Babcock Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #6

[Inspector_North]

I think it is possible there were more victims in the summer of 2012, but I doubt that there is enough evidence to build a case on.
If you strip down the timeline to references about the incinerator you come up with:
Jul 23 - SS does the pre-burn cycle and DM and MS do the night time burn of LB.
Aug 13 - SS texts Penner that the eliminator is working great NOW
Aug 28 - DM's another dead deer text
Aug 28 - SS notices bones, ash and rotting smell
Aug 28 - SS takes incinerator to hangar "you wanted it tonight"
Sep 5 - DM to MS text about returning incinerator to barn

Also of relevance might be MS text of Aug 20 re seeing Isho "tomorrow".

I don't see how the rotting smell could relate to LB. The picture of the burning bones indicates that there would be nothing left to rot. Also there are no texts that night to suggest that there was an interruption or something had gone wrong.

That series of texts is puzzling. It would have been after DM traveled to Croatia. "IF", DM and MS were getting into the disposal business through links to ISH, you would think it would be lucrative. However, we know that DM was texting that he was cash poor to AM just before the TB murder. And MS was still living with his mom. MOO

 

[RandomName479]

Although CSC does not make prisoner locations public, msm sources say that Paul Bernardo is now incarcerated at Port Cartier Institution, as are Rafferty and Williams.
Protection of inmates, while incarcerated, is a CSC responsibility. Bernardo, and Rafferty are absolutely not in General Population for that reason.

Source: http://torontosun.com/2013/06/21/mi...ison/wcm/fe1761c0-2bb7-4f6e-a715-d8397fe87b00

Seems to be disagreement about where Bernardo ended up.....

From http://torontosun.com/2013/09/26/pa...h-it/wcm/afd1fe7e-780f-41f0-b038-b94d79a9074f

And, the Sun has learned, from several Corrections Canada sources that new home is down the road 20 minutes at maximum-security Millhaven Penitentiary.

Ken Bernardo confirmed the transfer.

“He was moved out a week ago with a bunch of others,” he said.

There was discussion, he said, of moving him to Quebec to serve time at the same prison where Russell Williams was transferred.

But Paul Bernardo ended up in Millhaven.

 

[Lexiintoronto]

Thank you for this info. I sat in on a trial at the University Ave. courthouse a few years back. The perpetrator had been charged with 2nd degree murder. When the jury was selected not one of them was asked a single question at all. Each was asked to look at the accused, and there were two people selected from the jury pool (I think they were called Triers of Fact?) who observed the potential juror looking at the accused, and then a decision was made whether to accept that juror or not (defence and Crown had a say too).

But not a single person was asked anything at all ... not if they were aware of the case, if they could set aside any of their decisions based on what they had read, etc. Nothing at all like we see in the U.S. where jurors answer pages of questions before hand, and are subject to endless questioning.

So, why would some cases here in Canada not ask a juror a single thing, and other cases some questions are asked?

Would that be at the judge’s discretion? TIA




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That had to have been a very tense situation if there wasn't a dialogue, especially for a murder case! I'd be curious to know what they were watching for as they exchanged looks. And I'd like to read the lawyer's notes.

I wonder if the potential jurors In a high-profile case that is well-covered by the media might face tougher screening. (?) I know there are preliminary questions for potential jurors when they are first called for jury duty. (My father and I were both received letters for jury duty.)

I remember there were a few potential jurors during jury selection for the TB trial that were dismissed because they knew TB or attended the same church as TB.


From: https://www.google.ca/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.3412009

'For the third straight day, prospective jurors were called in front of Justice Andrew Goodman to explain whether or not they could serve for the trial in the Bosma case.

One man said he knew the Bosma family, and was deferred to come back on a different trial.

While walking out of the courtroom, he looked over at the accused — Dellen Millard, 30, and Mark Smich, 28, — and venomously spat "f---ers" before leaving the room.'

(And hello, Mrs. Threadgoode! Nice to see you )

 

[inbetweendoors]

I don't see how the rotting smell could relate to LB. The picture of the burning bones indicates that there would be nothing left to rot. Also there are no texts that night to suggest that there was an interruption or something had gone wrong.

