Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #17 [06.03.16 to 06.09.16]

[sleuther76]

To me this should be so obvious, of course TD not just danced around certain topics, but IMO probably helped Smich craft his whole story based on what had been presented at Trail. This is what a good Lawyer does, it should be no surprise to anyone.

Ethical lawyers do not help their clients craft their stories ... that would be highly unethical.

 

[Abitcountry]

There was some discussion a few days ago on these threads about MS's 'SAY10' graffiti. One poster said they saw the tag on a train, and there was some discussion about how intricate it was etc & it could not have been made by MS. In an April NP article I found an example of it MS had drawn on his hand:

Source: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/c...cific-model-truck-tim-bosma-was-selling-crown

Well, I am the one who saw the tag on the side of a train car.
Thanks so much for posting this again, I had forgotten that it was up some time ago.
So I have taken a good hard look at this tag written in pink.....this tag is done in block style letters while what I saw was a single line for the letters and the numerals. I will say this, the top stroke of the S and the first downward stroke of the S are similar in style to the way the entire letter was drawn that I had observed. The long tail on the Y is similar too.
This small tag was done with a pen nibbed marker or Sharpee.....I don't know if he would have done it this same way with a can of spray paint.....interesting though...thanks again.
(Looks a whole lot less threatening when it is presented in a henna style hand drawing !!!)

 

[Webulls]

Let's see....I can choose to believe the evidence presented by the Crown, and summarized eloquently during the Crown's closing argument. Crown has no reason to lie. Mr. Leitch isn't facing 25 in the can.

Or, I can choose to question the Crown's evidence of premeditation, execution, and incineration by giving equal value to a wholly concocted story spun by a desperate drug addict & drug dealer, alcoholic, career criminal, never had a single job in his life (now 28 years old), girlfriend abuser, punk, gangster wannabe with selective amnesia, thief, liar, degenerate, and world class . And now, add murderer.

This is really what it distills down to.

I don't think the jury is that stupid. MS's act on the stand fooled nobody. The moment he claimed not to remember where he buried the gun (about an hour into his testimony), it was game over for his show and tell. Meaning, it was abundantly clear that his narrative was a complete fabrication, quite obviously crafted to fit the Crown's evidence.

I do not care how much pot you smoke. Nobody forgets where they buried a gun.

M1 for both. The Crown's not lying. The evidence is not lying. Only MS is lying.

 

[DMB]

Went back through the Tweets of BDs testimony. Dungey went nowhere near mentioning BD and MS being together in that last meeting. His cross was mainly about BD saying MS had a gun.

BD testified that he saw Millard and had let him into the apartment which was the only day that DM had stopped by. The crown had their opportunity as well as DM's defence to question but did not, same question can be asked about them, why not?

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

Millard did too, he just had absolutely nothing to work with.

Yes, that is true. All the defence lawyers did the very best they could with what they had.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

BD testified that he saw Millard and had let him into the apartment which was the only day that DM had stopped by. The crown had their opportunity as well as DM's defence to question but did not, same question can be asked about them, why not?

The crown wouldn't have known what MS was going to say. TD should have known and used it to strengthen MS testimony. Most likely is BD just left, but again we don't know.

And you are right. I didn't put it together that DM was only at the apartment once.

 

[ILoveDateline]

BD testified that he saw Millard and had let him into the apartment which was the only day that DM had stopped by. The crown had their opportunity as well as DM's defence to question but did not, same question can be asked about them, why not?

Is this true? I don't remember that. I'm gonna look. Thanks.

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

Haha I knew that was going to be the next point. .But truly unclear whether MS testimony was premeditated with his lawyer. If so, I'm sure they discussed how it was supposed to happen. Or his lawyer has told him how it should happen. But all scenarios don't always go as you think they will. Or led to believe. Even from those you trust.

In fact they probably took notes, which I'm sure we could have a hayday with putting them into context.

Thanks for the afternoon discussion. Have a good weekend folks

BBM

Aha! So it is YOU who is the mind reader then.

I assure you that for all the unforeseens so that you mentioned in your post, a skilled lawyer will have well thought out contingency plans as well.

MOO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[spanishshara]

Now that this trial is almost finished I wonder what Madeline Burns is thinking. Not like she showed up for her son. Interesting that Smich's mother and sister came from time to time.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

I found this article on the net regarding rebuttal evidence in Canada:


REBUTTAL OF EVIDENCE
This is a separate category of evidence, presented by the prosecution, when required, to refute or disprove some aspect of the defence case.

