Bosma Murder Trial 05.12.16 - Day 48

[JuneBug67]

Maybe if MS offered an approximate area, LE could take the fleet of DM's stolen bobcats, on DM's stolen trailers, down to 16 Mile Creek, and use them to dig up some of the forest floor looking for the gun. If they have to take down any trees in the process then can remove them with DM's stolen woodchipper. Then if they need to replant trees to replace those they had to take down, then can use some of DM's stolen nursery trees.

Of course, MS won't say where, so it's most likely instead he could be using DM's stolen floor polisher to prep his cell.

I love this idea. Totally efficient and environmentally sustainable! Plus, if anything happens to the creek in all this MH can cry them a river. If they actually find the gun MS gets to be a hero of sorts and which time he can get out and resume his rap career and make a movie about the Oakville forest called 16 Mile, automatically making him precisely twice as good as Eminem. AND they might even find Christina Noudga's missing memory adhered to the duct tape on the gun on accident, in which case she can get finally get the STD ( 'smiling Thomas Dungey') she deserves. Should we let DM watch? He can sit on a rock looking confident but scared.

 

[Wondergirl]

Like everyone else, I am thinking wtf over the abrupt (and weak) closing today.

Obviously, I'm missing some critical legal details.

Is it possible for LE to cut a deal for MS to be driven out to attempt to locate the general vicinity of the gun disposal location? (as per TM in VS case eg.)

I'm sure he was high when he disposed of it. It's not a stretch to imagine he doesn't know exactly where, but, generally, I'm sure he does.

Can someone clarify - is MS charged in the murder of LB also?

 

[Errrr]

Not necessarily. The audience here is not representative of the general population.

Neither is the jury. They're carefully selected.

 

[Ontario_girl]

I'm not sure how that would work. He works for MS. His job is to provide defense. Dungey is very invested in winning this case so I don't see him throwing up his hands and saying that his client is on his own.
Also, MS would have needed to come forward with that information before or he would be considered to be withholding evidence and there could be a mistrial. jmo

Actually, TD very well could have thrown his hands up and say I give up. I've heard of lawyers doing that here, in Ontario when the accuse doesn't follow advice. My nephew being one of them. It was a reckless driving charge and his lawyer literally said screw it when my nephew wanted to admit guilt. The lawyer who was getting paid dropped the file on his wife's lap who is also a lawyer and was a duty counsellor that day.

 

[redheart]

Like everyone else, I am thinking wtf over the abrupt (and weak) closing today.

Obviously, I'm missing some critical legal details.

Is it possible for LE to cut a deal for MS to be driven out to attempt to locate the general vicinity of the gun disposal location? (as per TM in VS case eg.)

I'm sure he was high when he disposed of it. It's not a stretch to imagine he doesn't know exactly where, but, generally, I'm sure he does.

Can someone clarify - is MS charged in the murder of LB also?

Yes, he is. And there's enough evidence that they're also going directly to trial. This murder was 10 months before Tim's. That's a long time for "scared, confused" MS to develop a closer and closer bond with DM.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...-to-trial-in-death-of-laura-babcock-1.3225820

 

[Ontario Mom]

So based on the evidence so far, if anyone was sitting on the Jury and only knew what the Jury has been allowed to hear, would you be able to find DM and MS guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" of 1st degree murder? JFMOC (Just for my own curiosity!)

DM: yes.
MS: no.

 

[kramkat]

I'm thinking it's more on the lines as to whether Justice Goodman will allow DM to testify or call witnesses after cross. JMO.

I'm just catching up here - but DM had his chance to testify and they denied that opportunity. He can no longer call witnesses or testify.

 

[canadiangirl]

.

Another thing that stands out for me is all the people around MS who knew he had the gun .... check the court tweets today .... for someone who wanted no association with the gun there were sure a lot of people who knew he had it

I notice how he said, everyone was giving him advice and telling him to get rid of it.

 

[RandomName479]

Yes. DM is easy, I won't even explain that.

