Trial Thread 7 May 2012 - Closing Arguments, Defense then the Crown

Status
Not open for further replies.
Did you miss the video link back in may 2009 when he was being escorted out of a building. I think it is obvious that many are angry with MR...he was there, he was involved in a murder of an innocent 8 yr old child, he could have saved VS's life if he was innocent like the defence is stating.


yes I saw that video but I believe because Tori was still missing at that time those people were reacting because someone had been arrested...that happens a lot...at the initial arrest...Three years have passed and I don't believe these same people would take that risk of committing a crime now just for payback... I don't think we need to worry about that anyway because I personally don't think MR will be found not guilty...I hope he is not found guilty for certain charges for reasons I have already stated but I would like to think that our courts would just not give him a slap on the wrist because he did help cover up the body etc... I know that this is not the popular belief on this site but I always thought both side of the coin were welcome....I don't tear up when others post the opposite of what I think so I find it strange that when I post I get hit on... also, and I am sure a mod could agree with me here but I do not alert mods to posts that I don't agree with but there was one post today that I thought was not called for because shortly before that we were warned not to make remarks about anyone that wasn't involved in the case..and I suggested that a mod should delete it and followed it up with my concern...I thought it was rather uncalled for and rather unkind to someone that was innocent...as I am sure others did, and I did make my concern known...I was open about it and I don't regret what move I made...JMO
 
I do not think it is a strange statement to make,I think no one will want MR to be their neighbour. He most certainly would not be welcomed back in Woodstock. Do you think RS/JG/TM will not put up some sort of fight to have him removed from the town? If he moved into my neighbourhood I would lock my kids up and most certainly do everything in my power to make him move. I wouldn't care if he was found innocent, nope not one little bit, he wouldn't be my neighbour long. I believe most people who have young children would feel this way if he moved in next to them. JMO

The sad thing is ... What if his story is true ...
 
What a ridiculous defence Derstine put on today. He was all over the place, he contradicted himself a few times, and if memory serves me correctly, he even lied about some of the things that happened on the stand. I wish I had made notes of them, as now I can't remember what they were.

If the jury falls for this, I will be very disappointed.

I had a list in my head, but now that I'm posting of course they all flew out, but there is one - Derstine said there was NO evidence that the backseat was in the car on April 8th - that is incorrect. There is a sliver of material with blood on it, that came from the backseat. Tori's blood was on it, that means, in my opinion, the seat was in the car.

Salem
 
I had a list in my head, but now that I'm posting of course they all flew out, but there is one - Derstine said there was NO evidence that the backseat was in the car on April 8th - that is incorrect. There is a sliver of material with blood on it, that came from the backseat. Tori's blood was on it, that means, in my opinion, the seat was in the car.

Salem

Yep. The foam that was attached to the piece of fabric is the same foam as a Honda Civic backseat of his year and model. There was a seat in that car and he raped Tori on it. JMO
 
“Mr. Rafferty came back after the death, was horrified, but helped you clean up,” Mr. Derstine said then.
He didn’t repeat most of these elements Monday, suggesting instead at some point “Michael may have come to realize the girl was being held against her will,” and noting only science — the forensic evidence — was silent about whether “poor Tori had been sexually assaulted.”


I am having a very difficult time believing MR did NOT know he was part of a kidnapping very early on for one very simple reason: If Tori was told she was going to see a puppy, her mom, friend, (insert whatever excuse TLM gave) etc she would almost certainly start to say something or question once they hit the 401. And if she couldn't see the HWY, then it's true she was being forced to hide. Kids know that's the way out of town to somewhere else. 8 year olds can stay quiet only so long, it's their nature to be chatty. IMO MR had more than enough time and opportunity to right the wrong and he chose to keep driving.
 
The sad thing is ... What if his story is true ...

He didn't take the stand to tell his story. He was there...involved in a kidnapping and murder...and for that he needs to rot in jail for the next 25 years.MOO
 
The sad thing is ... What if his story is true ...

What I know for sure is that he was involved in the murder of an 8 year old girl. So there is not "sad thing" for me. I also truly beleive he sexually assaulted her. Nothing anyone alive can say will make me think different. MOO.
If he is set free he will be a hated man in Canada. Someone said they do not think the outrage will leave Southern Ontario, well I am in Northern Ontario and many here talk about the case. Many of our posters on here are all over the world, so yes I think the outrage would reach all parts of the world. Just look at the people following the tweets and were they are from. MR would not walk out of jail a popular guy MOO.
 
He did, but he didn't connect them together, like I said all his statements were disjointed, perhaps that was his strategy, who knows. I hope that crown connects them together.

I think you are right Hello_Kitty - it is much easier to excuse away MR's behavior if all the facts and evidence are not put together. If you just take a piece here and there, then it is plausible that such and such happened. It is when all pieces are put together that you get the clear picture of what is most probable and real.