Four criteria must be adhered to when presenting rebuttal evidence.
These criteria for presenting Rebuttal Evidence are that it must be presented:
a. At the conclusion of the defence.
b. When defence presents unforeseen evidence.
c. With permission of the court.
d. To "rebut" or disprove new or other defence evidence.


http://teacherweb.com/ON/PerthDistr...tar/Rules-of-Evidence-in-Canada-from-RCMP.pdf




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[XiolaBlueX]

Hey all - I have a couple of completely hypothetical and purely speculative questions if that's ok ---- curious of different points of view. I drove by the field/TB residence area today, and my mind was moving around on a couple of things
1) why do you think MS didn't just drop off DM at the house and be that friend 'lost, trying to find a Tim Hortons' msged of parking it nearby like that and having to both show up
2) when MS and DM got to the TB residence, what if TB had just given them the keys for the truck to take a quick test drive (a stretch, I know, but I'm sure some people have done it) Do you think they would have (obviously) just taken the truck.... and been happy about that? Or do you think that they were premeditating it to the extent that they would be disappointed that they didn't get to kill somebody?

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

Hey all - I have a couple of completely hypothetical and purely speculative questions if that's ok ---- curious of different points of view. I drove by the field/TB residence area today, and my mind was moving around on a couple of things
1) why do you think MS didn't just drop off DM at the house and be that friend 'lost, trying to find a Tim Hortons' msged of parking it nearby like that and having to both show up
2) when MS and DM got to the TB residence, what if TB had just given them the keys for the truck to take a quick test drive (a stretch, I know, but I'm sure some people have done it) Do you think they would have (obviously) just taken the truck.... and been happy about that? Or do you think that they were premeditating it to the extent that they would be disappointed that they didn't get to kill somebody?

Well... completely speculative but..
1) Would depend on their plan, perhaps they wanted to over power TB or have the guy in the backseat with the weapon. Hard to really know.
2) Again hard to say, but I would guess when you give someone your keys you also get something from them so they just don't steal the car (like their license or their keys or something). So may have completely foiled their plan.

 

[Redwing]

Hey all - I have a couple of completely hypothetical and purely speculative questions if that's ok ---- curious of different points of view. I drove by the field/TB residence area today, and my mind was moving around on a couple of things
1) why do you think MS didn't just drop off DM at the house and be that friend 'lost, trying to find a Tim Hortons' msged of parking it nearby like that and having to both show up
2) when MS and DM got to the TB residence, what if TB had just given them the keys for the truck to take a quick test drive (a stretch, I know, but I'm sure some people have done it) Do you think they would have (obviously) just taken the truck.... and been happy about that? Or do you think that they were premeditating it to the extent that they would be disappointed that they didn't get to kill somebody?

It really does make you wonder. I think they would have been happy to take the truck but eventually they would have found a reason to get to murder someone else.
As to your first part of question 2-- when I was selling a car a few years back I let test drivers take it on their own. More for not trusting someone else's driving skills. Think I photo copied their license though AND of course they arrived with their own car. If someone had been "dropped off" (I have a long country driveway ) I would be even more suspicious if the friend didn't at least drive up the 200 ft to drop them (as opposed to letting off at the road). A friend wound make sure it was the right house etc.

 

[Redwing]

Well... completely speculative but..
1) Would depend on their plan, perhaps they wanted to over power TB or have the guy in the backseat with the weapon. Hard to really know.
2) Again hard to say, but I would guess when you give someone your keys you also get something from them so they just don't steal the car (like their license or their keys or something). So may have completely foiled their plan.

i wondered why not one person alone on test drive but you're right--! They needed both of them to over power and both of them to have a weapon in the backseat.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

I am hoping that WSer Juballee might be able to answer my question as it pertains to something she posted a couple of months ago. But, if anyone else knows the answer, please feel free to step in [emoji846]

I also realize that this isn't of importance, it is simply curiosity on my part, due to a few of the text messages we have seen.

I was searching the threads to see if I could find anything about "Scott" or "Scotty". I came across this post from Juballee for which I made a screenshot, because Tapatalk doesn't seem to let me post a link to a WS comment.

Anyhow, Juballee, you mention Scotty in this post, and that the Crown asked LW2 his last name and other info and was satisfied with LW2's answers (paraphrasing), but that the media didn't fully tweet or explain about Scotty, thus keeping him a mystery.

I am guessing that you must have attended court that day in order to know this?

If that is the case, could you please share anymore info about what you heard about Scotty's relationship with DM and LW2, or was this something that was discussed without the jury present?

