Wayne Millard: Dellen Millard Charged with Murder in the First Degree #2

[SnooperDuper]

Firstly, I personally find it degrading and dehumanizing to associate a hairstyle of an First Nations tribe in an inference of childishness and irresponsibility. It has been established that DM wore that hairstyle in a tribute to his forefathers with pride, and to mock it was insensitive of AS, in my opinion, and still smacks of racism to me.

What does it say when you dye your hair Manic Panic Rock'n'Roll Red? http://www.manicpanic.com/classiccreamformula.html

Isn't that the product that rose up with Punk Rock in England? Weren't they all Fascists?

Again, all we have is one secondhand report from someone with a very good reason to besmirch the name of the accused.

If the standard is owning a home, then DM met that standard, in my opinion. If the standard was being employed, then DM also met that standard by being CEO of MillardAir, in my opinion.

What standard are we speaking to?

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but until I see proof that DM was unemployed, I will have to disagree with that assumption, respectfully.

 

[Alethea Dice]

What does it say when you dye your hair Manic Panic Rock'n'Roll Red? http://www.manicpanic.com/classiccreamformula.html

Isn't that the product that rose up with Punk Rock in England? Weren't they all Fascists?



What standard are we speaking to?

Not sure what you're trying to insinuate here, or who you're saying is a Fascist, but could be he just got the idea from Jared Leto's style the year before. Everyone uses Manic Panic - Lady Gaga, Katie Perry, Heidi Klum, Chris Benz, Flea, Alice Cooper, Cher, Marilyn Manson, Gwen Stefani, even The Scary Guy. And of course, Jared, and many many more.

 

[hopingforjustice]

No Carli...I don't believe any of us here misunderstood you..
But JMO MOO IMHO

 

[hopingforjustice]

Both my sister and I got mortgages in our early 20's.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Not sure what you're trying to insinuate here, or who you're saying is a Fascist, but could be he just got the idea from Jared Leto's style the year before. Everyone uses Manic Panic - Lady Gaga, Katie Perry, Heidi Klum, Chris Benz, Flea, Alice Cooper, Cher, Marilyn Manson, Gwen Stefani, even The Scary Guy. And of course, Jared, and many many more.

That's right, there's that strange itch for celebrity again...

 

[Carli]

No Carli...I don't believe any of us here misunderstood you..
But JMO MOO IMHO

Thanks. I dearly hope not. But I'm not nearly so certain as you on the matter. :scared:

 

[Alethea Dice]

That's right, there's that strange itch for celebrity again...

Ah, I should have been able to guess that was your angle. It's been a long week. I could have named more for you, but unfortunately, they aren't famous so you never would have heard of them. People have been doing things like this to their hair for years. What a scary thought that all of these people who choose to sometimes use bold colour in their hair could potentially become serial killers to attain celebrity.

 

[Tamarind]

Both my sister and I got mortgages in our early 20's.

So did I, took a while to climb the ladder though before I could get the house I have now.

 

[Tamarind]

Respectfully, may I suggest that may be because some persist in misunderstanding the point in looking at the circumstances of TB and his family, in the chance there may be clues to this tragedy that have been overlooked. For some puzzling reason many seem to assume that any such questions are only meant to suggest that TB was involved in some form of illegal activity. Frankly, I don't know how that sideways leap into the abyss was made but that seems to be the inference. Yet LE already stated that there was no previous direct association between TB and DM so I don't see why anyone hangs on to this notion. IMHO

I was of the opinion that LE usually looked for clues that tied a victim to the murderer, either directly or indirectly. Surely it doesn't always mean the victim was involved in some criminal activity, more a case of trying to find the reasons for the tragedy that are not obvious. As you say Carli, a direct association between TB and DM has been ruled out. But has an indirect connection also been ruled out? If not then why can't this line of investigation continue. If its not demeaning the victim, and doesn't show to be investigating people not identified by LE, it wouldn't be against the rules would it?

