Trial Thread 4/18/2012

[snoofer]

I wonder if he was late by an hour to meet JW because he was being interviewed by police but told JW he was in court.

good point HK; my thanks button not working.

and..now it is.

Pretty sure I would run quickly the other way if I heard some guy I started dating talking about visiting girls who were in detention and suspect in missing child and DEFO if the guy said he thinks the police suspect him!!!!!!!! Yowser! JMO I would defo want off at the next stop and RUN!!!!!!!! And any time thereafter I saw him I would RUUUUUUN! There would so be sparks comin from my sneaks! JMO

 

[crazyladi]

Did he really go to the court dates or is that a lie? What about the jail house visits and possible phone conversations? Were those recorded?

So many questions.......

I was thinking the same thing last night. I really wonder if he did go. If he did it would have been to make sure she didnt say anything. Intimidation.

If he didnt go its just another one of his made up lies!! I cant keep up with them, not sure how he remembers them all.

 

[Thinkzerz]

I wonder if he was late by an hour to meet JW because he was being interviewed by police but told JW he was in court.

Date of Interview:

15May09
Location of Interview:

Interviewed By:

D/Cst. Gord JOHNSOND/Cst. Colin DARMON
Time Interview Commenced:

19:04 hours
Time Interview Concluded:

19:33 hours

http://www.citytv.com/toronto/cityn...raw-audio-opp-interview-with-michael-rafferty

She and Rafferty planned to go to the States on May 15th, were to leave in the morning around 9. He arrived at 10:35.

 

[~n/t~]

Mike answered by question. I guess I misunderstood when they said 8 more witnesses. They had 8 in total for the Mt. Forest Chapter.

9:14
Mike Knoll: @Guest - the Mt. Forest chapter saw 8 witnesses over the last couple of days. We can't report the legal issues that were discussed yesterday (or at any point during the trial for that matter)
9:13
Comment From Guest
I thought the Mt. Forest Chapter had 8 more witnesses ....is that not the case? Why did they suddenly abrupt the testimony yesterday for legal issues and then moved on to the next chapter? Can you clear that up for us? Thanks

 

[Hello_Kitty]

Date of Interview:

15May09
Location of Interview:

Interviewed By:

D/Cst. Gord JOHNSOND/Cst. Colin DARMON
Time Interview Commenced:

19:04 hours
Time Interview Concluded:

19:33 hours

http://www.citytv.com/toronto/cityn...raw-audio-opp-interview-with-michael-rafferty

Hmmmm, so yeah maybe the interview WAS after they went to Michigan, and it would probably make more sense too since he did call JW the next day complaining he thought the police were blaming him for taking Tori.

 

[~n/t~]

9:19
Mike Knoll: @guest - it would be a rare instances and it wouldn't be automatic, but yes, the defense could make a request to the judge to recall a witness based on some compelling reason that has popped up since the original testimony of said witness.
9:18
Comment From guest
Am i correct in understanding the defense can't call any witnesses who have already testified?

 

[Wondergirl]

Good-morning.

 

[Wondergirl]

By: M. Cake

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=o.260737528320&type=1

 

[~n/t~]

9:27
Mike Knoll: @Patrick - it's at the judge's discretion. For example, if it's mid-afternoon when the Crown calls its final witness and the defense completes optional cross-examination, the judge could always say, "let's start tomorrow" -- but in general, yes, it's seamless.
9:25
Comment From Patrick
Is there usually down time between the crown presentation and the start of the defense or is it seamless?

 

[~n/t~]

9:29
Mike Knoll: @Guest - absolutely the jury can clarify things once deliberations begin. Nothing outside of what's been presented by the two sides but certainly clarifications of legal questions.
9:27
Comment From Guest
Are jury members allowed to ask for clarifications or additional information after both sides have finnished, or is it a take it as presented situation?

 

[~n/t~]

9:31
Mike Knoll: @guest - he's been generally passive throughout the trial but he reacted more to things TLM said than to this string of ex-girlfriends.
9:30
Comment From Guest
Was Rafferty more interested in TLM on stand or ex's?(visibly)

 

[~n/t~]

9:32
Mike Knoll: @Bev - it's unknown if Rafferty will take the stand.
9:31
Comment From Bev
When do you think Rafferty will be put on the stand.




LOL...this question keeps getting asked. Poor Mike. hahaha

 

[~n/t~]

9:33
Mike Knoll: @Monique - it is assumed that the Crown knows everything that is coming. They have to be able to prepare a cross-examination in advance. If a surprise witness was called there would no doubt be objections from the other side (not like U.S. TV)
9:32
Comment From Monique
Is the Crown aware of all anticipated defence witnesses and evidence ahead of time -- i.e. there are no real surprises?

 

[Bravo]

good point HK; my thanks button not working.

and..now it is.

Pretty sure I would run quickly the other way if I heard some guy I started dating talking about visiting girls who were in detention and suspect in missing child and DEFO if the guy said he thinks the police suspect him!!!!!!!! Yowser! JMO I would defo want off at the next stop and RUN!!!!!!!! And any time thereafter I saw him I would RUUUUUUN! There would so be sparks comin from my sneaks! JMO

LOL Please tell me you dont wear Pumas LOL It is shocking that red flags were there from the get go.

 

[~n/t~]

9:37
Mike Knoll: @guest - absolutely.
9:37
Comment From guest
do you anticipate an increased media presence "if" Rafferty was to take the stand Mike?
9:36
Mike Knoll: @guest - as soon as the jury is sequestered for deliberations all legal arguments and pre-trial motions can be reported.
9:36
Comment From Guest
Once the trial is over, are you able to report on the legal matters that have been discussed when the jury was out?

 

[~n/t~]

LOL Please tell me you dont wear Pumas LOL It is shocking that red flags were there from the get go.

I know this wasn't addressed to me but I thought of the Puma shoes yesterday and my son wears them. :/

Not the same style MR does though. That was a relief. LOL

 

[~n/t~]

9:40
Mike Knoll: @guest - a day sickness would likely just cause a day-long delay in the trial but if a juror suffered a serious medical issue, the trial would continue with 11 jurors.
9:39
Comment From Guest
What happens if a juror gets ill during the trial? Derstine's illness caused a one day delay, but if something similar (or more serious) happed to someone on the jury what is the protocol?
9:38
Mike Knoll: @guest - cross-examination is optional, so no, not all Crown witnesses were cross-examined. I assume all defence witnesses will be 'new'
9:37
Comment From Guest
Have all crown witnesses been cross examined by defence already? Defence witnesses will all be new? Not crown witnesses recalled to stand? Thx



bbm

 

[~n/t~]

9:43
Mike Knoll: @guest - I find the legal system fascinating so, on the surface, I do enjoy murder trials. However, this particular case weighs quite heavy. I attended TLM's guilty plea and heard much of the details we're hearing now then, so I've had time to digest it.
9:41
Comment From Guest
I found TLM's testimonty very emotionally. As a journalism student, I'm curious if you find it hard to cover murder trials. Especially this case - the details regarding Tori's death are so heartbreaking. Was there any point during this case that you found it hard to cover?

 

[~n/t~]

9:47
Mike Knoll: back to @guest's question from 9:43... I've been covering this story since Tori went missing and by far the hardest day was the day of the arrests when the case switched from a missing person to a homicide.

 

[mkozub]

Bugger I have to run out for an hour or so.....ugh I hate playing catch up. Thanking everyone in advance for the tweets, see you's soon!