Verdict: GUILTY for both Millard and Smich of 1st degree murder #2

[canadiangirl]

I wonder if she'll wrap herself up in a scarf on the way to the courtroom.

I often wonder how this would've been handled if she testified this week. Lol

 

[leafs_fan93]

As far as I can see the Smich reasonable doubters just dismiss all the evidence and say they believe his story. Where do you stand on Meneses' testimony about the celebration, his 100-plus post-murder text messages to Millard including talk about his wedding suit and chilling out, Daly's testimony that Smich was perfectly fine that week until Millard got arrested?

How do you explain all his pre-murder texts about the BBQ, his gun obsession, his change of clothes, etc? And what about the fact that he draws a complete blank on his gun burial and 50-minute meeting with Millard before his arrest while remembering other things crystal clear?

I've only scratched the surface, <modsnip>

What still bothers me abt MM adding to her testimony is the timing. Why wait til a few days before you testify(not to mention well into the trial)? She had clearly moved on, had no lingering feelings, and said so herself, once he was in jail there was no point staying together. This leads me to believe she embellished.

As for the gun, I don't believe the burial story and I'm not sure anyone does. What I do think is that he was more afraid of Isho's crew still out on the street than he was of being convicted of first degree murder. No point being out of jail only to be killed, which I think he was certain would happen if he said the gun was returned to Isho as I suspect it was

 

[canadiangirl]

So I'm curious what happens to Isho now that it's been decided that the guilty verdict has been handed down.

 

[canadiangirl]

What still bothers me abt MM adding to her testimony is the timing. Why wait til a few days before you testify(not to mention well into the trial)? She had clearly moved on, had no lingering feelings, and said so herself, once he was in jail there was no point staying together. This leads me to believe she embellished.

As for the gun, I don't believe the burial story and I'm not sure anyone does. What I do think is that he was more afraid of Isho's crew still out on the street than he was of being convicted of first degree murder. No point being out of jail only to be killed, which I think he was certain would happen if he said the gun was returned to Isho as I suspect it was

Bbm.
I've been curious if someone "got to her" about changing her testimony.

 

[DMB]

But, regardless of the date the texts were sent, the texts that WERE entered into evidence proved that DM purchased the gun that killed Tim Bosma. That is why those texts were allowed to be entered as evidence (to support the various other photos, etc., evidence that that was the gun that was used in Tim's murder.) Those texts most assuredly DID have great bearing in this trial.

The texts that were a part of that same conversation that were NOT entered into evidence, as Susan Clairmont tweeted, were more than likely not allowed because they couldn't, by the date of the texts alone, prove the gun was purchased to specifically kill Tim, and therefore those texts didn't have a specific bearing in Tim's trial.

There is a possibility that they might have more bearing in Laura Babcock's and Wayne Millard's trials.

MOO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There was no Warranty expiry date on that contract. It was a deal that was made that stated IMO that, if and when DM was done with that gun he could return and MWJ could change the print on it. It should have been allowed into evidence as it showed, regardless of the fact that we did not actually have the murder weapon that DM had purchased one with the intent on using it and if he should want, MWJ could make it clean again. MS's testimony that there was multiple guns should also have been allowed along with the original texts with MWJ as it shows that DM didn't need to have multiply guns at the same time as one gun could and would be all he needed.

 

[ABro]

For all you people are making Iisho out to be the biggest, most scary criminal ever, it's time to give his Red Shoes promo video another watch. Smich and Millard are way scarier.

 

[Londoneye]

For all you people are making Iisho out to be the biggest, most scary criminal ever, it's time to give his Red Shoes promo video another watch. Smich and Millard are way scarier.

I've never understood that theory either. When I saw the text messages between him and DM that weren't admitted I just took the bring the gun back and cleaning message to be that he'd take the gun if/when he needed to get rid of it and he could clean it if needed. I haven't googled "cleaning" a gun but I assumed it to be just filing the barrel. Then I saw many making a big deal out of it, I thought I was missing something. IMO

 

[canadiangirl]

For all you people are making Iisho out to be the biggest, most scary criminal ever, it's time to give his Red Shoes promo video another watch. Smich and Millard are way scarier.

