Bosma Murder Trial 05.20.16 - Day 53

[musicaljoke]

So then, this lighter was found in the field in a different area than where MS said the Yukon was parked.

There is no proof either way that this lighter does or does not belong to either MS or DM.

Apparently there were no prints or DNA (assuming it was tested?)

It can't even be entered into evidence.

This lighter could actually belong to someone completely unrelated to the case.

Are we even sure this is a lighter, or a really bright red herring? :thinking:

Yeah, it was obviously disregarded as evidence, but it's a reasonable suggestion that the lighter may have been dropped when the two were up to no good. The crime occurred in early May. The field would have been accessible for only a couple of weeks, since, there would be a snow bank along the road which would take a while to melt away. A farmer is not going to drop a lighter on his or her hay field. Never. Not gonna happen. In the hay field!? No.

How many trespassers would be in that area since the spring thaw? Two that we know of.

 

[Arnie M]

Watching this....I am SHOCKED that the Prosecution didn't pick up on this vehicle seemingly going past the camera three times, twice north and once south. I know there is no way to confirm 100% it is the same vehicle but through my eyes, there is no doubt in my mind that it is the same one. Even the shine coming off the vehicle appears the same...which falls in line with the testimony that Tim had just washed the truck to get ready for the test drive. This would support the idea that all three of them were in the vehicle at the time Tim was shot and it would also fill in the missing time in MS' time line. All my opinion but MS' story never made sense to me and this video supports that. But my main point is related to how LE didn't see this as important enough to point out or, more likely, missed it entirely. MOO

I AGREE !!!.... first time I have seen this version of the SS video .... previously I saw only the Yukon going south at 8:46 and the Yukon and truck going north at 9:20. This changes everything and I have changed my mind AGAIN and no longer believe the MS version where he got dropped off right away.

 

[Prairie_dawg]

To me the only way his story holds any value is if he went to police with it before he was arrested. Once he was arrested then everything becomes a he said/he said.DM was his meal ticket and had MS gone to police after DM was arrested and then for some reason DM gets released....oops! I just buried my free ride. MOO

Agree with you 100% on the empathy thing....none from me. Every time I start to waiver in my thoughts, I remember that both of these guys are also charged with LB's death...clearly LE found enough evidence to charge them. MOO

DWO I am not disagreeing with you but I wanted to point out, for this EXACT reason there is a publication ban. We cannot allow a jury to know about un-convicted charges. In fact I was surprised about un-convicted MS charges coming out, I certainly hope those could not be grounds for mistrial for MS. Until we see exactly what evidence is presented in that case, we cannot assume that any of it has bearing on this case. Its about separating emotion with just the facts in this case.

I am in no way defending the accused but am simply saying we cannot prejudice our verdict with evidence that was not presented by the crown or brought out by defense. I want to see justice in this case whatever that outcome may be. Alot of us have made up our minds and alot of folks seem to be basing their opinions on revenge and/or a popularity contest. We all have an 'opinion' about the accused and I for one do not like either one of them. This trial is not being tried in WS, thank goodness, as I know even I have missed an important piece of evidence here or there, its easy enough to do in our environment here. I trust the jury and reporters and family who attend trial day in day out to have the WHOLE trial picture. I cannot possibly imagine sitting through all of this for 56+ days.

iirc ABRo enlightened us with the fact that not ALL evidence is necessarily put forward as some would be deemed merely chaff and draw out the trial longer, only pertinent evidence makes it into the trial or at least into the narrative. I realize the crown must be careful of omission as the defense can pounce on that and say 'this piece would have exonerated my client etc'. From what we saw today with the lighter, it sounds like defense HAS in fact at their disposal ALL evidence collected regardless whether or not it was presented. (someone in the know, correct me if I am wrong please) I also realize the crown will not testify a surety unless they can say 90-100% that something happened in a certain place or a certain way, they will just throw the evidence out there and let the jury decide. ie GSR drivers side roof vs YES a gun was fired from the driver side.

 

[Juballee]

So then, this lighter was found in the field in a different area than where MS said the Yukon was parked.

There is no proof either way that this lighter does or does not belong to either MS or DM.

Apparently there were no prints or DNA (assuming it was tested?)

It can't even be entered into evidence.

This lighter could actually belong to someone completely unrelated to the case.

Are we even sure this is a lighter, or a really bright red herring? :thinking:

When Sachik introduced the lighter, I had an idea that it was something that DM might have recognized as being MS's from the disclosure photos. If it was his lighter that he dropped, or that of a stranger, there would have been no reason to bring it up, in my opinion. It's not much of a red herring, either as far as I see.

