GUILTY Canada - William Staples, 67, & Rhonda Borelli, 36, murdered, Binbrook, Ont, Jan 1998

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5024170-live-mark-staples-double-murder-trial/

8 hours ago |
Staples trial: Accused tried to get sister to withdraw cash, detective suggests
Warning: graphic content
Mark Staples leaves court in this Spectator file photo
Hamilton Spectator
By Susan Clairmont

Perhaps Rhonda's final words, uttered to her angry and desperate brother, were this: "I'm telling Dad."

That might have been enough to send Mark Staples over the edge. To, possibly, slit his sister's throat in a cold drive shed on the family farm.

....

Mark cut her throat, Arnold says.

Forensics showed a lot of decay and maggots around the neck. There was a stain of Rhonda's blood on the drive shed floor.

Calls to the house that afternoon go unanswered.

Bill stops at the corner store and arrives home shortly after 7 p.m. As soon as he pulls up, he knows "something's amiss," says Arnold.

He gets out quickly, leaving his phone in the car, something he never does.

Mark doesn't attack him in the house. There are no signs of a struggle or violence there. And not in the laneway, where they could be seen from the road.

Arnold points to a photo of the farm and says "Murder No. 2, right there," indicating a spot behind the drive shed. A spot Mark would later snowplow.

Bill's skull "broken into 140 pieces."

Maybe with the crowbar found in Bill's truck?

"I had nothing to do with nothing," insists Mark.

"Why should I believe you?" asks Arnold.

Mark pauses before answering.

"I don't know."
....
 
Today's news report (BBM):

Wow, took 12 years to make this arrest.. seems they had little in the way of concrete evidence.. so little that the defence felt they had nothing to defend?? Just wow.

Defence calls no evidence in Mark Staples double-murder trial
7 hours ago
Hamilton Spectator
The defence team representing Mark Staples at his double murder trial is not calling any evidence, the jury heard Thursday.
....
The eight women and four men of the jury have been dismissed by Justice Harrison Arrell until Nov. 20 when the Crown will make its closing arguments.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5026725-defence-calls-no-evidence-in-mark-staples-double-murder-trial/
 
This looks like a slam dunk --- jury will not take a long time to deliver a decision -- hopefully closing arguments will be quick too.
 
Looks like a slam dunk for the prosecution, to me. What are you thinking?

This looks like a slam dunk --- jury will not take a long time to deliver a decision -- hopefully closing arguments will be quick too.
 
Looks like a slam dunk for the prosecution, to me. What are you thinking?

With so little to digest....don't think that the jury is going to spend too much time ''thinking about it''. Given that there doesn't seem to be much from the ''defence'', the question will be how ''credible'' the PT presented their case. JMO - seems to be obvious to me MS will be found guilty.

How much jail time do you think he will get will be the next ?
 
I wasn't really hearing much from MSM in the way of evidence, unless I missed something.. what would they be able to convict based on? It will be interesting to hear the closing arguments for sure, and also the judge's instructions to the jury.

I figured that since it took SO long for LE to have enough evidence to lay charges, that we would hear a big bombshell at trial, but... I just didn't hear anything at all that would say he did it. I am very disappointed in the case presented (at least as far as what has been reported in the news, but then again, there has only been the one reporter present at trial, and I believe she has missed some days) by the prosecution.

Has it ever happened before where at a jury trial the defence would present absolutely nothing? I'm going to research that a little to see if so, what the outcomes were.

With so little to digest....don't think that the jury is going to spend too much time ''thinking about it''. Given that there doesn't seem to be much from the ''defence'', the question will be how ''credible'' the PT presented their case. JMO - seems to be obvious to me MS will be found guilty.

How much jail time do you think he will get will be the next ?
 
I wasn't really hearing much from MSM in the way of evidence, unless I missed something.. what would they be able to convict based on? It will be interesting to hear the closing arguments for sure, and also the judge's instructions to the jury.

I figured that since it took SO long for LE to have enough evidence to lay charges, that we would hear a big bombshell at trial, but... I just didn't hear anything at all that would say he did it. I am very disappointed in the case presented (at least as far as what has been reported in the news, but then again, there has only been the one reporter present at trial, and I believe she has missed some days) by the prosecution.

