GUILTY - Wayne Millard Murder Trial - Dellen Millard Charged With Murder - #4

[winter2017]

Edited by me - For real there was no financial benefit, but I think in DM's puny brain there was. He may or may not have thought of what he would inherit, but moreso, he wanted control of the facility. He was spending money so frivolously and I think blamed his dad when the pot seemed to be running dry. I don't think he did the math.

I think he merely had a plan to conquer the world as a gangster and his dad's return to health and commanding him to clean up the floor of his junk was the final straw, so was the gun bought to kill his dad with or used for other purposes first?

quote from billandrews timeline:
Apr 14 12:26 pm
Millard texts Smich: "Be smart bro. We are gonna take this world, but we've got to be smart about it.

DM , gangsta? , the guy is a coward, he kills unarmed people.

 

[winter2017]

RBBM

The 'structure' of this murder seems very much like Laura's murder to me. DM's job was killing, and MS's job was providing immoral support and an alibi as necessary.

MS was willing to provide an alibi to someone who tried to blame him for Tim Bosma s murder. DM used MS and if he could have pinned Tim Bosma s murder on him he would have to save himself.

 

[nuff]

Good point. And...where was WM the night DM killed LB? Did he not do it at 5 Maplegate? Strange this man who worked from home and was in back recovery would not be aware of what went on then!!

I've always imagined LB was killed someplace away from Maplegate just after he picked her up from Islington - but that doesn't explain the mattress purchase, does it? I still think DM would have been able to drug his father's nightcaps when and if it suited his plans, including on the night of his death. (We've never heard evidence of him purchasing GHB or other date rape drugs, but it wouldn't surprise me if DM knew all about them.)

 

[MistyWaters]

Denial? Just like MB, I'd speculate WM was still seeing the son he wanted, not the son he had (in spite of all the red flags and utter lack of adult success at anything.) And perhaps part of the motivation was that WM, who seems to have turned a corner in 2012 and was starting to become stronger and emotionally healthier, was beginning to recognize and question the behaviour of the real DM, not the idealized one.

I didn’t really get the sense from witnesses called by the prosecution, that WM had turned a corner in 2012. His newly developed relationship with JC could well have been a diversion from everyday realities involving difficulties involving his son and their business plans. Other than she, we didn’t hear testimony from anyone other than business associates, all who testified they didn’t know WM on a personal level but several of which made comments about financial difficulty.

But if indeed he was starting to recognize the behaviour of DM, what could he do about it in the 11th hour? I also wonder if he somehow discovered things about his son involving the murder of LB. His son, his business partner, a murderer.....their new business wouldn’t have a glimmer of hope if that got out, his legacy dreams would go down with a quick thud.

My point is I don’t think the Crown did a good job in proving a suicide didn’t occur, especially if Sutherland’s experiment is tossed. The onus is on the Crown to prove a murder occurred because if it didn’t, nobody can be convicted of murder. Only then will the judge get to the matter of has it been proven DM is guilty of that murder. In a Judge only trial only evidence presented in court is considered, without speculation.

JMO

 

[6degrees]

Regarding WM's health.
He had been visiting Doctors regarding his back problem.
Blood tests would have been done.
What were his LFT results (Liver Function Tests)?
Didn't WM indicate, in our posts, that his Liver, was not the problem with his back.
(I remember reading it here 'some where').
An Expert could have discussed the LFT results.
Wonder why these have not been mentioned?
These could indicate if there was a possible drinking problem.

I don't think we should assume that because he sought health care for a back concern that he would have had labs done. I feel confidently saying that as an NP. If there were issues outside of a mechanical back issue, then yes, likely, but a person presenting with back pain doesn't need blood work done. Maybe a plain film of the lumbosacral area (or other corresponding area).

 

[6degrees]

Regarding WM's health.
He had been visiting Doctors regarding his back problem.
Blood tests would have been done.
What were his LFT results (Liver Function Tests)?
Didn't WM indicate, in our posts, that his Liver, was not the problem with his back.
(I remember reading it here 'some where').
An Expert could have discussed the LFT results.
Wonder why these have not been mentioned?
These could indicate if there was a possible drinking problem.

And elevated LFTs, in the absence of other findings are very non specific. Alcohol yes but many other things also.

 

[6degrees]

Well at least that answers one of our questions. The judge WILL make a ruling on Sunderland's testimony before RP decides if he's putting on a defence.