The name on the lighter means it comes from Toronto, so that would lessen the likely hood of it being from a local, and keeping a lighter in a pocket would likely be enough to rub any usable prints off of it, in my opinion.

I agree with the member who said that when you are a smoker you are constantly looking for a lighter, smokers lose them all the time without realizing it. Either way, MS already admitted to being there, I can't see the difference if he was a little deeper in the field or not, personally, he was still there.

 

[Dion]

Well, I'm glad that's over - what a waste of time. MS didn't do himself any favours by testifying, so what was the point? This was his opportunity to come clean and show himself in a better light for the jury. He blew it completely, and just showed himself to be the liar that he is. Did he (or his lawyer) really think that by sticking to the script, he would somehow be more believable. He has the nerve to accuse others of lying under oath, while doing the same, with all his don't remembers.

While I learned nothing new, I'm convinced he knows where the gun is - and he is not saying - no matter what.

MM was beside herself, that night, because she hadn't heard from MS, and thought he had "died or something". She knew about other "missions" and was even planning on taking part in one, so why did this particular night cause her so much concern? Because it was different than the others, and had the potential go really wrong.

We are never going to learn the truth about who actually shot Tim Bosma, but no matter who actually pulled the trigger, both participated in the crime and the cover up. They knew there were going to be "fireworks" that night, and for Mark Smich to now try and claim that he was scared and did whatever DM wanted, is just not believable.

 

[Juballee]

I don't think the truck in the 9:05 and 9:15 videos WAS relevant to the Crown's case at all. They are obviously much more concerned in the 8:46 and 9:20 videos, for obvious reasons.

For everyone else, the 9:05 and 9:15 videos, are very important discussion points. If that is indeed TB's truck, then MS is lying about his story. And if he is lying about his story, he is probably lying about who pulled the trigger. I would say the Crown, and the jury, would be very interested in knowing that, now that MS is telling his version of what happened.

Look forward to hearing your thoughts....

I'm wondering if the crown call call a blood splatter expert to try to determine which direction the bullet came from now that we seem to have two different versions from the defendants? Can they re evaluate the evidence based on the new version of events presents by the witness before proceeding with the crown's cross?

Can an they re-open their case to call Arthur now that there has been new testimonial evidence that he saw the gun?

Is there some reason why they didn't call Arthur that I missed?

 

[Juballee]

If DM went to get gas, where is his receipt with date and time stamp to prove? Even if he paid cash, he would still have a receipt...

The gas station would have had video of the transaction too, where was that in the numerous surveillance cameras that they checked?

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

I'm wondering if the crown call call a blood splatter expert to try to determine which direction the bullet came from now that we seem to have two different versions from the defendants? Can they re evaluate the evidence based on the new version of events presents by the witness before proceeding with the crown's cross?

Can an they re-open their case to call Arthur now that there has been new testimonial evidence that he saw the gun?

Is there some reason why they didn't call Arthur that I missed?

There is a possibility that Dungey might call Arthur as a witness, and/or other witnesses after MS has completed his time on the stand.

MOO

 

[Oreck]

If D doesn't like carpets, he's going to the right place.

 

[canadiangirl]

True, but in fairness, no one was likely looking for him by this point. I think they would have had more than enough time to get to the farm before anyone, save for maybe SB, was even aware what was going on.

SB testified by 1022pm her tenant had gone looking for Tim. When he came back she went out to the nearby bar and on the way she called 911. Police met her at the bar. So that's a pretty quick turn around time IMO

 

[ILoveDateline]

I'm wondering if the crown call call a blood splatter expert to try to determine which direction the bullet came from now that we seem to have two different versions from the defendants? Can they re evaluate the evidence based on the new version of events presents by the witness before proceeding with the crown's cross?

Can an they re-open their case to call Arthur now that there has been new testimonial evidence that he saw the gun?

Is there some reason why they didn't call Arthur that I missed?

The crown already had a blood spatter expert. He couldn't determine where the bullet came from. The missing front seats may have been able to provide him with that data but they were missing/burned. Knowing DM and MS version of events doesn't change that, IMO.

There has been lengthy discussion previously as to why Arthur may or may not testify. My opinion is he is not viewed as a credible witness.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

I don't think the truck in the 9:05 and 9:15 videos WAS relevant to the Crown's case at all. They are obviously much more concerned in the 8:46 and 9:20 videos, for obvious reasons.

For everyone else, the 9:05 and 9:15 videos, are very important discussion points. If that is indeed TB's truck, then MS is lying about his story. And if he is lying about his story, he is probably lying about who pulled the trigger. I would say the Crown, and the jury, would be very interested in knowing that, now that MS is telling his version of what happened.