Well as it would seem you're the only reporter that I can find to have written anything about MWJ. However back on the MWJ thread you commented about the 14 tat being linked back to Latino gangs in California, the 416 tat as a Toronto gang affiliation, the teardrop tattoo which means murder. Add to that the guy has AK47s in his possession and owned a bullet proof vest. Just to name a few.
He doesn't exactly seem like Mr. Roger's to me. Although his friends say he's nice. MOO

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

There was no Warranty expiry date on that contract. It was a deal that was made that stated IMO that, if and when DM was done with that gun he could return and MWJ could change the print on it. It should have been allowed into evidence as it showed, regardless of the fact that we did not actually have the murder weapon that DM had purchased one with the intent on using it and if he should want, MWJ could make it clean again. MS's testimony that there was multiple guns should also have been allowed along with the original texts with MWJ as it shows that DM didn't need to have multiply guns at the same time as one gun could and would be all he needed.

I understand what you are saying and your thoughts are valid ones which make sense to you.

However, most of us are not lawyers and don't have an understanding of the intricacies of legal arguments, the law and/or judges' interpretations of it, so can only share our personal beliefs.

IMO, the lawyers who argued for/against the admission of certain evidence would have made legally valid arguments, and Justice Goodman would have taken every possible factor into consideration before ruling on those arguments. I completely trust his judgement as to what was/wasn't admitted into evidence. It is he who has the experience and wisdom to make legally sound rulings. Neither would he wish for this case to be appealed, so would definitely give his most considered judgement to prevent the possibility of appeal.

It is difficult for us to understand what his reasoning was because of our lack of legal knowledge.

MOO



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

What still bothers me abt MM adding to her testimony is the timing. Why wait til a few days before you testify(not to mention well into the trial)? She had clearly moved on, had no lingering feelings, and said so herself, once he was in jail there was no point staying together. This leads me to believe she embellished.

RSBM

There are a few different possibilities for sure.

A few WSers have suggested the possibility that MM was still in love with MS during her first police interview, still trying to protect MS in whatever way she could at that time. Hence "DM was happy".

But by the time she gave another statement prior to her testimony, she decided to be more honest then, hence the "celebration", as she no longer loved him.

It would be interesting to know if the jury gave this much consideration or not.

MOO




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Elisabeth]

Maybe they did put their references aside. But people aren't robots. If you're told for 4.5 months someone is a low life scum of the earth, I'm pretty certain your opinion of that person is formed and you've been biased. It only takes between 21-66 days to form a habit. How hard is it to break any habit? Certainly not 4.5 days. MOO

We weren't told for 4.5 months that MS was a low life scum of the earth. Many people here complained there wasn't enough evidence against him during the early part of the trial. After the initial cell phone and video evidence we then heard lots of evidence about DM's DNA, DM's finances, DM's relationships with workers etc.

I had sympathies of him as the underdog during the first part of the trial as well....until we got to the bulk of the evidence that did concern him: the premeditation texts, the post crime behaviour evidence from BD and MM, etc. No evidence presented after that (including MS's testimony) weakened that evidence which I felt indicated his guilt. By the end of the trial, my opinion of his guilt was set and it was based on all of the evidence presented in the whole trial.

Being able to weigh evidence is not a habit as you state. I did not lock in my opinion early as a "bias". I listened to all of the evidence to the very end and it built up against both DM and MS.

I am confident the jurors did the same and weighed all of the evidence to the end of the trial. I think it is insulting to them to assume they were not able to do so.

 

[Elisabeth]

RSBM

There are a few different possibilities for sure.

A few WSers have suggested the possibility that MM was still in love with MS during her first police interview, still trying to protect MS in whatever way she could at that time. Hence "DM was happy".

But by the time she gave another statement prior to her testimony, she decided to be more honest then, hence the "celebration", as she no longer loved him.

It would be interesting to know if the jury gave this much consideration or not.

MOO




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think also that someone might say they no longer have feelings...but I believe that is easier said than done....

I see no reason why she would lie or embellish her testimony to incriminate MS on the stand. The opposite is what people would expect given her history with him.

 

[dar107]

Well as it would seem you're the only reporter that I can find to have written anything about MWJ. However back on the MWJ thread you commented about the 14 tat being linked back to Latino gangs in California, the 416 tat as a Toronto gang affiliation, the teardrop tattoo which means murder. Add to that the guy has AK47s in his possession and owned a bullet proof vest. Just to name a few.
He doesn't exactly seem like Mr. Roger's to me. Although his friends say he's nice. MOO

Then there's the infatuation with shooting someone in the eye as AB herself talks about here:

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/201...ll-faces-millard-related-weapons-charges.html

"Big Iisho has such an ongoing fascination with people being shot in the eye. For example, in this “creep *advertiser censored* ontario south toronto” recording circa 2007, he sings the lyrics are “shoot a man in his eye socket twice, he be quick to start jerking, twittering, twitching and moving.” This has been a disturbing obsession of Big Iisho’s for quite some time. And it’s all the more peculiar, given that Matthew Ward-Jackson is accused of selling Dellen Millard the illegal gun he allegedly used to kill his father, Wayne MIllard, who is reported to have been shot in the eye."

