Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I would like to hear from the 5 that voted yes. What did you base you vote on????
I voted yes because it's obvious that TLM was the other perpetrator here. And she has given LE a detailed account of what happened that day. She was not alone. This is huge. Just think of all the other cases we follow on here where the evidence is circumstantial at best and there are no eyewitness accounts and they are convicted. We have the other participant here telling the jury exactly what happened. MR has no alibi for that day and evidence likely points to him as the other participant so I really don't see how his defence is going to get him a not guilty verdict.
I think TLM's testimony will be riveting. She has taken responsibility for her part and she is not wasting the taxpayer's dollars with a trial. Nor did she try to cut a plea deal like Homolka. While the defence is going to try to smash her credibility with her past actions, her actions when she confessed are going to outweigh that in the minds of jurors IMO. She was instrumental in bringing Victoria home to her family and took responsibility for her part in this horror. That will count for something.
Because there was a kidnapping involved, MR has no choice but to go for broke here, and I can understand why he has chosen to considering his family is willing to provide him with decent legal counsel, but unless he has indisputable evidence that he could not have been the other person, and obviously he does not, then he is going to be charged for this crime. There is no reasonable doubt here. Either he was there or he wasn't. No one can not have any alibi for approximately 7 hours of the day unless it was the middle of the night and they were home alone sound asleep.
Personally I think he is wasting the taxpayers and his mother's money but that's his right.
MOO
How do you know his mother or his family is actually footing the bill? Are you 100% sure that his lawyer wasn't hired through legal aid (which a lot of criminal lawyers do).
We have no way of knowing what his defence counsel has in way of refuting the evidence, they do not have an obligation to provide disclosure to the Crown (unless there are special circumstances i.e., the Bernardo tapes that were found in the ceiling), only the Crown has an obligation to provide full disclosure. No one actually knows whether TLM tried to make a deal or not. Just because her lawyer said she didn't try, doesn't mean there wasn't an attempt. Anyway, this all JMHO.
Will Michael Rafferty be found guilty of first degree murder in the case of Victoria Stafford?
That would be some bad luck if he decided to have a nap from 3:30pm-10:30pm and turned his phone off and lent his precious car to his girlfriend and she and another guy used it to kidnap and murder a little girl. The nerve of her after he gassed it up and everything for her just before the abduction. What are the odds? :waitasec:
MOO
We do not know what evidence LE have, but by Jimminy, they must have something substantial. We do not put people in jail just because we "think" they "might" be involved. Nor do we jail them for their own protection.
And the way his friends were talking about his love of cars, I highly doubt MR would have lent(sp?) his car to anyone, especially not to a not-so-serious girlfriend (if she was actually that).