Still can't believe he was trying to get a voluntary witness statement thrown out as a 10b violation but it appears MB was successful in making sure that hers wouldn't be entered into evidence. Unless it shows up as part of the defence. Would she be willing to get into the witness box and stand by her son knowing that would likely expose her police interview to the public as well?
DM's
MOO

Jumping off that Kamille, is it possible that MB's interview could be entered into evidence by the crown but without her being called to the stand? I'm absolutely no expert at rules of evidence. If DM's statement gets entered into evidence by the crown and he doesn't have to be called to the stand, couldn't that same principle apply to MB?
And if she had worked to get her video statement not entered as evidence when there had been a plan for it, would that not be announced to the court? I've got no expertise at courtroom procedure.
I suppose the second part of my thought is that didn't we hear at the outset that she would be a witness? If she was going to give testimony and the decision for her to do so was changed (be it by her or a lawyer), would they not make mention of that?
Apologies in advance if I've missed something along the way....

 

[JoS13]

I suppose the second part of my thought is that didn't we hear at the outset that she would be a witness? If she was going to give testimony and the decision for her to do so was changed (be it by her or a lawyer), would they not make mention of that?
Apologies in advance if I've missed something along the way....

6degrees, yes, the Crown said last week that they would not be calling MB as a witness.

Adam Carter‏Verified account @AdamCarterCBC Jun 13
The Crown says they are not calling Madeleine Burns, Millard's mother, as a witness. They have two witnesses left -- a crime scene reconstructionist tomorrow, and the manager of the Kitchener airport Friday. Cameron says the Crown expects to close its case Friday. #Millard

 

[6degrees]

DM's interview is just as important for what he didn't say about being in the home in the overnight hours. He claimed he last saw his Dad in the afternoon of the previous day and that he spent the night at Mark's. There are some pretty glaring omissions for a guy who went into significant detail about his movements between rooms, dog beds, snacks, more than five minutes and less than ten, etc.

Absolutely. In addition to the fact that he had (a) initially told the paramedic he hadn't seen his dad for a couple of days and was concerned and thus went to Maple Gate where he "stayed 3 or 4 nights a week" and (b) told the police he hadn't heard from his dad his their meeting the afternoon prior.....yet he doesn't walk into the house calling out his dad's name in an effort to locate him....we don't hear evidence from phone records that he's been calling his dad because he's concerned about his whereabouts.....no....DM just wander in to get a sweater because "it was a cold day out" and planned to head "to the kitchen to make a snack" and just HAPPENED to look in his dad's room.....whatever happened to the loving son who was just worried about his dad's whereabouts!!??

I may be in part a bit more irritated about DM's behaviour today than any other day I'm here because I drove to the hangar today. When compared to the other structures there at the airport it really does stand out...new, modern, architecturally impressive. And now, happily, being used by a functioning company with a hive of associated activity.

To think that his father had DM's future in mind when he built that....to think that WM was trying to modernize and extend what his own father built from the ground up....and all DM could do was steal motorcycles and put his toys there for his pleasure...not even clear the floor of his toys so that they could secure a conctract for the new MRO.....as his father was risking their family fortune to give him a future. It really infuriates me. DM all over it...his father and his grandfather's life work.

 

[6degrees]

6degrees, yes, the Crown said last week that they would not be calling MB as a witness.

Adam Carter‏Verified account @AdamCarterCBC Jun 13
The Crown says they are not calling Madeleine Burns, Millard's mother, as a witness. They have two witnesses left -- a crime scene reconstructionist tomorrow, and the manager of the Kitchener airport Friday. Cameron says the Crown expects to close its case Friday. #Millard

Thanks for clarifying JoS13.

 

[Kamille]

MB's willingness wouldn't matter if they needed her as a witness.

If DM doesn't want his mother put on the stand, she will not be put on the stand.

 

[MistyWaters]

Jumping off that Kamille, is it possible that MB's interview could be entered into evidence by the crown but without her being called to the stand? I'm absolutely no expert at rules of evidence. If DM's statement gets entered into evidence by the crown and he doesn't have to be called to the stand, couldn't that same principle apply to MB?
And if she had worked to get her video statement not entered as evidence when there had been a plan for it, would that not be announced to the court? I've got no expertise at courtroom procedure.
I suppose the second part of my thought is that didn't we hear at the outset that she would be a witness? If she was going to give testimony and the decision for her to do so was changed (be it by her or a lawyer), would they not make mention of that?
Apologies in advance if I've missed something along the way....

All we can do is speculate but it’s very common for either side to not require subpoenaed witnesses to testify if, for whatever reason, the testimony is decided not to be beneficial.

Remember MM made earlier statements and then changed her testimony, so imo the Crown could not file MBs videod statement as evidence without her having an opportunity to testify as well. Maybe the same sort of thing occured, she claimed was shocked, confused about something she said earlier? Or maybe the Crown realized that Pillay was adept at cross-examining prosecution witnesses and they decided not to risk it? She also might be a defence witness, we don’t know.