Look forward to hearing your thoughts....

I agree with what you said about the Crown's case only requiring the evidence that the Yukon went south and that the RAM followed by the Yukon went north.

It will be very interesting to hear the Judge's charges to the jury regarding what must be considered for finding both guilty/not guilty of 1st degree murder.

IMHO, there is overwhelming evidence to show that MS and DM were complicit in planning and following through with their mission, and it really doesn't matter who actually fired the gun, or the true scenario of how it happened. Therefore, IMO, all the SuperSucker times on the video aren't too important in their totality because it is only important to know there is supporting evidence to show that MS and DM arrived in the Yukon, and then left in the Ram with the Yukon following behind.

But, without knowing the intricacies of the law with regard to 1st degree murder, that is only my personal outlook, and certainly not from a legal standpoint. The Judge's charge to the jury will make things so much clearer to the jury.

Thanks to all who post here ... I read every post ... Always enjoy reading other people's perspectives as food for thought, whether or not our opinions coincide.

MOO

 

[andreww]

Yeah, it was obviously disregarded as evidence, but it's a reasonable suggestion that the lighter may have been dropped when the two were up to no good. The crime occurred in early May. The field would have been accessible for only a couple of weeks, since, there would be a snow bank along the road which would take a while to melt away. A farmer is not going to drop a lighter on his or her hay field. Never. Not gonna happen. In the hay field!? No.

How many trespassers would be in that area since the spring thaw? Two that we know of.

The owners son testified that it was common to see people in there if I recall correctly.

 

[lanman]

I AGREE !!!.... first time I have seen this version of the SS video .... previously I saw only the Yukon going south at 8:46 and the Yukon and truck going north at 9:20. This changes everything and I have changed my mind AGAIN and no longer believe the MS version where he got dropped off right away.

I'm with you Arnie. I downloaded the video from youtube, and took screenshots of the first and second passes of the truck, then put them one above the other. They look virtually identical to me. I know it's already been said by the experts that the trucks were similar, but until I just compared the two, I didn't realize how similar they were! It just seems like too much of a coincidence for me not to be the same truck.

 

[andreww]

Well, I'm glad that's over - what a waste of time. MS didn't do himself any favours by testifying, so what was the point? This was his opportunity to come clean and show himself in a better light for the jury. He blew it completely, and just showed himself to be the liar that he is. Did he (or his lawyer) really think that by sticking to the script, he would somehow be more believable. He has the nerve to accuse others of lying under oath, while doing the same, with all his don't remembers.

While I learned nothing new, I'm convinced he knows where the gun is - and he is not saying - no matter what.

MM was beside herself, that night, because she hadn't heard from MS, and thought he had "died or something". She knew about other "missions" and was even planning on taking part in one, so why did this particular night cause her so much concern? Because it was different than the others, and had the potential go really wrong.

We are never going to learn the truth about who actually shot Tim Bosma, but no matter who actually pulled the trigger, both participated in the crime and the cover up. They knew there were going to be "fireworks" that night, and for Mark Smich to now try and claim that he was scared and did whatever DM wanted, is just not believable.

I think Smich did himself a huge favour by testifying and I think that at least one juror will believe that his version of events is possible.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

I'm with you Arnie. I downloaded the video from youtube, and took screenshots of the first and second passes of the truck, then put them one above the other. They look virtually identical to me. I know it's already been said by the experts that the trucks were similar, but until I just compared the two, I didn't realize how similar they were! It just seems like too much of a coincidence for me not to be the same truck.

View attachment 94943

Thank you for doing this!

 

[canadiangirl]

I think Smich did himself a huge favour by testifying and I think that at least one juror will believe that his version of events is possible.

I agree. Based on the comments here which would be similar to a jury's knowledge. I'd say so far he's casted some doubt in someone on the jury thus far.

 

[andreww]

I'm with you Arnie. I downloaded the video from youtube, and took screenshots of the first and second passes of the truck, then put them one above the other. They look virtually identical to me. I know it's already been said by the experts that the trucks were similar, but until I just compared the two, I didn't realize how similar they were! It just seems like too much of a coincidence for me not to be the same truck.

View attachment 94943

You don't think it could just be another black RAM? You can't swing a dead cat in these parts without hitting a RAM.

 

[JuneBug67]

If D doesn't like carpets, he's going to the right place.

I LOLd.

 

[andreww]

I agree. Based on the comments here which would be similar to a jury's knowledge. I'd say so far he's casted some doubt in someone on the jury thus far.

For sure he has. His other positive is that all the people that testified against him were obviously lying about various things. So you have the fact that he was there plus a couple of suggestive texts. Is it enough?