Bosma Murder Trial 04.25.16 - Day 39

[andreww]

I'm not even sure why this is an issue here. MM didn't mention she was abused, DM's defense did and she responded in the affirmative. I can only guess that was brought up to show that MS is an abusive creep and entirely capable of hurting someone to get what he wants. Taking the spotlight off of DM for a moment and causing the jury to think the worst of MS.

But really, it all seems like smoke and mirrors to me. The defense really has nothing except pointing fingers at each other's client because they both know they're both guilty. Now it's just a matter of which side can make the other side look more like a vile monster. To me, they both do.

moo.

How did that information get to the attorney's do you think? There is only two possibilities;

- Smich told his attorneys he was abusing MM (Not likely)
- MM made it know during her police interview.

So lets not give her a pass because she was asked about it. She was only asked about it because she told them about it.

 

[andreww]

I think maybe I thought she would know more, have more information of what went down from convo's with MS after DM was arrested. But she did bring some damning evidence to the table. She may have some inconsistency, some half truths being twisted around, caught in a few lies. But i feel more that the lies are more fear, confusion, stress and the fact she was not 100 percent truthful when first talking to police making her second guess certain events...then outright lying on the stand to protect MS.

I would love to know how many women here think being called a man's b**** equals being called his girl or "friend" It is not OK in any situation. Girls that allow this tend to be victims with low self esteem. Whether or not it's the gangster lingo....it is absolutley derogatory, abusive, made to make a female feel worthless and like a piece of mans property. Disgusting talk, more the talk of an abuser then a "gangster"!!

Pick up any of the latest RAP albums and listen. Whether you like it or not, thats the way it is.

 

[Prairie_dawg]

I thought we were not supposed to pick apart a witness. Remember how talk got shutdown fast when we commented on the book keeper?

MM is NOT on trial here, she has given damning evidence on MS as well as DM (although jury is not supposed to use that, they are human and likely will)

DM and MS imho will be convicted the day is coming, no need to vilify MM, she is like the rest, may or may not have known more and likely did not do the right thing at the right time IMO.

 

[RandomName479]

How did that information get to the attorney's do you think? There is only two possibilities;

- Smich told his attorneys he was abusing MM (Not likely)
- MM made it know during her police interview.

So lets not give her a pass because she was asked about it. She was only asked about it because she told them about it.

BBM - How in the world do you know this for a fact? IMO you are stating opinions as facts and vilifying the witness.

DM may have told his attorneys about the abuse to try and make MS look like he could have been more involved in the murder......it was brought up by DM's defense team.....not the Crown.....we have a series of witnesses testifying to MS and violence......she is not the only one.....all MOO

 

[Camel]

How did that information get to the attorney's do you think? There is only two possibilities;

- Smich told his attorneys he was abusing MM (Not likely)
- MM made it know during her police interview.

So lets not give her a pass because she was asked about it. She was only asked about it because she told them about it.

It was DM's defence that brought it up so I think there's actually a third option. DM told his lawyer he'd seen MS abuse her hoping he could use it against MS. If the defence teams are going to point the finger at the other guy (which it clearly seems to indicate both defence teams will do) it's pretty advantageous for DM to use it as a "Hey, look at what a jerk this guy was, I even saw him abuse her".

 

[andreww]

It was DM's defence that brought it up so I think there's actually a third option. DM told his lawyer he'd seen MS abuse her hoping he could use it against MS. If the defence teams are going to point the finger at the other guy (which it clearly seems to indicate both defence teams will do) it's pretty advantageous for DM to use it as a "Hey, look at what a jerk this guy was, I even saw him abuse her".

Something tells me that physical abuse would have been between the two of them. I doubt Millard would have known anything about it.