I should add that maybe someone who was involved along the line of that indirect connection is connected to the events surrounding TB. Until that avenue of investigation is dealt with and either used or eliminated the possibility for it to be extremely relevant will exist IMO

Like most people my aim is to uncover any possible facts that will reveal the true nature and circumstance behind this case.

 

[Carli]

Something has been nagging at the back of my mind. I was just looking for MSM references to delays in the delivery of discovery documents to the defense when I again stumbled upon this article about the absolutely misery of LB's family.

Of course, the thing that brought the agony of their loss back into total pre-occupation was the much heralded and sensational reports of LE's return to the DM farm searching for remains of their poor lost daughter with police reportedly action on "new information" from unnamed sources. But as days passed with no results, the whole feeding frenzy hysteria eventually slid off the front page and out of the nightly breaking news reports into a passing reference on the back pages with the comment that no new evidence relating to the alleged death of LB had actually been found.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...r_lengthy_delay_in_dellen_millard_probes.html

Precisely who supplied this false "new information?" What was their reason for inserting themselves into this serious criminal investigation and messing around with investigator's heads. A very, very expensive game, if you ask me, with all manner of specialized police personnel and equipment assigned to the search and MSM from all over creation snapping pics and circling overhead. Whoever is responsible for planting this false "new information" should be brought up on charges, if you ask me, and asked to satisfactorily explain their motives. Why was this person or persons so determined to place LB's remains on the Millard farm? Tell you what. If I were an LE investigator, I'd want to have a rather lengthy sit-down chat with the person or persons who set the department off on that very public and acutely embarrassing wild goose chase. MOO. IMHO. etc.

 

[Sillybilly]

Something has been nagging at the back of my mind. I was just looking for MSM references to delays in the delivery of discovery documents to the defense when I again stumbled upon this article about the absolutely misery of LB's family.

Of course, the thing that brought the agony of their loss back into total pre-occupation was the much heralded and sensational reports of LE's return to the DM farm searching for remains of their poor lost daughter with police reportedly action on "new information" from unnamed sources. But as days passed with no results, the whole feeding frenzy hysteria eventually slid off the front page and out of the nightly breaking news reports into a passing reference on the back pages with the comment that no new evidence relating to the alleged death of LB had actually been found.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...r_lengthy_delay_in_dellen_millard_probes.html

Precisely who supplied this false "new information?" What was their reason for inserting themselves into this serious criminal investigation and messing around with investigator's heads. A very, very expensive game, if you ask me, with all manner of specialized police personnel and equipment assigned to the search and MSM from all over creation snapping pics and circling overhead. Whoever is responsible for planting this false "new information" should be brought up on charges, if you ask me, and asked to satisfactorily explain their motives. Why was this person or persons so determined to place LB's remains on the Millard farm? Tell you what. If I were an LE investigator, I'd want to have a rather lengthy sit-down chat with the person or persons who set the department off on that very public and acutely embarrassing wild goose chase. MOO. IMHO. etc.

It's simply not fact that the information provided LE was false. All we know is that LE said (paraphrased) they did not find evidence relating to her disappearance at the farm.

 

[Tamarind]

It's simply not fact that the information provided LE was false. All we know is that LE said (paraphrased) they did not find evidence relating to her disappearance at the farm.

If the new information led them to start scouring the farm, its safe to say that the new information was related to possible evidence being there IMO.

The fact that no evidence appears to have surfaced from this search suggests that the new information was not of much use. Meaning imo that the new information was not particularly accurate. Whether or not it is absolute fact remains to be seen, but not all roads have been leading to Rome in this case.

 

[Juballee]

Something has been nagging at the back of my mind. I was just looking for MSM references to delays in the delivery of discovery documents to the defense when I again stumbled upon this article about the absolutely misery of LB's family.

