land DM back in jail. JMO

Obstruction of justice for sure, as you had brought up previously! MOO

 

[Archangel7]

IMO, even though I understand and truly do respect DM's Constitutional Right to remain silent, I'm perplexed as to why, when LE discovered the truck in Kleinburg, DP indicated that there was more to the story, yet DM didn't make a statement thru DP about the Ayr farm and what they may find ie) incinerator, equipment etc. IMHO, right then, for that brief 24 hours, the defense did have an opportunity to put out the "Bad guys are after my client" theory, not simply a "there's more to the story" statement. JMHO, DM knew that TB was dead and laying in the incinerator, otherwise, just like everyone else, he would have held out hope that TB would be found alive and would have been assisting LE every single way possible to find him. Instead, DM, knowing TB was very dead, remained silent, hoping and praying that they'd never find the farm or the secrets it held until he could post bail on the Wednesday. MOO

Exactly.

Along those "story lines"..........
If a raid occurred at a restaurant/bar, or anywhere really, which (fill in your name) were present, and you were arrested initially(but were truly innocent/not involved)would you just sit in jail, be fingerprinted, go through arraignment, no bail, preliminary inquiry etc? Or would you immediately and verbally profess your noninvolvement and innocence?

Also...
The prison letter, if it's genuine, has some interesting anomalies.

 

[Sillybilly]

Yes MsS! And there is this statement-UBM



This tells me that DM had gone into some detail with DP about the situation, and therefore would wait on requesting bail, knowing TB was dead, and if his body was not discovered before the bail hearing, that TB would be discovered in the near future, only to land DM back in jail. JMO

Obstruction of justice for sure, as you had brought up previously! MOO

JMO skatergirl, but I can't think of any case where an accused's right to remain silent resulted in an obstruction of justice charge.

from:
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obstruction_of_justice"]Obstruction of justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Generally, obstruction charges are laid when it is discovered that a person questioned in an investigation, other than a suspect, has lied to the investigating officers.

 

[skatergirl]

JMO skatergirl, but I can't think of any case where an accused's right to remain silent resulted in an obstruction of justice charge.

from:
Obstruction of justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I stand corrected, thanks SB.

 

[Archangel7]

Well he did write that letter that starts with a whopper (The prisoners here call me Big D)...isn't he in solitary away from all the others?

However, they may mean "Big Dummy".
Because if he didn't do it, dumb enough to get caught up with the wrong crowd....

If he did it, dumb enough to get caught. Either way certainly not a likely Mensa International prospect.

Inmates have an odd sense of humor, although they definitely do look up to murderers at the local detention level which could be an interesting tidbit of telling info. in itself.

 

[Sillybilly]

However, they may mean "Big Dummy".
Because if he didn't do it, dumb enough to get caught up with the wrong crowd....

If he did it, dumb enough to get caught. Either way certainly not a likely Mensa International prospect.

Inmates have an odd sense of humor, although they definitely do look up to murderers at the local detention level which could be an interesting tidbit of telling info. in itself.

Also, BigD may or may not be a great way to start a convo with a potential squeeze. Hey, I wonder how his gf feels about him making arrangements to meet Dee in the future.

Re the inmates, not only might they admire BigD now, but if he gets off, might be a good contact to have down the road wrt $$ and connections ...then there's the old "birds of a feather" type of thing.

PS: He doesn't mention to Dee that he has a gf .. maybe he doesn't particularly like her at the moment

 

[skatergirl]

Also, BigD may or may not be a great way to start a convo with a potential squeeze. Hey, I wonder how his gf feels about him making arrangements to meet Dee in the future.

Re the inmates, not only might they admire BigD now, but if he gets off, might be a good contact to have down the road wrt $$ and connections ...then there's the old "birds of a feather" type of thing.

PS: He doesn't mention to Dee that he has a gf .. maybe he doesn't particularly like her at the moment

Could be trying to set himself up with a 'companion' for his next 25 years too:floorlaugh:

 

[Juballee]

IMO, even though I understand and truly do respect DM's Constitutional Right to remain silent, I'm perplexed as to why, when LE discovered the truck in Kleinburg, DP indicated that there was more to the story, yet DM didn't make a statement thru DP about the Ayr farm and what they may find ie) incinerator, equipment etc. IMHO, right then, for that brief 24 hours, the defense did have an opportunity to put out the "Bad guys are after my client" theory, not simply a "there's more to the story" statement. JMHO, DM knew that TB was dead and laying in the incinerator, otherwise, just like everyone else, he would have held out hope that TB would be found alive and would have been assisting LE every single way possible to find him. Instead, DM, knowing TB was very dead, remained silent, hoping and praying that they'd never find the farm or the secrets it held until he could post bail on the Wednesday at which time he may be able to tidy things up! MOO

Or he might have been remaining silent because he really did not know anything, but he knew enough to know that anything he said would be used against him from that point on.