MS is guilty. I would dismiss most of his testimony, because I think it is untruthful and self-serving
That leaves me with:
-him posing with guns - goes to character, but doesn't prove murder
-knowledge of the mission - knowledge of THEFT, not necessarily murder
-told to bring a change of clothes - he has explained this to my satisfaction, bring black clothes to go back and steal vehicle....would love to know if his change of clothes was black....just thought of that...
-referring to the mission as "fireworks" - could just be referring to the theft
-texting fireside furniture and sausages to DM in the middle of mission discussion - this has never been a major issue for me, maybe I just didn't make the same connection (although I know it has been for many other posters). TD did not touch on it. Don't know about this one
-celebratory (or happy) mood of DM and MS per MM following the mission - he may have been in shock. but it is damning, although to me isn't evidence of 1st degree.
-direct participation in a great deal of the cleanup - yep to the last 3. absolutely accessory after the fact at a minumum.
-not going to police at any time
-asking for the drugs and "the other thing" and then getting rid of the gun


I'm sure there's more. Some of those things can be explained, but it becomes unreasonable to find an explanation for each one. Put them all together and I firmly believe that MS knew that murdering and incinerating Tim was the plan and was a willing participant, even if he didn't do the shooting.

MOO

Coloured by me....

Excellent synopsis And I *Hate* to be THAT poster who is being disagreeable.....because it has driven me crazy when people take a "DM/MS is innocent" stance and ignore evidence. But I'm going to do it anyway.....

all MOO. I would love it if the Crown had evidence that disproved MS's version of events.....that would get me off the fence....

 

[Ontario Mom]

Coloured by me....

Excellent synopsis And I *Hate* to be THAT poster who is being disagreeable.....because it has driven me crazy when people take a "DM/MS is innocent" stance and ignore evidence. But I'm going to do it anyway.....

all MOO. I would love it if the Crown had evidence that disproved MS's version of events.....that would get my off the fence....

Oh I don't think he's innocent by any stretch of the imagination. I just have reasonable doubt he's guilty of 1st degree murder. Loads of other charges YES.

 

[JuneBug67]

I've always had issues with this scenario myself. Surely TB would have been suspicious from the moment they pulled into the field (assuming they did) and how would DM have persuaded him to go on such a long drive (if he did)?

A possibility that did occur to me (and it's only that) is that with his famous charm and persuasiveness that we know from other testimony DM has when he chooses to turn it on, he expressed genuine interest in the truck, said something about taking it for a longer spin to be sure (I can see TB being keen on such a possible resolution to his truck issue!) and then, maybe well before they got to Brantford but while en route, perhaps on a back road, TB pulled out his phone to text SB that he'd be late and DM overreacted with the consequences we know of. Then he waited to do something about the situation till they got to the Brantford site, which he was probably familiar with.

There would be no reason for TB to agree to an irregular process unless he was convinced a sale was in the works. That could have been the "hook."

I think this is all true, but I also think people in general are just carried along by the existing direction and momentum of any given situation. We are not easily nudged out of obedience to authority, whether authority is an individual or the norms of human transactions and interactions. Tim was an eager seller and DM was a potential buyer with a cultivated and devious ability to put people at ease. In a way, Tim was a host and DM was a guest, which has a built in dynamic that favoured DM. The whole situation was prime to quietly continue to unfold to it's ugly conclusion, no matter what unease my have been experienced by Tim.

 

[Errrr]

I've always had issues with this scenario myself. Surely TB would have been suspicious from the moment they pulled into the field (assuming they did) and how would DM have persuaded him to go on such a long drive (if he did)?

A possibility that did occur to me (and it's only that) is that with his famous charm and persuasiveness that we know from other testimony DM has when he chooses to turn it on, he expressed genuine interest in the truck, said something about taking it for a longer spin to be sure (I can see TB being keen on such a possible resolution to his truck issue!) and then, maybe well before they got to Brantford but while en route, perhaps on a back road, TB pulled out his phone to text SB that he'd be late and DM overreacted with the consequences we know of. Then he waited to do something about the situation till they got to the Brantford site, which he was probably familiar with.

There would be no reason for TB to agree to an irregular process unless he was convinced a sale was in the works. That could have been the "hook."

Another thing that bugs me is that all the Bullmans were pretty sure two trucks came out of that field. It is fairly shielded from the road but it was pretty clever for Smich to come up with the explanation that the Yukon was just sitting at the entrance and for DM to say that their buddy was lost as an excuse to stop. I'm not sure if Smich is clever enough to come up with that? But that scenario doesn't ring true to me. I wish we could see DMs face during the course of MS testimony!

 

[redheart]

Coloured by me....