Salem
 
AM980.ca ‏ @AM980_Court
Rafferty said, according to McClintic, it would be "too heat" to use Armstrong's tools. Had to head to Home Depot

This tweet has me baffled....why would the defence bring this up...to me this proves that TLM and MR discussed the need for a hammer as a murder weapon. MOO

I think it was poorly worded, and that "armstrong" may have been a typo? TLM's testimony was that MR said he had tools at home but it would be "too heat" (attract too much attention) to go get them. (The tweet might be better understood as: According to McClintic, Rafferty said...rather than the way it was worded) Then Derstine says: Why would a grown man need to buy a hammer to kill someone anyway? He already had a knife in his car. He is trying to argue that TLM's claim that Home Depot was MR's plan was a lie and that he didn't know what she was doing there.

Without McClintic, it becomes apparent Rafferty may not have known about the hammer, or told her to buy it.

RaffertyLFP: Derstine says why would grown man need to tools to kill little girl? He already had a knife in the car

Rafferty said, according to McClintic, it would be "too heat" to use Armstrong's tools. Had to head to Home Depot.

Assuming Rafferty did need tools, he a,ready had a knife in his car. Why would a full grown man need a hammer, he asks?

Derstine didn't give any plausible alternative though, as to what MR thought was going on the whole time that Victoria was in his car. MOO
 
I heard from someone today that the reason why the crown couldn't ask questions about the break ups etc was because he didn't take the stand and therefore it can not be brought up. If he did take the stand I am sure the crown would have a lot to say . Jmo

Is this true? I know it's true when it comes to things like rape for example. If he was charged prior and lets say it was 5 yrs ago that could not be brought up
 
I had a list in my head, but now that I'm posting of course they all flew out, but there is one - Derstine said there was NO evidence that the backseat was in the car on April 8th - that is incorrect. There is a sliver of material with blood on it, that came from the backseat. Tori's blood was on it, that means, in my opinion, the seat was in the car.

Salem

I guess you missed my earlier post? The blood on that sliver of material could not be ID'd. It was too small of a spot (so small it wasn't visible) to be tested.

McLean's testing on the grey material found chemical indications of blood, though none was visible, and while DNA from at least two people, one being male, was present, the minuscule amount of it meant it was unsuitable to be tested further, she said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/04/11/michael-rafferty-trial-dna-stafford_n_1417867.html

JMO
 
Why cut the stain out anyway if you're just going to throw the whole seat out?

I'm way behind here, but I think it was a temporary solution for him until he could get another seat. But he couldn't find another seat. Then comes the speaker installation excuse.
 
In my opiinion, the Crown has to put something together tomorrow that makes sense and is supported by real evidence, not speculation and conjecture, that proves MR is guilty. After today, I think the jury will choose to disregard all of TLM's testimony.

Nobody will want to vote for conviction of such serious charges, based on testimony from such an unreliable witness.

The Crown knew they had a problem with TLM from the outset, and have tried to mitigate the damage, but Derstine has brilliantly brought TLM's credibility as the main issue in the trial.

It is an issue the Crown is probably loathe to defend.

JMO.............

BBM: Just to be clear, you feel the jury will choose to disregard all of TLM's testimony except the part where she says she killed Tori, correct?
 
BBM: Just to be clear, you feel the jury will choose to disregard all of TLM's testimony except the part where she says she killed Tori, correct?

You would either have to believe all of her testimony or none at all. Picking and choosing makes no sense.
The Crown backed up her testimony with evidence. I am not sure what people want.
 
The sad thing is ... What if his story is true ...

Which story would that be?

At the very least, the very least, he let a distraught family search for their baby girl for three long agonizing months, knowing where she was and what happened to her. That is the least heinous thing he's done. Despicable.
 
I don't think in the world..maybe the southern part of Ontario..I've never heard any outrage over the CA case and that was a well known case...maybe outrage in the US..but not here in Canada or elsewhere. most I had heard anyone say was.."oh she more than likely did it" ..JMO actually this case is not followed by many outside those areas (southern Ont.)...most people you mention it to they respond with.."oh that little girl from a few years back...thought someone already confessed and is in jail"....sorry but that's the truth...not everyone follows crimes unless they are in their backyard...so to speak...JMO JMO JMO

I can assure you there was outrage south of the border. :)
 
You would either have to believe all of her testimony or none at all. Picking and choosing makes no sense.
The Crown backed up her testimony with evidence. I am not sure what people want.

Picking and choosing makes lots of sense when one is conniving and plotting as she has had plenty of time to scheme and plan. One needs to step back and think about what motivates that TLM and what results she personally wants from her stories. JMO MOO IMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
194
Guests online
1,914
Total visitors
2,108

Forum statistics

Threads
589,949
Messages
17,928,071
Members
228,012
Latest member
cbisme
Back
Top