But then AB seems to have been charmed enough by all his great character references :

"Based on this diverse but unanimous chorus of character references, I have concluded that Matthew Ward-Jackson, more than anything else, resembles a character in an Elmore Leonard novel, one of those aspiring small-time hoods and con artists who — thanks to dumb mistakes and bad judgment — unwittingly get caught up in far more dangerous and deadly capers."

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

This blog post points out that bad character evidence can be introduced for by a defendant against the other defendant in a cut-throat defense (with restrictions).

Main gist is that if it is allowed - the judge must point out that it can't be used to show guilt of one accused (can only be used to find the one presenting as not guilty). I would say the judge did it in this case. TD brought up the 'killing games' DM played and DM's lawyers brought up the rap stuff and the judge clearly told the jury to not consider those in determining guilt.


http://jmortonmusings.blogspot.ca/2010/12/bad-character-and-cut-throat-defence.html

Thank you so much for posting this. It explains so much about the legal reasoning behind probative vs prejudicial evidence, etc., and gives us more of an understanding about the possible legal reasons behind some decisions made in this trial. I learned a lot from this lawyer's "musings." [emoji4] A valuable read!

(IMHO, from my personal interpretation of this post, Justice Goodman followed all of these legal steps, or points, to a T.)

MOO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Elisabeth]

Thank you so much for posting this. It explains so much about the legal reasoning behind probative vs prejudicial evidence, etc., and gives us more of an understanding about the possible legal reasons behind some decisions made in this trial. I learned a lot from this lawyer's "musings." [emoji4]

MOO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I agree!

Are there rules about "good character" evidence? Such as finishing high school?

Did some of the evidence of MS's crimes have to be admitted since MS used it as an excuse for not going to police?

 

[Ontario Mom]

There was no trial evidence wrt personality disorders in either of the accused. It's speculation by the publc. Lots of people have personality disorders .. the existence of such doesn't make them guilty.

I think it's kind of dangerous any way for the public, the general, untrained public, to go around speculating on who might be a psychopath, sociopath or have personality disorders. I'd guess the vast majority of the public isn't trained in the field to be able to make that call, and even if they were, without one-on-one face time in counselling sessions, such a "diagnosis" would be irresponsible at best. In this case, obviously there is something wrong with both DM and MS for them to be able to do what they did, but none of us really know what that wrong thing is. Me personally, I'd call it plain old fashioned evil, the same way SB sees it.

moo.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Puts a whole new meaning to Spare the rod, Spoil the child.
Proverbs 13:24, “He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him.”

It's not new, but I get what you're saying.

 

[DMB]

Well as it would seem you're the only reporter that I can find to have written anything about MWJ. However back on the MWJ thread you commented about the 14 tat being linked back to Latino gangs in California, the 416 tat as a Toronto gang affiliation, the teardrop tattoo which means murder. Add to that the guy has AK47s in his possession and owned a bullet proof vest. Just to name a few.
He doesn't exactly seem like Mr. Roger's to me. Although his friends say he's nice. MOO

AND, he makes MS look like a choir boy! MOO

 

[Ontario Mom]

Well considering it's been said how close the Smich family is.....

I'm not sure what you meant by that, but like I said, even kids brought up in decent homes with loving families can turn into absolute monsters as adults. It could be they were always like that, but family made excuses for them. It could be that while at home they were under strict rules where they couldn't act out without getting caught. Or it could be some mental illness that didn't manifest until later, or it could be repeated drug use that caused horrible changes. I'm just guessing & speculating. I honestly don't know how close the Smich family is. I know Smich himself said they were, but he also said he was not guilty of first degree murder of Tim Bosma. So... there's that.

 

[Londoneye]

AND, he makes MS look like a choir boy! MOO

A choir boy with a first degree murder conviction and another first degree murder trial pending. Now I don't think for a second MWJ is some petty criminal. Sounds like just from what we've heard in this trial (admissable and unadmissable evidence), the charges he's dealing with now and ones he's beat in the past he's deep in the gun and drug world. That doesn't put him on the level of killing an innocent man for no reason like DM and MS. MOO.