Excellent synopsis And I *Hate* to be THAT poster who is being disagreeable.....because it has driven me crazy when people take a "DM/MS is innocent" stance and ignore evidence. But I'm going to do it anyway.....

all MOO. I would love it if the Crown had evidence that disproved MS's version of events.....that would get my off the fence....

Haha, you're never disagreeable. And I concede that some of your rebuttals make sense, but taken as a whole it's too much 'splaining to do.

 

[RandomName479]

I really wish we were privy to the evidence they have against MS in LB's murder......

 

[SuperSpy]

DM: yes.
MS: no.

That will change when DM gets on the stand and tells the jury that MS carried the gun into the truck. DM had no place to conceal it. SB already testified he wasn't wearing a man purse.

DM will maybe say that MS had the gun in the Yukon and when they stopped he went up to the truck's driver's window. DM rolled it down. MS raised the gun and shot TB, the bullet passing in front of DM. That is the only way that I can see TB wouldn't have been able to reach at the gun and try to get it away.

TD stopped the story short. He didn't question MS about what went on between burying the gun and getting arrested. He didn't ask him about what was said during the famous call from CN. TD planned to ask more questions, but didn't. Something changed. I wonder if the Crown was offering a lesser sentence AATF, but they withdrew it because MS's testimony didn't offer enough new evidence.

 

[Typhoo1961]

Maybe if MS offered an approximate area, LE could take the fleet of DM's stolen bobcats, on DM's stolen trailers, down to 16 Mile Creek, and use them to dig up some of the forest floor looking for the gun. If they have to take down any trees in the process then can remove them with DM's stolen woodchipper. Then if they need to replant trees to replace those they had to take down, then can use some of DM's stolen nursery trees.

Of course, MS won't say where, so it's most likely instead he could be using DM's stolen floor polisher to prep his cell.

I wonder if the City of Oakville ever got their woodchipper back.

 

[SuperSpy]

I wonder if the City of Oakville ever got their woodchipper back.

I wonder if the Bobcat owner ever got it back.

 

[canadiangirl]

I have no problem finding DM guilty of 1st degree.....but unless MS's testimony is shown to be a lie during cross examination, at this point I could NOT find him guilty of first degree. His story has created reasonable doubt for me (I know I may be crucified for this....).....he's guilty of accessory after the fact FOR SURE.....MOO

I have a question for you. Or anyone here who believes MS story (personally I'm on the fence right now until after cross etc so I'm not judging your stance in any way)

But, if DM had've got on the stand first, and recited the jailhouse letters as he rehearsed, would your feeling be the same about MS?

 

[palisadesk]

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6546273-clairmont-the-end-of-the-bosma-trial-is-in-sight/

* except that we now expect that after MS's team is finished calling evidence, DM's team will. AFTER that...

Yes, *If* that happens, then the Crown will present the final closing address. The Spec article assumes (but doesn't state, for clarification) that both defense counsel will call witnesses. While that often does happen, it is not unusual for the defense not to call witnesses, and in that case, defense gets the last word, after the Crown's closing statement.

So, if Millard's team is given leave to call new evidence -- and we only have speculation to that end, at this point -- then the order of closing statement, as reported by the Spec article, will be followed ( Millard, Smich, Crown).

But, if Millard's team does not present new evidence, either because it declines to do so or is not given leave to do so, then the order will be DM's team last.

See a fuller explanation at this link:
http://www.julianhermida.com/polnotesoverview.htm

The important take-away is that the Crown does not automatically get the last word.

 

[ILoveDateline]

I understand that, and this trial, because of no PH, has had more than most, but I thought they just had a significant amount of time for legal arguments when TD made the announcement that MS was going to testify. I thought the majority of it may have been dealt with then. Now they have another almost full day for legal arguments and the attorneys have another 3 days for prep.

I suppose this judge is just being extra cautious because of the nature of this trial. It just seems to me that a team of defense attorneys shouldn't need this much direction and prep time. But if it prevents a mistrial or appeal, I suppose it's for the best. Explains a bit about why our court system is so backlogged though.

MOO

Three days prep on the weekend?! don't you think they deserve a rest? I am happy for the break. Aren't you?

I have to admit, I have an unhealthy attraction/addiction to this case and it's starting to show in other areas of my life. The breaks are welcomed here. JMO.