RSBM

Also it could be presumed they used the rake thing and cleared out the remains when they were through, given the pic of MS.
Unless that was done at a later date...MM wasn't asked/didn't mention them bringing a box or anything back with them.

Do the texts reveal anything that might suggest them clearing the incinerator out on a specific date?

 

[FastLikeLight]

I think it is possible there were more victims in the summer of 2012, but I doubt that there is enough evidence to build a case on.
If you strip down the timeline to references about the incinerator you come up with:
Jul 23 - SS does the pre-burn cycle and DM and MS do the night time burn of LB.
Aug 13 - SS texts Penner that the eliminator is working great NOW
Aug 28 - DM's another dead deer text
Aug 28 - SS notices bones, ash and rotting smell
Aug 28 - SS takes incinerator to hangar "you wanted it tonight"
Sep 5 - DM to MS text about returning incinerator to barn

Also of relevance might be MS text of Aug 20 re seeing Isho "tomorrow".

I don't see how the rotting smell could relate to LB. The picture of the burning bones indicates that there would be nothing left to rot. Also there are no texts that night to suggest that there was an interruption or something had gone wrong.

Origin of smell - might be some liquids dripped when the body in the tarp was lifted into the eliminator. Other body - hope not... Though would be not surprised with these sick people.

 

[winter2017]

[FONT=&quot]Prison sentences aren't exclusively about punishment. The goal, at least in theory, is equally about rehabilitation and reintegration into society.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]But sociopaths can't be rehabilitated. Indeed — there's mounds of literature to support this — they become ever more cunning in erecting a façade of normal behaviour, pretending empathy, pretending remorse, pretending insight.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Todorovic was never diagnosed as a sociopath. Indeed, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders eschews both "sociopath" and "psychopath" as diagnostic terms in favour of "anti-social personality disorder."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Whatever the lexicon, they are skilled, clever liars.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]At Todorovic's trial, one of the first where social media evidence played a key evidentiary role, literally thousands of texts and messages exposed the toxic relationship between these natural born killers. How Todorovic harangued Bradshaw for months and months to do away with Stefanie, variously browbeating and cajoling, wielding sex as blackmail, leading the lumpen Bradshaw around by the his testosterone-infused gonads. When Bradshaw complained he didn't have a mask, she snapped back via text: (italics here) "cut f---ing leotards."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]When he finally committed the act — a day after botching an earlier attempt — Todorovic rewarded him with sex, but only after she'd double-checked that Stefanie was really and truly dead by calling her cellphone and only after making Bradshaw re-enact the slaying.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]All this violence inflicted on a gir

this section I copied from a news article about the teenage girl that got her bf to murder a young teenager. It describes about sociopaths/psychopaths, and that there is no chance to rehabilitate them. That is how I feel about MS and DM , I don't think any chance for rehabilitation. [/FONT]

 

[banting]

That series of texts is puzzling. It would have been after DM traveled to Croatia. "IF", DM and MS were getting into the disposal business through links to ISH, you would think it would be lucrative. However, we know that DM was texting that he was cash poor to AM just before the TB murder. And MS was still living with his mom. MOO

In August 2012 (20th) too by the sound of this text to MS: "No more money bro, we take what we want from the source".
I'm not sure what DM's cash flow source would be though. He obviously had a large income as he is facing a bill of almost $1m from the CRA
https://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2016/10/19/dellen-millards-tangled-financial-web.html
There was the rental income from Riverside but I think that the properties were in the company name. I doubt that Millardair was paying him because it didn't have income and would presumably have debt to service. I don't think anything was free as far as DM was concerned, he charged Villarda for use of the truck and van as well as rent when Riverside was being reno'd, he charged Bochenuk rent in the basement room at Maple Gate and charged LB (and therefore most likely everyone else) for drugs.
I'm not sure that the murder and disposal of bodies was a business proposition perhaps more like a means to an end. Maybe getting rid of someone who knows too much. I'm inclined to think that LB was the first victim but I'm not sure. I do find it hard to believe he did that with no previous experience of killing. It seems an extreme step to get rid of a pesky former girlfriend.