Has it ever happened before where at a jury trial the defence would present absolutely nothing? I'm going to research that a little to see if so, what the outcomes were.

It's a weird one --- we haven't had much in the news about it.....just seems all too convenient about the financial issues...we haven't heard a peep about fingerprints in the vehicle where bodies were found etc. ....

Slam dunk -- quick answer -- yeah or nay and no in between ((based on the little bits we've heard)) Can't see that there is much for the jury to re-examine

My impression that he is guilty is just based on impression that the accused seemed desperate and greedy ((MOO)) -- if I was sitting in the court room I might have a different impression based on what was presented as evidence.
 
The Prosecution's closing:

12 hours ago | Vote 0 0
Someone helped Staples move bodies: Crown
Prosecution submits closing arguments to attentive jury, victims' family and curious faithful

Hamilton Spectator
By Susan Clairmont
....
A neighbour's evidence of seeing one vehicle drive up to the Staples farm at about 11:30 p.m. on Friday, Jan. 16, 1998 — the day the murders probably took place — and two vehicles leaving, "is likely Mark and his confederate coming to move the bodies." The bodies were placed in the back of Bill's pickup truck, then moved to an interim location and on to a Toronto parking lot two days later, suggests the Crown, where they would go unfound for five months.
.....
For two hours, Leitch led them through the Crown's evidence, pointing out many "lies" in Mark's accounting of his finances and whereabouts.

Mark lied to police about the amount of money he owed his father and his other creditors. He lied to police that he was still farming. He lied when he said Bill signed a $20,000 cheque made out to him and then changed his story and said he'd forged Bill's signature. And then he lied when he said he told police the truth about the cheque.
....
The murders happened between Jan. 16 and 19, 1998. Leitch pointed out Mark's "lies" about where he was during that time period and questions his story that on Jan. 18 he spent the day at the casino in Niagara Falls with his girlfriend, Nella Bradt. There is no corroborating evidence of that and the Crown suggests that is the day the bodies were moved to the parking lot in Toronto.

The defence is expected to close its case Friday.

http://www.insidehalton.com/news-story/5149775-clairmont-someone-helped-staples-move-bodies-crown/
 
Jury begins deliberations on Monday.

The Defence's closing:

2 hours ago | Vote 0 0
Inheritance motive ‘makes no sense,’ Staples’ defence team says
Hamilton Spectator
By Susan Clairmont

....

"If Mark Staples was looking to inherit the estate as quickly as possible, why would he hide the bodies of his father and sister in a sealed pickup truck bed in the farthest reaches of a Park 'n Fly lot in Toronto?" Sciarra asked. "One would have to know that they wouldn't be found for many months."

Bill's estate could not be settled until the bodies were found and he and Rhonda were officially declared deceased.

"Yet the Crown would have you believe that he committed these crimes to save his so-called dream, Mulligan's," the lawyer said.
The defence's closing address, which was two hours long, is really the first time the jury has heard the defence theory during the seven-week trial. While the Crown called about 100 witnesses, the defence chose to call none.

Justice Harrison Arrell began his charge to the jury Friday afternoon, and the jurors are expected to begin deliberations Monday.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5151150-inheritance-motive-makes-no-sense-staples-defence-team-says/
 
Given that his father would never forgiven the breach of trust by having his son forge a cheque for $20K demonstrates ((to me)) that that alone could trigger a coverup by the accused. Even though it may have taken months to find the bodies -- all the dust would have settled from his failed business venture, bankruptcy settled etc and then he would have access to the $ ((all just MOO)).

I don't think it's going to take the jury a long time Monday....
 
Staples double murder verdict now in the hands of the jury
Mark Staples leaves court earlier this fall. The jury began deliberations Monday on whether he is guilty of killing his father and sister.

Hamilton Spectator
By Susan Clairmont


....

The eight women and four men of the jury began deliberations at 1 p.m. today, instructed by Justice Harrison Arrell that they must find Mark Staples guilty or not guilty of two counts of first degree murder in the deaths of his father and sister. No lesser charge is to be considered.

