Trial Thread, May 1, 2012 Defense begins it case in chief

[Thinkzerz]

Something is DEFINITELY up with Grandma's testimony. I think she is confused, and not a reliable witness, unless the tweets are incorrect.

1. She says the woman came out of the school.

2. She says the woman went in the front, then her Grandchildren came out (how could she see the woman leave, then?)

3. She says she never saw the woman leave the school.

Which is it?

JMO

These at tweets and i am sure more tweets say she only saw the women enter the school. Spelling mistakes and wording are not going to be accurate. Fortunately.

 

[Bravo]

I was hoping MR would take the stand, but didn't seriously believe he would.

There is no requirement for him to take the stand, and the jury will take no inference from it. They will directed by the judge that it doesn't infer innocence of guilt.

Sitting on the witness stand and saying you didn't do something, is about equivalent to telling the police you are innocent..........doesn't do much good.

Very few defendants testify, and juries perform their duties.

JMO..........

Agree. Typically Defendants dont as you point out. I truly thought this may have been a case where the Defendant did. I'm betting Derstine put him thru the ropes of a mock run and he failed miserably.

 

[Macright]

I find today's witness perfectly credible. There were two minor discrepancies between her original statement to LE and her testimony: At first she said she couldn't remember the colour of the woman's pants. She later said they were dark. She seemed fixated on the white jacket (thought it was inappropriate for the weather), so she obviously was paying less attention to the pants. I don't think this is a big deal.





The second discrepancy involved the distance the witness saw the woman from. She estimated about two bus lengths in her LE statement. She now says one, or less than two. Were these short buses or long ones? We don't know. Even if they were the longer vehicles, it's not a long distance when one is sitting in a car with nothing else to look at - just a few meters.





This was a reluctant witness for the defence who applied for and received a publication ban on her name, for obvious reasons. The fact that she's a grandmother has no bearing on anything. I know some very young, vibrant grandmothers. Regardless, her eyesight or age was not questioned. I see no reason to disbelieve her testimony.

Had there been any other mother fitting this description (especially the white jacket) picking up a child on April 8th at OSPS, I am positive LE would have found and questioned them within the past three years. The Crown would have put them on the stand during their turn in order to discredit today's witness's testimony.





As for Tori's teacher's testimony, I do not think she was lying. I think she and the other teachers were very busy at that time getting the children ready to leave and putting them on buses. As someone else posted, she could have meant the classroom door, not the outside door. TLM could have been lurking in an empty classroom without being noticed.

I DO believe that this proves that Tori was targeted and the reasons have been stated many times. The implications of TLM entering the school are huge and have also been explained, so there's no need for me to repeat them.

JMO

hate when real life gets in the way...good post AG and my thoughts exactly..still trying to catch up though...JMO think LE "overlooked or passed by this witness because it blew a hole in their theory that TLM grabbed the first available child...always believed she knew exactly who she was looking for and for a reason other than a play toy for MR...JMO who knows who was visiting CM that day and TLM could have overheard something..JMO

 

[impatientredhead]

I have always told my daughter and I am sure you all have told yours. You hang around trouble you will be in trouble. You with someone who steals you will be in trouble as if you stole yourself.

They both were trouble and both had evil sides to them. Their worlds collided that day at the pizza shop and their sick twisted minds decided that they need to do what they have always wanted to do. He knew TLM would act that is why he also thought that she would take the fall for him...His mistake I think was his big mouth....."you'd do anything for a little bit of love" Some how I think that was the straw that broke the camels back. JMO.... Lesson learned for him I guess.

I think the 18 women she didn't know about broke the camels back. Once they were seperated and he couldn't work his "charm" on her. The state is telling her about all these other women and she is by herself, hurt and getting mad... and we know she has a temper problem.

 

[Wondergirl]

What the defense hasn't said, speaks louder than what it has said (which isn't much!)

I guess Derstine just wants to summarize the entire defense in a closing argument, without anything being subject to cross examination (though the Crown does get to address, since it is entitled to present last now.)

Stingy defense, if you ask me.

JMO

 

[Macright]

Its possible they always saw the Grandmother pick them up and never the mother so maybe seeing a younger person with her didnt set off any red flags. JMO

well I would have thought the opposite..if grandmother usually picked her up and this day a younger person..well that should have set off red flags. JMO

 

[Wondergirl]

Linda Nguyen‏@LindaNguyenPN

#ToriStafford's father, Rodney, tells media that he's disappointed #Rafferty did not testify http://twitpic.com/9g3wbn

 

[nettie_82]

Are there always victim impact statements in a guilty verdict? If so, when are these typically done, at sentencing?

 

[impatientredhead]

Will there be victim impact statements, and if so when are these done typically?

In the States they are done after the verdict is in but before sentencing is handed down. I think Canada does the same

 

[Sillybilly]

Are there always victim impact statements in a guilty verdict? If so, when are these typically done, at sentencing?

Prior to sentencing (if he is found Guilty, of course.).