 

[inbetweendoors]

In the TB trial, CN claimed to have been told the incinerator was for metal. While probably a lie, and also possibly not the best way to do it, theoretically that could have proved useful for his chop shop operation, and thus a less sinister motivation behind the purchase of the Eliminator.
(Really I can't see how that would work - how would you get molten metal out of there? - but DM wasn't known for thinking things through logically)

 

[banting]

RSBM

Also it could be presumed they used the rake thing and cleared out the remains when they were through, given the pic of MS.
Unless that was done at a later date...MM wasn't asked/didn't mention them bringing a box or anything back with them.

Do the texts reveal anything that might suggest them clearing the incinerator out on a specific date?

I think the raking might have been done at the farm, because the burning photo was taken at 11.20pm and MS was writing the rap at 12.40am, so I think could have been too hot still to do the clean-up at the hangar. Of course the lighting at the farm would not be great and could have meant not doing a thorough job.
It's a pity there was nothing on the DVR from that time. Anyone know when this was installed? Was Dubien involved?

 

[Typhoo1961]

Nothing at all like we see in the U.S. where jurors answer pages of questions before hand, and are subject to endless questioning.

If that is the case in the US then it does not surprise me why the jury got it wrong in the OJ Simpson trial.

 

[banting]

https://www.thespec.com/news-story/...t-to-testify-at-babcock-murder-trial-dimanno/

He certainly knew all about the gun's history. I'm sure these people are thrilled at being named in the press.
How did he get that info? Perhaps it was stated at Odium's or Ish's trial, though I thought these were covered by pub bans.
Even more puzzling is why it was presented.

 

[Typhoo1961]

Yep, sad take on society. Many folks care more about what happens to the Kardashians that what happens in their own backyards.

True. When the verdict was being deliberated in the Bosma trial, I ended up in the Emergency Room at St. Joe's in Hamilton. I was continually asking anyone who passed by me if they heard anything about the trial yet. Not one person was following it. Luckily I got home just before the verdict was handed down.

 

[Typhoo1961]

yet another death somehow attributed to DM.

If it is true because I never heard anything in the media about that.

 

[inbetweendoors]

So for Millard's Closing, can he essentially "testify" or tell his version of what happened, as long as it all relates to evidence presented, without the cross examination aspect?
For instance, could he say something like, "the night Laura died, she was with me at Maple Gate and unfortunately ODed in my presence" or some other explanation?

Or can he simply ONLY go over his "evidence" that "proves" she is not even deceased?

Not sure what the latitude is for defense closing in this situation.
Also don't know if I'm phrasing my inquiry properly...

 

[winter2017]

If I lived in T.O I doubt I would have paid much attention to the case. I live in Hamilton and posters were everywhere about the disappearance of Tim Bosma and the truck. All over the downtown on bus shelters. Then when Sharlene came on the news and to see her face, heartbroken and the anguish, it caused me to pay attention. Then when they captured DM and said who he was. I had hoped they would find Tim Bosma alive.

Yep, sad take on society. Many folks care more about what happens to the Kardashians that what happens in their own backyards.

 

[Inspector_North]

In August 2012 (20th) too by the sound of this text to MS: "No more money bro, we take what we want from the source".
I'm not sure what DM's cash flow source would be though. He obviously had a large income as he is facing a bill of almost $1m from the CRA
https://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2016/10/19/dellen-millards-tangled-financial-web.html
There was the rental income from Riverside but I think that the properties were in the company name. I doubt that Millardair was paying him because it didn't have income and would presumably have debt to service. I don't think anything was free as far as DM was concerned, he charged Villarda for use of the truck and van as well as rent when Riverside was being reno'd, he charged Bochenuk rent in the basement room at Maple Gate and charged LB (and therefore most likely everyone else) for drugs.
I'm not sure that the murder and disposal of bodies was a business proposition perhaps more like a means to an end. Maybe getting rid of someone who knows too much. I'm inclined to think that LB was the first victim but I'm not sure. I do find it hard to believe he did that with no previous experience of killing. It seems an extreme step to get rid of a pesky former girlfriend.