 

[EspressoBean]

I don't think abuse should be the focus here. The DM defense is using it to depict MS in a different light to counter the way MS defense is trying to show DM as the controller and MS as the victim.
But I wanted to post this to hopefully help increase understanding about partner abuse and recognize that if MM is telling the truth, her relationship with MS and her actions in the relationship do not contradict what is known about abusive relationships.
This brief simple article can be found here: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/enlightened-living/200807/understanding-the-dynamics-abusive-relationships

A snippet from the article:
"Let's look at social abuse. Have you ever had a boss who praises you one minute, and makes you wonder if you'll have a job tomorrow the next? Or let's you work yourself to the bone on a project, only to take credit or give the credit to someone else? That's an abusive dynamic. Your boss has a need to control you because s/he is threatened by you, or has a sense of insecurity about his/her own ability to motivate or lead. And you have a need for a job -- a metaphor for being loved - so you put up with it; you submit.

The abuser is also driven by a more subtle and primitive sense of fear. Because s/he is often limited in his/her social perspective, and sees things only from an egocentric perspective (i.e., has not developed a sense of ethnocentric compassion), s/he will lash out when s/he sees no other options."

The victim, on the other hand, tends to be an emotional anorexic. Starving themselves, or allowing him/herself to be starved and then gorging themselves on whatever comes his/her way only to feel guilty about it later because of a sense of not deserving what s/he has received; a state of mind that drives his/her neediness - needing, not having...having, not wanting...needing, again.

Sometimes for the victim there is also a sense of familiarity and comfort in an abusive relationship, which is why victims will often return to an abusive relationship or, leaving one, will unconsciously seek out another.

Think about growing up. Was there something that your family did that was unusual (sitting around at night, singing together or working in a community garden) that you just assumed everyone did, and you were later surprised to find that you were mistaken? It's the same thing - if you are socialized to equate love with pain or withholding, then you will seek out love in that form."

 

[Ontario Mom]

I think maybe I thought she would know more, have more information of what went down from convo's with MS after DM was arrested. But she did bring some damning evidence to the table. She may have some inconsistency, some half truths being twisted around, caught in a few lies. But i feel more that the lies are more fear, confusion, stress and the fact she was not 100 percent truthful when first talking to police making her second guess certain events...then outright lying on the stand to protect MS.

I would love to know how many women here think being called a man's b**** equals being called his girl or "friend" It is not OK in any situation. Girls that allow this tend to be victims with low self esteem. Whether or not it's the gangster lingo....it is absolutley derogatory, abusive, made to make a female feel worthless and like a piece of mans property. Disgusting talk, more the talk of an abuser then a "gangster"!!

Frankly I find it incredibly demeaning but I do know there are some sub-cultures (if that's the right word) where it's common. Sadly, I think women in those situations have pretty much zero self-respect to begin with. I do think MM was crazy in love with MS because to her, at the time, he seemed like the best thing going. I can only imagine how she looks back now and thinks "what the heck was I thinking??". I'm guessing she does, especially in light of recent public exposure due to her testimony. Most women who were ever in such wretched relationships don't have a public spotlight shined on it the way she now does.

 

[Ontario Mom]

How did that information get to the attorney's do you think? There is only two possibilities;

- Smich told his attorneys he was abusing MM (Not likely)
- MM made it know during her police interview.

So lets not give her a pass because she was asked about it. She was only asked about it because she told them about it.

Option 3: DM told his attorney how MS treated MM and DM's defense decided to use that to make MS look worse than he already does.

I don't know that either of us have proof one way or another how that information got into the hands of DM's defense. Regardless, MM isn't the one on trial. She just happens to be the unfortunate ex GF of one that is.

 

[dar107]

Yep, I realize it is all over rap, just like being a pimp is glorified as the ultimate career choice of the young black man............does not make it right or acceptable. This type of thinking and desensitizing, giant leaps and bounds backward for women and equality IMO.

MM may have brought it up because she was asked............we are not privy to her complete statements that I am aware of. In any event the fact she was most likely abused by MS helps explain her actions in wanting to keep believing him...typical victim behavior IMO, believe he won't hit me again, believe he didn't do these awful things, believe if I try to cover some things for him, its ok because he really was not that involved, believe if I have a baby he is going to man up marry me be a great dad love me forever, etc.