Of course, the thing that brought the agony of their loss back into total pre-occupation was the much heralded and sensational reports of LE's return to the DM farm searching for remains of their poor lost daughter with police reportedly action on "new information" from unnamed sources. But as days passed with no results, the whole feeding frenzy hysteria eventually slid off the front page and out of the nightly breaking news reports into a passing reference on the back pages with the comment that no new evidence relating to the alleged death of LB had actually been found.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...r_lengthy_delay_in_dellen_millard_probes.html

Precisely who supplied this false "new information?" What was their reason for inserting themselves into this serious criminal investigation and messing around with investigator's heads. A very, very expensive game, if you ask me, with all manner of specialized police personnel and equipment assigned to the search and MSM from all over creation snapping pics and circling overhead. Whoever is responsible for planting this false "new information" should be brought up on charges, if you ask me, and asked to satisfactorily explain their motives. Why was this person or persons so determined to place LB's remains on the Millard farm? Tell you what. If I were an LE investigator, I'd want to have a rather lengthy sit-down chat with the person or persons who set the department off on that very public and acutely embarrassing wild goose chase. MOO. IMHO. etc.

Thanks, Carli. That link lead me to an article I don't remember reading before, that it doesn't seem to want to link here for me, called Five unanswered questions in the alleged Dellen Millard killings.


It's nice to know I'm not the only one who doesn't quite feel the motive question is answered by simply saying it was a theft or a thrill.

 

[Sillybilly]

If the new information led them to start scouring the farm, its safe to say that the new information was related to possible evidence being there IMO.

The fact that no evidence appears to have surfaced from this search suggests that the new information was not of much use. Meaning imo that the new information was not particularly accurate. Whether or not it is absolute fact remains to be seen, but not all roads have been leading to Rome in this case.

That fine if it's stated as opinion ... just that we don't incorrectly present something as fact when it has not been stated as such by LE and/or in MSM and able to be linked to. It's a matter of keeping the record straight for others who may read here. This has been addressed in numerous other cases where someone presents an opinon as 'fact' with the potential for the inaccuracy to be attributed to WS as the source.

I agree that the information may have not been of much value .. but it doesn't necessarily equate to "false" information or a frivolous investigation initiated by someone with an ulterior motive.

i.e. The original information may have been simply that LB's vehicle was seen at the farm, or ??? Doesn't mean the information was inaccurate, just that evidence to substantiate such information was not able to be located.

 

[Carli]

Puhleeze. We had grids. We had hazmat and forensics. We had vans and cruisers and cranes and diggers and earth movers. Lord knows how much hay and straw was picked up, moved and sifted and put down again. We dug odd holes in the earth here and there. For five long days the press was everywhere on the ground and overhead, trying to interpret every action until breathlessly reporting the removal of oil barrels. (Had LE been watching Breaking Bad, or was MSM just desperate for hard news?) Somewhere, midpoint in the circus, in a particularly poignant turn of events, LB's uncle showed up. no doubt driven by the abiding inference that the remains of his missing niece were about to be discovered. http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4072830-uncle-of-missing-woman-pleads-for-answers-at-millard-farm/ Who knows how many days he kept sad and futile vigil?

If you ask me it must have been heartbreaking for LB's family, not to mention an appalling waste of LE resources and a dreadful illustration of the growing tendancy for MSM to play to the gallery for the benefit of advertisers.

If all that activity took place because LB's vehicle was seen at the farm - did LB have a vehicle??? - then something is even more seriously amiss in the assignment of resources. IMO. (Seriously, do you know if LB have a vehicle? Do you happen to know more about this? Model, year, etc? Could be rather incredibly important information, no? IMO)

Anyway, it wasn't until many months later - May 2014 that LE finally stated that LB's remains were not found at the farm. We should also recall that the coroner earlier reported that LB's remains have never been found in Ontario (or at least never processed in Ontario facilities.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...a_babcocks_body_not_recovered_in_ontario.html

All just MOO, of course. MHO. etc.