Whatever they decided to do to make money in August of 2012, DM was still hurting cash wise by April 2013. Although his plan for "all business" profits in April was "ambitious" to say the least.


Apr 5 2013 - Millard texts Michalski: "2013 is gonna be all business. 2014/15 will be for inventions!"
Apr 5 2013 - Michalski texts Millard: "need to make some money first."
Apr 5 2013 - Millard texts Michalski: "about 100,000 a month and I'll be out of the hole."

Trying to figure out what was going through DM's mind at that time is futile. He had already decided to get out of the Aviation repair business. Not sure if he was seriously considering making a profit leasing the hangar? But he did mention in an email to Rabbit, and one to CN that his dad a left the business in a lot worse financial shape than he thought. To the point that he wanted Rabbit's equity in her house to help him make urgent financial obligations.

DM would never consider that the financial shape he was left with, was mostly his doing.

MOO

 

[Grey-St]

So for Millard's Closing, can he essentially "testify" or tell his version of what happened, as long as it all relates to evidence presented, without the cross examination aspect?
For instance, could he say something like, "the night Laura died, she was with me at Maple Gate and unfortunately ODed in my presence" or some other explanation?

Or can he simply ONLY go over his "evidence" that "proves" she is not even deceased?

Not sure what the latitude is for defense closing in this situation.
Also don't know if I'm phrasing my inquiry properly...

Your phrasing is fine , I think I understand what you are getting at, and have had the same questions going through my mind as well.

To my understanding, I don't believe either DM or TD for that matter, can get up there and spew some narrative that hasn't been suggested by evidence in court. That would be like giving testimony as a witness, and has to be rightly subjected to cross examination by the crown.

I think what they CAN do, is try to discredit the crowns case, and elaborate on evidence (or lack of evidence) that has been presented that supports their defence. For example, TD can say there has been no sufficient evidence to suggest his client even knew LB or that she had been murdered, until after the fact. They both might suggest that no hard evidence exist to support that LB is even deceased (a stretch, but I suppose fair game). I don't think either of them can get up there during closing arguments and provide testimony on "what truly happened to LB".

I hope I am making sense, it's JMO after giving it some thought. Maybe someone else knows better?

 

[inbetweendoors]

Your phrasing is fine , I think I understand what you are getting at, and have had the same questions going through my mind as well.

To my understanding, I don't believe either DM or TD for that matter, can get up there and spew some narrative that hasn't been suggested by evidence in court. That would be like giving testimony as a witness, and has to be rightly subjected to cross examination by the crown.

I think what they CAN do, is try to discredit the crowns case, and elaborate on evidence (or lack of evidence) that has been presented that supports their defence. For example, TD can say there has been no sufficient evidence to suggest his client even knew LB or that she had been murdered, until after the fact. They both might suggest that no hard evidence exist to support that LB is even deceased (a stretch, but I suppose fair game). I don't think either of them can get up there during closing arguments and provide testimony on "what truly happened to LB".

I hope I am making sense, it's JMO after giving it some thought. Maybe someone else knows better?

Thank you, that's exactly what I was asking

 

[JuneBug67]

So for Millard's Closing, can he essentially "testify" or tell his version of what happened, as long as it all relates to evidence presented, without the cross examination aspect?
For instance, could he say something like, "the night Laura died, she was with me at Maple Gate and unfortunately ODed in my presence" or some other explanation?

Or can he simply ONLY go over his "evidence" that "proves" she is not even deceased?

Not sure what the latitude is for defense closing in this situation.
Also don't know if I'm phrasing my inquiry properly...

I'm not sure...but it's an interesting question for sure. Because of his letters to CN, does that allow him or Dungey to raise an overdose scenario? Or could they have anyway? I know you can't introduce new evidence at closing, but is blathering other theories considered evidence? Not sure.

 

[Typhoo1961]

he wanted Rabbit's equity in her house to help him make urgent financial obligations

As I recall she told him no.