 

[Lochlynsmom]

:ignore: me today. Clearly I am following a different trial then some here.

 

[meterclicks]

Back at the Tim Bosma trial again today. We're scheduled to start at 9:30 a.m. this morning for legal arguments, with open court to start at 10 a.m.
by Adam Carter 9:22 AM

We're underway now in legal arguments. I'll let everyone know when the jury is in and testimony starts.
by Adam Carter 9:33 AM

 

[JuneBug67]

Not excluding him in the grand scheme, just in a particular context - MS and DM had that brotherly love-thing going on. It's the only texts/communication I have seen a hint of something human. Outside of that small snip in time, they were equal opportunity users and abusers.

Nobody is ever in an equal relationship with a psychopath, and the love only flows one way. Smich is going to spend at least the next 25 years in prison realizing every day how stupid he was to allow his own dark impulses and perhaps his need for a strong male bond to make him vulnerable to the calculated siren song of Millard's grandiose schemes. Millard on the other hand is going to spend the next decades continuing to do pirouettes in his head and using and manipulating anybody still within his reach.

 

[Mikala]

I'm not even sure why this is an issue here. MM didn't mention she was abused, DM's defense did and she responded in the affirmative. I can only guess that was brought up to show that MS is an abusive creep and entirely capable of hurting someone to get what he wants. Taking the spotlight off of DM for a moment and causing the jury to think the worst of MS.

But really, it all seems like smoke and mirrors to me. The defense really has nothing except pointing fingers at each other's client because they both know they're both guilty. Now it's just a matter of which side can make the other side look more like a vile monster. To me, they both do.

moo.

MM may have written about being abused when she was questioned by police and wrote her numerous statements. We've not seen those statements, but I believe the jury will have copies of everything. Yes, this is a case where the defendants are pointing at each other. But we still must keep in mind that one of them may be innocent of murder, or intent to murder, albeit intending to commit robbery or even armed robbery. MOO

 

[mozzagirl]

:ignore: me today. Clearly I am following a different trial then some here.

I feel the same. I discovered the ignore function on here today.

 

[MorningStar22]

I feel the same. I discovered the ignore function on here today.

There is actually an ignore button? I thought I just had to do it in my head!!!

 

[Ontario Mom]

MM may have written about being abused when she was questioned by police and wrote her numerous statements. We've not seen those statements, but I believe the jury will have copies of everything. Yes, this is a case where the defendants are pointing at each other. But we still must keep in mind that one of them may be innocent of murder, or intent to murder, albeit intending to commit robbery or even armed robbery. MOO

I don't believe either of them are innocent of any of the charges. If nothing else (and there is plenty "else"), their demeanor in the Yukon the morning after Tim was incinerated, speaks horrific volumes. Innocent men do not "celebrate" after they've killed a man and burned his remains.

moo

 

[EspressoBean]

MM may have written about being abused when she was questioned by police and wrote her numerous statements. We've not seen those statements, but I believe the jury will have copies of everything. Yes, this is a case where the defendants are pointing at each other. But we still must keep in mind that one of them may be innocent of murder, or intent to murder, albeit intending to commit robbery or even armed robbery. MOO

My understanding is that the jury will only have copies of things that are entered into evidence. Legal arguments involve what things can be entered into evidence and are relevant for the jury. The jury would only be distracted from the details of the trial if they had thousands of pages of statements to read through and decide what was truth.

 

[MorningStar22]

Hey SnooperDuper, totally off-topic as we wait for court to start - I was reading through the WS archives last night about MWJ, and your music video synopses had me in stitches. You have a gift for translating gansta!

 

[mozzagirl]

There is actually an ignore button? I thought I just had to do it in my head!!!

Ya! Click on the username of the poster you would like to ignore and when it goes to their profile there is an "add to ignore list" option on the left side of the page.