 

[Kamille]

I think the 18 women she didn't know about broke the camels back. Once they were seperated and he couldn't work his "charm" on her. The state is telling her about all these other women and she is by herself, hurt and getting mad... and we know she has a temper problem.

She did not know about all these women when she confessed. At most she heard about one or two.

MOO

 

[Wondergirl]

2:20
Mike Knoll:

@Friend - after the judge's charge to the jury they are instructed that's one of the first things they should do.

Tuesday May 1, 2012 2:20 Mike Knoll

2:19

[Comment From Friend from Woodstock Friend from Woodstock : ]

When does the jury select a foreman/woman

 

[Sailor Bug]

can Rafferty speak at any point if he whishes to

Mike Knoll: @Guest - should he be found guilty the judge will give him a chance to say something - he won't have to say anything if he doesn't want to.



Is there a minimum and/or maximum time as to how long the jury can deliberate?

Mike Knoll: - no. On a case like this the judge would want a verdict no matter how long it takes.



Will the additional coverage of details not reportable right now begin once the jury is sequestered?

Mike Knoll: - yes.

 

[Wondergirl]

2:21
Mike Knoll:

@Guest - should he be found guilty the judge will give him a chance to say something - he won't have to say anything if he doesn't want to.

2:21

[Comment From Guest 5 Guest 5 : ]

I have asked you a bunch of times today can Rafferty speak at any point if he whishes to

 

[Kamille]

well I would have thought the opposite..if grandmother usually picked her up and this day a younger person..well that should have set off red flags. JMO

Did this witness today even testify that she knew Victoria? I didn't think she did.

MOO

 

[Wondergirl]

More q & a's:

2:26
Mike Knoll:
@guest - it's up to the judge. But in 1st-degree murder trials the sentence is pretty much set in stone and victim impact statements essential aid the judge in determining a sentence.


2:25

[Comment From Guest Guest : ]
mike do you know if in canada they do victim statements when the accused is found guilty? I know this has happened before but not sure if it was just american cases

2:24
Mike Knoll:
@steveo - yes.


2:23

[Comment From steveo steveo : ]
Will the additional coverage of details not reportable right now begin once the jury is sequestered?

2:23
Mike Knoll:
@Alison - no. On a case like this the judge would want a verdict no matter how long it takes.


2:23

[Comment From Alison Alison : ]
Is there a minimum and/or maximum time as to how long the jury can deliberate?

 

[Kamille]

I was hoping MR would take the stand, but didn't seriously believe he would.

There is no requirement for him to take the stand, and the jury will take no inference from it. They will directed by the judge that it doesn't infer innocence of guilt.

Sitting on the witness stand and saying you didn't do something, is about equivalent to telling the police you are innocent..........doesn't do much good.

Very few defendants testify, and juries perform their duties.

JMO..........

Very few defendants are innocent or they wouldn't be on trial in the first place.

MOO

 

[Sailor Bug]

Is Rafferty able to appeal if he is found guilty? If so, does a new trial take place?

Mike Knoll: - if found guilty, he has an automatic right to appeal. If the appeal goes through, he would have the right to a new trial.


mike do you know if in canada they do victim statements when the accused is found guilty? I know this has happened before but not sure if it was just american cases

Mike Knoll: @guest - it's up to the judge. But in 1st-degree murder trials the sentence is pretty much set in stone and victim impact statements essential aid the judge in determining a sentence.

 

[Dmman]

I'm totally confused. What is this? Is that all? If Derstine haven't said already that this is his only witness I would think that there is still a bomb shell to come. I really don't get it. Did MR know that this is all what his lawyer can do for him?

I feel like being in the middle of a joke.

No family from him present...that says a lot.

What a circus. I really don't know what to say. We all expected so much today and that is it? stunned

ITA! I personally believed he plead not guilty in hopes he'd be released at some point per-trial. He had no defense to the crimes he's accused of committing! For a split second this morning, I actually thought Grandmom was going to testify she went along for the ride to MT Forest with MR & TLM & Tori and that she followed MR on his "walk" while TLM murdered little Tori. I was not expecting nothing from Derstine!

 

[JayFriend]

It puzzles me as to why the Crown didn't present the evidence.

The witness went to the police with this information days after the abduction.

She helped LE start looking for a woman with a white puffy coat, but her testimony wasn't credible enough for the Crown to put her on the stand?

Does Derstine now point to this witness...........and tell them that without him revealing the information, they wouldn't have heard this key testimony.

Does he ask the jury how much other information that doesn't suit the allegations, the Crown hasn't disclosed?

Powerful words in front of the jury........to create reasonable doubt.

JMO...........

This witness's testimony is a bit disturbing because it doesn't agree with the teacher's testimony. I'm guessing the Crown didn't want to make either witness look bad by calling them both. It also opens up a can of worms about security at the school. Was the teacher negligent? I'm sure she thinks so and blames herself. Is this witness imagining what she saw? I bet this witness was in the Crown's disclosure and Derstine grabbed her in an effort to shift more blame on TLM and away from his client. I don't think the Crown would have had anything to gain from this witness, but the defence possibly has.