Here is how imagine pretty much any conversation going if someone actually is innocent and knows nothing;
LE - Tell us what you know
Innocent person - I don't know anything, I swear. I think maybe I should talk to my lawyer.
LE - Why do you need a lawyer? Do you have something to hide?
IP - I don't have anything to hide, I just think it might be smart to talk to my lawyer if you think I did something I know I didn't do. I'd like to help you if I could, but I don't know anything and I don't want to say anything to somehow incriminate myself.
LE - Oh, you might say something that is going to incriminate you, what would that be, do you suppose? How could you say anything to incriminate yourself if you didn't do anything? What have you got to hide?
IP -I don't have anything to hide, I just think that maybe I should talk to my lawyer because I know you've got the wrong guy.
LE - Oh, and how would you know we've got the wrong guy if you don't know anything about it? It sounds like you know more than you're letting on!
IP - I swear, I don't know anything! You're twisting my words!
LE -That's exactly what a guilty person would say! Are you sure that's the statement you want to give .....

And on and on in circles.

That is why they have to say "Anything you say can and will be held against you". They are saying right up front, we have a right to turn everything you say against you, so you have a right to shut up. I am sure any lawyer would do the same thing in the same situation. That right was put there to protect the innocent, and they have a right to use it without people presuming that means that they are guilty. One of the beautiful things about this country that our veterans fought for, in my opinion.

 

[robynhood]

JMHO.................D.M. & M.S took TB for a test drive.MAY 6 , 2013 shortly after 9;20 pm..They were the last person to see him alive.
TB never returned home to SB. even tho his last words were" this should take 20 mins and I will be home RIGHT HOME...."to S.B.

IP says: he know nothing why TB NEVER RETURNED HOME?>....Something happened or he would be home.....Lawyer says 'there is more to this story....we are waiting for crown's case.

It has been over 4mths....nothing seems to be said from defense lawyer???


IMO....>>>D.M. & M.S. you have some explaining to do ....WHAT HAPPENED in between?????....


LE : may be asking DM what happened After or during your test drive that TB ends up DEAD on your farm....MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!...robynhood....IMO!

 

[Archangel7]

Or he might have been remaining silent because he really did not know anything, but he knew enough to know that anything he said would be used against him from that point on.

Here is how imagine pretty much any conversation going if someone actually is innocent and knows nothing;
LE - Tell us what you know
Innocent person - I don't know anything, I swear. I think maybe I should talk to my lawyer.
LE - Why do you need a lawyer? Do you have something to hide?
IP - I don't have anything to hide, I just think it might be smart to talk to my lawyer if you think I did something I know I didn't do. I'd like to help you if I could, but I don't know anything and I don't want to say anything to somehow incriminate myself.
LE - Oh, you might say something that is going to incriminate you, what would that be, do you suppose? How could you say anything to incriminate yourself if you didn't do anything? What have you got to hide?
IP -I don't have anything to hide, I just think that maybe I should talk to my lawyer because I know you've got the wrong guy.
LE - Oh, and how would you know we've got the wrong guy if you don't know anything about it? It sounds like you know more than you're letting on!
IP - I swear, I don't know anything! You're twisting my words!
LE -That's exactly what a guilty person would say! Are you sure that's the statement you want to give .....

And on and on in circles.

That is why they have to say "Anything you say can and will be held against you". They are saying right up front, we have a right to turn everything you say against you, so you have a right to shut up. I am sure any lawyer would do the same thing in the same situation. That right was put there to protect the innocent, and they have a right to use it without people presuming that means that they are guilty. One of the beautiful things about this country that our veterans fought for, in my opinion.

Hey, he and his lawyer are the ones who marketed "the story behind this."

All he had to do was say I want my lawyer present and then we will clear this misunderstanding up. But he can't, as proven by DP going all the way through the Criminal Justice System so far.

