Bosma Murder Trial 04.13.16 - Day 34

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Are you discovering as I am that the English language simply fails when it comes to vocabulary adequate to describe such a person. I wonder if there are words adequate in any other language on the planet.....:dunno:

Well, the english language does have some adequate words which when stitched together into a string, would very well describe DM and MS, however forum rules prevent the use of them here. ;)
 
I think he was going to be murdered, just not inside DM's new toy.

What brought a whole lot of trouble was their post actions and DM's confidence that his sycophant ways would get him through another crisis.

MOO

But you are contradicting yourself. What precipitated the change of plan? With the exception of accidental discharge, the only other possibility is a response to an action from Tim. The fact that one of those things did happen leads to the question "what evidence is there that there plan was to shoot him outside?"
 
Maybe on TV. But the reality is that handguns are extremely rare in Canada and very few people would use an ankle holster unless they were involved in something illegal. We just don't walk around carrying guns like is done south of the border.

If IT was carrying any weapon, I would put my money on a knife. Quicker, just as deadly in close quarters and 100% legal.

No you can't legally walk around with a concealed knife.
 
But you are contradicting yourself. What precipitated the change of plan? With the exception of accidental discharge, the only other possibility is a response to an action from Tim. The fact that one of those things did happen leads to the question "what evidence is there that there plan was to shoot him outside?"

There post actions say that the location of the murder (inside the truck) was unplanned. DM had to keep the guys away on the 7th, with an emergency text early in the morning. But we have heard evidence of preparing the Eliminator prior to the test drive, with the question to SS about the state of the generator.

You are saying it was an armed robbery that went wrong. I am saying it was a planned theft and murder, with the murder not going as planned. Big difference. MOO
 
Again, DM and MS went to test drive a truck with the possible intent of purchase (imo, I could be wrong, but I'm certain this is what Tim thought).
The question "Maybe Tim thought the gun was a fake?"....who the heck brings a gun for a test drive?
Let's not forget, Tim and family are the victims, NOT DM and MS.
I don't know the Bosma family or any of their friends but I'm quite certain with a wife and child at home that he adores, given the opportunity, he would've walked away without the truck.
Again, strictly my opinion

Do you know how many people are shot dead every year defending amounts far less than what most people carry in their pocket?

I was recently involved in a road rage incident where a guy intentionally ran my car off the road, exit his vehicle. This guy was at least a foot taller than I and had at least 100lbs on me. What did I do? Called him an ahole and suggested he learn how to drive. Like most bullies he walked away when he saw I wasn't yielding. Afterwards I thought how stupid I was, put I was running on adrenaline and principal. Again, unless you've been in a situation you have no clue how you'll react.
 
But you are contradicting yourself. What precipitated the change of plan? With the exception of accidental discharge, the only other possibility is a response to an action from Tim. The fact that one of those things did happen leads to the question "what evidence is there that there plan was to shoot him outside?"
BBM
All the same evidence that shows premeditation, whether it be in the truck or outside the truck.
- bringing a loaded gun
- not involving the other lowlife thieves, just MS
- the incinerator and the preparation for it (locating the generator, for eg)
- turning the hangar camera away in the week before (did they do this for any of the other stolen items that arrived at the hangar?)
- getting the red Ram from JV
- I'm sure there's lots more that escapes me at the moment

Another possibility is that DM, having shot WM in the head, didn't find it to be messy and thought the same would work for TB.
Another possibility is that either DM or MS got too excited/nervous/jumpy about their next victim and shot him too soon.
 
Now to offend everyone but people are turning IT into James Bond with concealed guns and Israeli forces looking for redemption etc. This is sounding like a movie script. He likely wasn't killed for a very simple reason and that's he was in the right place at the right time. Unless he can dodge a bullet from close range or sense a sneak attack from a rear passenger a small concealed gun from close range trumps all training. If the situation presented itself and the timing was right he would've been shot instead of TB


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AM says about DM's truck theft plan today:

molly hayesVerified account ‏@mollyhayes 1m1 minute ago
Sachak: he really wanted one.
Michalski: needed.
#Bosma

AM says yesterday: Colin Butler ‏@ColinButlerCBC 28s29 seconds ago
Because "I didn't think he needed to steal a truck" Michalski says. #Bosma

All MOO.

I haven't caught up fully on the thread so sorry if someone has already responded to this.

Those are not the same at all. Two different statements about different topics.

Yesterday, AM said that DM didn't need to steal a truck because he assumed DM could afford to buy one.

Today, Sachak suggested DM just wanted a truck like the ones in the kijiji ads (I guess saying he was looking at ads and daydreaming but had no need for one at the time) and AM corrected him to say no, DM needed a truck like one of those.

Completely different.

MOO.
 
BBM
All the same evidence that shows premeditation, whether it be in the truck or outside the truck.
- bringing a loaded gun
- not involving the other lowlife thieves, just MS
- the incinerator and the preparation for it (locating the generator, for eg)
- turning the hangar camera away in the week before (did they do this for any of the other stolen items that arrived at the hangar?)
- getting the red Ram from JV
- I'm sure there's lots more that escapes me at the moment

Another possibility is that DM, having shot WM in the head, didn't find it to be messy and thought the same would work for TB.
Another possibility is that either DM or MS got too excited/nervous/jumpy about their next victim and shot him too soon.

Good points. I'll disregard the CM stuff because the jury can't consider that, but nonetheless, you've just swayed me.
 