TIA

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Alethea Dice]

Hey all - I have a couple of completely hypothetical and purely speculative questions if that's ok ---- curious of different points of view. I drove by the field/TB residence area today, and my mind was moving around on a couple of things
1) why do you think MS didn't just drop off DM at the house and be that friend 'lost, trying to find a Tim Hortons' msged of parking it nearby like that and having to both show up
2) when MS and DM got to the TB residence, what if TB had just given them the keys for the truck to take a quick test drive (a stretch, I know, but I'm sure some people have done it) Do you think they would have (obviously) just taken the truck.... and been happy about that? Or do you think that they were premeditating it to the extent that they would be disappointed that they didn't get to kill somebody?

1) If murder was the plan, DM would have to think that he could do it all alone - take control of TB, shoot him and drive all at the same time - with no assistance, then MS could have been that lost friend and stayed away from the house in the Yukon. There would have been no reason for both of them to go on the actual test drive. It makes no sense for them to walk up together if DM was just going to drop MS off as soon as they left the driveway. Even if murder wasn't the plan, it still makes no sense to drop MS off immediately. Just another reason why MS's story is not believable.

2) If they had been allowed to take the test drive alone, which would be unlikely without leaving some assurance behind but if that did happen, I think they would have just driven away. But then, I'm not convinced that murder was the plan.

 

[CJPRINCESS]

BD testified that he saw Millard and had let him into the apartment which was the only day that DM had stopped by. The crown had their opportunity as well as DM's defence to question but did not, same question can be asked about them, why not?

Is this true? I don't remember that. I'm gonna look. Thanks.

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

Ok, I remember this being tweeted but can not find this on AC's trial blog. Maybe SC or MH tweeted this but AC didn't? I've read AC'S blog 5 times (both April 5th and 6th) Crown and defense and reexamination by Crown. Unless I need my glasses, I didn't see it.

 

[DMB]

It's on day 30 page 19

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 2m2 minutes ago
May 7-10, did he have interaction with Smich and Millard together? One time let Millard into apartment building. Nothing unusual.

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 3m3 minutes ago
Asked about Smich at that point he says he didn't notice anything unusual. "Not really no." #Bosma

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 3m3 minutes ago
"It wasn't until after Dell got arrested that I think I noticed a change," he says. #Bosma

I would have assumed the police and the crown would have been all over that. The only person who saw them together right before DM's arrest???

 

[Oreck]

Hey all - I have a couple of completely hypothetical and purely speculative questions if that's ok ---- curious of different points of view. I drove by the field/TB residence area today, and my mind was moving around on a couple of things
1) why do you think MS didn't just drop off DM at the house and be that friend 'lost, trying to find a Tim Hortons' msged of parking it nearby like that and having to both show up.

Please excuse me if my formatting doesn't turn out right.

Thank-you XiolaBlueX, you bring up a very good point
MS would have much rather just stayed in the Yukon and listened to tunes and then pulled in behind the Bosma truck as it drove past.
Rather he walked half a km. and risked being seen by whom ever.
It might have been part of the plan that he be in the Bosma truck on the way back to the field or as they pulled into it.
You have an interesting angle on this.
Crown might be right as to where the murder actually happened.

Other than this, I was on the fence until I read Post # 14 on this thread.

By NashBridges2
You looked at it, as a whole, and that's exactly what the crown asked the jury to do. Sure, every piece of evidence against both of them could have an explanation. But when there's so much that needs to be explained, it's time to stop and think, okay, is this reasonable?
The evidence for pre-med murder in this case is not as strong as the evidence in the truck theft. You're right. But when you look at it, as a whole, it all fits. Nobody acts that way, celebrates, cleans up, destroys evidence and continues to be BFF with a man who just surprised you and kills someone. We aren't wired that way. Had MS not known t was going to happen, MM would have noticed he wasn't sleeping, he was distracted, he wasn't eating, a huge change in his demeanour. Nobody witnesses an unplanned murder and just walks away, unscathed.

 

[Georgeo]

Ethical lawyers do not help their clients craft their stories ... that would be highly unethical.

The whole defending their client vigorously irregardless of what they did to victim is tough for me to come to terms with. It is clear both of them were with TB in the last moments of his life. No denying he was killed and incinerated, yet they are defended from taking ownership of clearly caused the death of a kind and reputable man.

Both of of them deserve life in prison, not just 25 years, but rest of their natural lives. Tough sentences should deter killing. Had they had a chance to hide or burn more evidence, imagine them getting away with it?

Both guilty of murder 1. Moo