So far it's simply excuses as to why there is no story that exonerates.(he's still in jail) So now we know he's involved somehow yet he has a "story" he and DP thinks might convince a Judge or a Jury.

I suppose he's told DM we can always plea at the last minute if it goes that far.....DP surely feels there is a many of slip between the cup and the lip. I'd hate to bet my life on that.

 

[MsSherlock]

JMO skatergirl, but I can't think of any case where an accused's right to remain silent resulted in an obstruction of justice charge.

from:
Obstruction of justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SillyBilly, where I was coming from in the Obstruction of Justice is the fact that IF in fact DM has been getting extorted or threatened by outside forces, and now an innocent man is dead as a result, then DM does have information that he's withholding from LE in their investigation into the abduction and death of TB. If he knows who the guilty party is and continuously hides their identity, then IMO, he's either an accessory or is obstructing the investigation. I'd be happy to have Archangel7 weigh in on this. It's just not everyday that a Defense Lawyer makes a statement indicating that his client is wealthy, intelligent & humble and there's much more to the story. IMO, if DM knows who the real murderers of TB are, he should be under obligation to tell the LE who are investigating the crime. MOO


"If the person tried to protect a suspect (such as by providing a false alibi, even if the suspect is in fact innocent) or to hide from investigation of their own activities (such as to hide their involvement in another crime), this may leave them liable to prosecution. Obstruction charges can also be laid if a person alters, destroys, or conceals physical evidence, even if he was under no compulsion at any time to produce such evidence. Often, no actual investigation or substantiated suspicion of a specific incident need exist to support a charge of obstruction of justice."

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obstruction_of_justice"]Obstruction of justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[Archangel7]

SillyBilly, where I was coming from in the Obstruction of Justice is the fact that IF in fact DM has been getting extorted or threatened by outside forces, and now an innocent man is dead as a result, then DM does have information that he's withholding from LE in their investigation into the abduction and death of TB. If he knows who the guilty party is and continuously hides their identity, then IMO, he's either an accessory or is obstructing the investigation. I'd be happy to have Archangel7 weigh in on this. It's just not everyday that a Defense Lawyer makes a statement indicating that his client is wealthy, intelligent & humble and there's much more to the story. IMO, if DM knows who the real murderers of TB are, he should be under obligation to tell the LE who are investigating the crime. MOO


"If the person tried to protect a suspect (such as by providing a false alibi, even if the suspect is in fact innocent) or to hide from investigation of their own activities (such as to hide their involvement in another crime), this may leave them liable to prosecution. Obstruction charges can also be laid if a person alters, destroys, or conceals physical evidence, even if he was under no compulsion at any time to produce such evidence. Often, no actual investigation or substantiated suspicion of a specific incident need exist to support a charge of obstruction of justice."

Obstruction of justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Withholding information during an investigation or lying can lead to OOJ charges.
Accessory/Parties to an Offense usually has wording such as 1-did it, 2-aided, 3-abetted, 4-counselled the person to do it or how to, 5- knew about it after the fact or similar, and some countries have a conspiracy clause on murder.

A person can be charged with numerous contraventions, generally they are tried only on the highest charge with exception to multiple charges of the same offense.....example 3 murders, 8 counts of heroin sales, etc.

 

[MsSherlock]

Withholding information during an investigation or lying can lead to OOJ charges.
Accessory/Parties to an Offense usually has wording such as 1-did it, 2-aided, 3-abetted, 4-counselled the person to do it or how to, 5- knew about it after the fact or similar, and some countries have a conspiracy clause on murder.

A person can be charged with numerous contraventions, generally they are tried only on the highest charge with exception to multiple charges of the same offense.....example 3 murders, 8 counts of heroin sales, etc.

Thanks Archangel7. IMO, if this is the case, then it's highly unlikely that DP would be advising DM to withhold info on anyone who may be responsible, otherwise, he'd be counseling his client to commit a criminal offense. Soooo...with that being said, IMHO, the fact there hasn't been any other charges indicates to me that there truly is only Millard, Smich and the men in the mirror. MOO

 

[SnooperDuper]

PS: He doesn't mention to Dee that he has a gf .. maybe he doesn't particularly like her at the moment

ha ha ...but also an interesting point.

The prison letter, if it's genuine, has some interesting anomalies.

Yes do go on...?