DMs videos statement is different as he’s the accused and has the right to testify, if he so chooses.

 

[6degrees]

I think he was very aware of how they worked, he simply didn't care because the burner phone would have been in a lake before anyone would be able to tie the two together. In this case he wanted to create the illusion that he was at Smich's all night, so he left his phone there knowing that it would ping off a nearby tower. The burner phone in this case is used to call taxi's and to likely communicate with Smich.

As for the Pizza Pizza order and taxi calls, I don't think much was said about them in court as they were submitted via an agreed statement of fact. But I assume that they are as simple as that, calls made from numbers linked to Millard on that evening.

And BTW I am very curious to know who's phone ordered the pizza? Would be very odd if they used Millards Samsung.

 

[6degrees]

I think he was very aware of how they worked, he simply didn't care because the burner phone would have been in a lake before anyone would be able to tie the two together. In this case he wanted to create the illusion that he was at Smich's all night, so he left his phone there knowing that it would ping off a nearby tower. The burner phone in this case is used to call taxi's and to likely communicate with Smich.

As for the Pizza Pizza order and taxi calls, I don't think much was said about them in court as they were submitted via an agreed statement of fact. But I assume that they are as simple as that, calls made from numbers linked to Millard on that evening.

And BTW I am very curious to know who's phone ordered the pizza? Would be very odd if they used Millards Samsung.

Would be very odd if they used Millards Samsung.

Not if that was what he told MS to do.....

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I noted DM made sure to tell MS he loved him at the end of this text, just so Mark knew how grateful DM was for his alibi in case the cops came asking questions. What a truly manipulative person DM was (is) !

Yes, this ^^!! IMO

 

[don_quixote]

All Sutherland is saying is that the gun was pointed a certain way - handle up, basically. Was it 66, 67 or 68 degrees is of no importance.

If WM wanted to shoot himself, would it be too difficult to roll on his back, or sit up? Hard to imagine that he would choose to shoot himself in the most awkward position. Form is essential for shooting, after all.

DM killed him, no doubt.

 

[Tilly23]

I seriously doubt MS didn't already know WM had died long before the text about leaving the station. In all likelihood, DM probably gave MS the high sign when he arrived back in Oakville to sleep on the floor!

MOO

 

[tmar]

I don't think we should assume that because he sought health care for a back concern that he would have had labs done. I feel confidently saying that as an NP. If there were issues outside of a mechanical back issue, then yes, likely, but a person presenting with back pain doesn't need blood work done. Maybe a plain film of the lumbosacral area (or other corresponding area).

The gentleman has died.
As family state, there are alcohol problems, wouldn't blood test be routinely taken, including LFTs.
As part of routine screening, where I live, these tests are taken, with general check ups. Raised levels would put Docs on alert, and in this case, followed up with Liver biopsy.
Was an autopsy performed: what would those findings show?

 

[6degrees]

The gentleman has died.
As family state, there are alcohol problems, wouldn't blood test be routinely taken, including LFTs.
As part of routine screening, where I live, these tests are taken, with general check ups. Raised levels would put Docs on alert, and in this case, followed up with Liver biopsy.
Was an autopsy performed: what would those findings show?

Medicine is more complicated than this. No offense. No, a liver biopsy would not be done for elevated LFTs. Not without substantial other findings....And no...if somebody was presenting for back pain LFTS would not be done routinely in Ontario. LFTs are not even routinely done on the labs that are included in annual physicals either. Medicine is not undertaken in a cookie cutter fashion....practitioners order labs and other investigations based on the individual's presentation, history and specific physical findings by exam.

 

[ABro]

Jumping off that Kamille, is it possible that MB's interview could be entered into evidence by the crown but without her being called to the stand? I'm absolutely no expert at rules of evidence. If DM's statement gets entered into evidence by the crown and he doesn't have to be called to the stand, couldn't that same principle apply to MB?
And if she had worked to get her video statement not entered as evidence when there had been a plan for it, would that not be announced to the court? I've got no expertise at courtroom procedure.
I suppose the second part of my thought is that didn't we hear at the outset that she would be a witness? If she was going to give testimony and the decision for her to do so was changed (be it by her or a lawyer), would they not make mention of that?
Apologies in advance if I've missed something along the way....

MB can’t keep her police statement out of evidence and there’s nothing to suggest she tried.

The Crown simply chose not to call her as she likely wouldn’t have helped their case.

She did testify at the prelim as did Michalski and Ward-Jackson and the housekeeper.