A first degree murder conviction comes with an automatic sentence of life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years.

....

During the eight week trial, the Crown called 90 witnesses. The defence led no evidence.

http://www.insidehalton.com/news-story/5153900-staples-double-murder-verdict-now-in-the-hands-of-the-jury/
 
I lived in the area when this happened. From what I recall, there were questions about the people with whom Rhonda associated, and questions about her deceased husband's friends. To my knowledge, none of Rhonda's friends were ever questioned. I know it's all rumour at this point, but my understanding was that she was frequenting an unsavoury crowd but that the police never questioned any of her friends, or delved into her background. I'm not saying Mark was an angel, but we never had any problems with him. We socialized with him and his ex-wife and their kids, and my parents had business dealings with him when he opened Mulligan's, as well. Having read every article that Susan Clairmont has written, I'm not clear on what new forensic evidence finally allowed the police to charge Mark?
 
I lived in the area when this happened. From what I recall, there were questions about the people with whom Rhonda associated, and questions about her deceased husband's friends. To my knowledge, none of Rhonda's friends were ever questioned. I know it's all rumour at this point, but my understanding was that she was frequenting an unsavoury crowd but that the police never questioned any of her friends, or delved into her background. I'm not saying Mark was an angel, but we never had any problems with him. We socialized with him and his ex-wife and their kids, and my parents had business dealings with him when he opened Mulligan's, as well. Having read every article that Susan Clairmont has written, I'm not clear on what new forensic evidence finally allowed the police to charge Mark?

Thanks for being here and giving us some ''insider'' /local information.

This is a very old case and raises so many questions on why it took so long to get to trial.

Am curious if anyone reached out to LE and offered any insight into the '''acquaintances''' of Rhonda. She sounds as if she could be very vulnerable.
 
Well it looks like they had more to consider than we knew!



https://twitter.com/susanclairmont



Wow! The food can't be that good.....
I was so wrong to think that this would be a fast decision



Susan ClairmontVerified account
‏@susanclairmont Jury is sequestered. Had rough first night in hotel due to power outage. Slept better last night, they indicate to judge. #HamOnt

ubm: I didn't know that!!
 
Hmm, interesting... that link that you posted, it says:
Staples has always denied his guilt, and his lawyers say it doesn’t make sense that he murdered his family to save Mulligan’s. (BBM)He declared bankruptcy for the golf club shortly after they went missing.
I know in earlier newspaper links, it was stated that MS did receive the inheritance monies as the sole beneficiary to the estate. I wonder what he did with the money then, which in these earlier MSM articles, suggests the amount was 2.5 million dollars.
Police believed that Bill and Rhonda were killed, so that Mark could inherit an estate worth an estimated two-and-a-half million dollars.
http://www.chch.com/jury-selection-begins-staples-murder-trial/"]http://www.chch.com/jury-selection-begins-staples-murder-trial/[/URL]
William Staples’ estate was valued at approximately $2.6-million at the time of death. The Hamilton Spectator reports Mark Staples inherited most of it.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/06/14/man-charged-in-murder-of-his-father-sister/

If not to save Mulligan's, then what? Also, according to reports at the time, the deceased's estate was worth over 2.5 million dollars. How did it become only 1.4 million dollars by the time Mark was able to receive his inheritance? Over 1 million dollars was gone from the time MS, along with his lawyer friend, got permission from the Court to control the estate. (info in link below)
March 20, 1998 -- Mark asks court for joint control of his father's $2.6-million estate, along with a longtime friend of Bill's. His request is approved.

Not sure if this article below has been posted before, but I found it very interesting. It was written on the 10th anniversary of the deaths, on January 16, 2008.

Also.. I had not realized this before, but the Staples family had planned on searching parking lots at the Toronto Airport for the deceased's vehicle way back, only 2 days after the two went missing, but they called off the search after being told that these had already been searched by LE.
BBM
Jan. 20, 1998 -- Bill and daughter Rhonda Borelli, 36, are reported missing.
Jan. 21, 1998 -- Hamilton police ask for the public's help to find Bill and Rhonda. A media release includes the licence of Staples' missing white GMC Sonoma pickup truck. Police say they do not suspect foul play.
Jan. 22, 1998 -- Neighbours circle Binbrook in an airplane looking for their missing friends. Meanwhile, the family calls off a planned search of parking lots at Toronto airport after a Hamilton cop tells them police have already checked there.
June 8, 1998 -- Bill's truck is found in a Toronto airport parking lot. Bill and Rhonda's badly decomposed bodies are in the back. Toronto police say they had never been asked by Hamilton cops to search the lot.