 

[Sillybilly]

If all that activity took place because LB's vehicle was seen at the farm - did LB have a vehicle??? - then something is even more seriously amiss in the assignment of resources. IMO. (Seriously, do you know if LB have a vehicle? Do you happen to know more about this? Model, year, etc? Could be rather incredibly important information, no? IMO)

Puhleeze ... read "i.e. The original information may have been simply that LB's vehicle was seen at the farm, or ???"

 

[Carli]

It's simply not fact that the information provided LE was false. All we know is that LE said (paraphrased) they did not find evidence relating to her disappearance at the farm.

Actually, to flesh out your paraphrase, what the Coroner actually said was "The remains of Laura Babcock, one of Dellen Millard’s three alleged murder victims, were not found on the aviation heir’s farm".

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ound-at-dellen-millards-farm/article18476919/

According to the National Post "new information" led LE to obtain a search warrant in September "in connection to the disappearance of Laura Babcock."
They had already unsucessfully searched the same premises several months earlier for evidence relating to LB.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/0...t-dellen-millards-farm-after-new-information/

Perhaps, when everything eventually trickles down to the courtroom, we'll learn that, indeed, evidence was discovered that confirmed LB was murdered at the farm or that her body was taken there and possibly disposed of at that location. If that be the case it will also be interesting to learn why on earth the Coroner would not have been made aware of any of this. MOO. IMHO.

 

[Carli]

Puhleeze ... read "i.e. The original information may have been simply that LB's vehicle was seen at the farm, or ???"

Sorry. It's late. I'm not catching your drift. Are you saying the search may have been called pursuant to some casual off-hand reference or hunch or something? I'm not so sure. The farm had already been pretty thoroughly raked over in May and June. Another warrant had to be obtained for the September search so something that seemed pretty specific and pretty solid "reasonable and probable grounds" must have prompted such action. MOO. IMHO. etc

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadi..._Practice/Search_and_Seizure/Warrant_Searches

ONe odd thing I recall about that search, and I haven't found the link again, is that it seemed to be open ended - something I understand to be unusual because, I suppose, searches should not appear to take on the character of fishing expeditions. Nevertheless this one didn't seem to specify a time limit but it was called off after five days anyway. Does anyone happen to know why?

 

[Tamarind]

That fine if it's stated as opinion ... just that we don't incorrectly present something as fact when it has not been stated as such by LE and/or in MSM and able to be linked to. It's a matter of keeping the record straight for others who may read here. This has been addressed in numerous other cases where someone presents an opinon as 'fact' with the potential for the inaccuracy to be attributed to WS as the source.

I agree that the information may have not been of much value .. but it doesn't necessarily equate to "false" information or a frivolous investigation initiated by someone with an ulterior motive.

i.e. The original information may have been simply that LB's vehicle was seen at the farm, or ??? Doesn't mean the information was inaccurate, just that evidence to substantiate such information was not able to be located.

I think most posts are opinion sillybilly, if we are going to scrutinize each post for bang on accuracy then I need to be going back over many threads and posts to point out the ones that fall short- as there are many.

Also, I did concede in my last post that the new information may or may not be absolute fact.

If you read most of the posts on here they are opinions regardless of whether they put a courteous IMO or JMO or MOO at the end. HTH

 

[Tamarind]

Sorry. It's late. I'm not catching your drift. Are you saying the search may have been called pursuant to some casual off-hand reference or hunch or something? I'm not so sure. The farm had already been pretty thoroughly raked over in May and June. Another warrant had to be obtained for the September search so something that seemed pretty specific and pretty solid "reasonable and probable grounds" must have prompted such action. MOO. IMHO. etc

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadi..._Practice/Search_and_Seizure/Warrant_Searches

ONe odd thing I recall about that search, and I haven't found the link again, is that it seemed to be open ended - something I understand to be unusual because, I suppose, searches should not appear to take on the character of fishing expeditions. Nevertheless this one didn't seem to specify a time limit but it was called off after five days anyway. Does anyone happen to know why?

Agreed, nothing a judge hates more than mere fishing expeditions, I read a case just recently where a judge through out evidence because of it. Will try to re-find the case.