So terribly sad to think that if only the family had not been lied to by police about the parking lots being searched, or if only they went and searched anyway, or if only police had done a better job of ensuring the lots had been checked, the truck and bodies would have surely been found only 2 days following the reported disappearance, when everything was still fresh and more evidence could have been gathered, memories would have been much fresher, etc. What a difference that may have made in resolving this case.

I also hadn't realized that MS had refused a lie detector test.
Mark had a chance to take a lie-detector test early on. He did the pre-test interview, but balked at being hooked up to the polygraph equipment.
Feb. 17, 1998 -- Mark Staples is interviewed by police. He refuses to take a lie detector test.

I also don't recall hearing about MS reported by neighbours to have been burning things 3 days after his family went missing.
Don moves toward the drive shed. This is where his niece was likely killed.

Don was there the day police used a concrete saw to cut out a big square of the floor. It was soaked with blood.

Rhonda's blood.

Back there was where Mark was seen by neighbours incinerating stuff three days after his dad and sister vanished.

Police later sifted through the burnt debris. They have not -- will not -- reveal what they found.

But Don will. He was there. Watching over their shoulder.

A woman's rings were in there, Don says. And coins. And a zipper, maybe from a purse.

Indeed, sounds like the jury had more to consider than it seemed from news reports during trial.

http://www.ottawacommunitynews.com/news-story/2124928-a-painful-journey/

latest MSM

http://www.chch.com/jury-deliberates-staples-murder-trial/

""The jury has ended deliberation for the evening. Will begin again on Thursday."
 
Seems there's much we don't know!

I wonder if they're working on the one hold-out who is in opposition to the rest of the jurors. It has to be a unanimous verdict. Geez wouldn't it be terrible if, after so long in finally reaching a courtroom, this case ends up with a hung jury. :(

Q - Do all the jury members have to agree on the verdict?

A - In a criminal trial the jury verdict must be unanimous, that is all 12 jurors must agree. Jury members must decide for themselves, without direction from the judge, the lawyers, or anyone else, how they will proceed in the jury room to reach a verdict.

If the jury members cannot reach an agreement on the verdict within a reasonable period of time, the judge will declare a mistrial and discharge the jury. It is up to the Crown to decide whether to apply for a new trial. A jury that cannot agree on a verdict is called a 'hung' jury.

If the jury reaches a unanimous decision, everyone will go back into the courtroom and the jury foreperson will announce the verdict. The court clerk may ask each member of the jury to confirm that he or she agrees. The judge will thank the jury and discharge them. If the verdict is not guilty, the judge will acquit the accused. If the verdict is guilty, the judge will sentence the accused either then or at a later date.

In Canada, the deliberations of the jury are conducted in secrecy and you must not talk about what went on in the jury room. If you do, you could be charged with a criminal offence

http://www.legalinfo.org/criminal-law/jury-duty.html#Doalljurymembers

Wow! The food can't be that good.....
I was so wrong to think that this would be a fast decision



Susan ClairmontVerified account
‏@susanclairmont Jury is sequestered. Had rough first night in hotel due to power outage. Slept better last night, they indicate to judge. #HamOnt

ubm: I didn't know that!!
 
Reading through SC's Twitter posts is very interesting! Can see questions brought forward by the jury, etc. There is one comment in there that is hilarious/perfect:

Susan Clairmont @susanclairmont · Nov 26
My daughter: "Can't you just come home and get the verdict off Twitter?"
Me: "Honey, on this one, I am Twitter."

#staples #murder #hamont
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
3,219
Total visitors
3,410

Forum statistics

Threads
592,205
Messages
17,965,054
Members
228,715
Latest member
Autumn.Doe
Back
Top