It's dinnertime now and I'm kind of late to the table, but please consider these tasty:cupcake::cupcake::cupcake::cupcake: as just desserts for our tweet team! :tyou: for covering today's torrent of tweets.

All MOO.
 
I guess we're not going to find out if DM had a license to fly that helicopter. I still don't think he did. It certainly was not found with his other cards and ID in the Yukon.

MOO

DM solo'd / qualified for both his Fixed-Wing and Helicopter's licence at age 14, on his birthday. It was a well-publicized Millard event. Whether he bothered to maintain his Pilot's qualifications along with such legal or regulatory peculiarities like an annual Pilot physical, certificate of airworthiness, insurance, inspection regimens, etc etc, is another question entirely.

I suspect not.
 
For those arguing that Tim would never have fought back I have to respectfully disagree that any of us have a clue how we would react in a situation like this until it happens. I described on these boards my reaction when two men attempted to rob me at knifepoint on a dark street and also have an experience with an idiot pulling a handgun out of his jacket as small gathering at my house years ago. In both cases I honestly might have stabbed or shot me I was so aggressive and insulting. My reactions were utterly illogical and bubbled up from some reservoir of I don't know what and it didn't feel like anything remotely controlled, measured or reasoned. I can say with assurance that most of us will simply be reacting and running on some primitive brain circuit that may have very little to do with what makes sense. In both cases for me I was shocked, completely shocked by my own behaviour once that first rush of autopilot wore off and I just had the time and space to be scared.

I am not arguing there was no struggle. I am arguing that the post actions show they were ready to dispose of the victim. Which to me suggests premeditation. I have been saying all along that killing him in the truck was not planned.

I didn't expect to hear "Just swell. Marlena's a child and worries too easily." He didn't seem rattled like I would assume a normal armed robber would respond when just finished murdering someone by mistake and cremating them.

Continuing with the morphing of the truck without any delay also tells me that it was more than an armed robbery with a hiccup.

MOO
 
I haven't caught up fully on the thread so sorry if someone has already responded to this.

Those are not the same at all. Two different statements about different topics.

Yesterday, AM said that DM didn't need to steal a truck because he assumed DM could afford to buy one.

Today, Sachak suggested DM just wanted a truck like the ones in the kijiji ads (I guess saying he was looking at ads and daydreaming but had no need for one at the time) and AM corrected him to say no, DM needed a truck like one of those.

Completely different.

MOO.

Thanks to you, mozzagirl and to billandrew, the light bulb went on and I've now seen the light! :cheerful:

All MOO.
 
No you can't legally walk around with a concealed knife.

I know many people who carry a pocket knife every day. My interpretation is that the only laws specific to knives prohibit switchblades, butterfly knives, etc. It is legal to carry a knife (concealed or not) as a tool, but not as a weapon. I'm not a lawyer, this is MOO. But if I'm wrong, I would like to know so I stop carrying my pocket knife before I get arrested for it.
 
Respectfully, I disagree. Both statements were made by AM when asked about the plan for DM to steal a truck. Yesterday AM said he didn't think DM needed to steal a truck and today AM said clearly the opposite and corrected Sachak to say DM didn't simply want the truck, he needed the truck, IMO.

What am I misunderstanding? Yesterday AM perceived DM as not needing to steal a truck and today he said he did need it?

All MOO.

You are missing the context (See mozzagirl's post for the context. It explains things pretty well.)
 
I know many people who carry a pocket knife every day. My interpretation is that the only laws specific to knives prohibit switchblades, butterfly knives, etc. It is legal to carry a knife (concealed or not) as a tool, but not as a weapon. I'm not a lawyer, this is MOO. But if I'm wrong, I would like to know so I stop carrying my pocket knife before I get arrested for it.

The Canadian Criminal Code criminalises the possession of knives which open automatically. Section 84(1) defines "a knife that has a blade that opens automatically by gravity or centrifugal force or by hand pressure applied to a button, spring or other device attached to or in the handle of the knife" as a prohibited weapon.[10] Only persons who have been granted exemption by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police through the Canadian Firearms Program are allowed to possess (but not acquire) prohibited weapons.

If a person is found in unauthorized possession of a prohibited knife by any law enforcement officer, the person is liable to a maximum of 5 years in jail and the weapon being seized. The Crown can then apply to a Provincial Court judge for the weapon to be forfeited and destroyed. The import and export of prohibited weapons is also strictly regulated and enforced by the Canada Border Services Agency.[11]

Examples of prohibited knives include:

  • any knife, including a switchblade, or butterfly knife with a blade that opens automatically by gravity or centrifugal force or by hand pressure applied to a button, spring or other device in or attached to the handle of the knife;
  • Constant Companion (belt-buckle knife);
  • finger rings with blades or other sharp objects projecting from the surface;
  • push daggers.[10][12]
  • Manually-opened or 'one-handed' opening knives, including spring-assisted knives, that do not fall within the categories listed as prohibited weapons definition are legal to own, import and use.[13]


There is no length restriction on carrying knives within the Criminal Code, but there is a prohibition against carrying a knife if the possessor intends to carry for a purpose dangerous to public peace or for the purpose of committing a criminal offence.[14] It is also an offence to take a weapon or prohibited device to a public meeting.[15]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knife_legislation#Canada
 
Permalink

Michalski was Millard's navigator for the Baja race. "We hadn't modified the Jeep correctly," Michalski says, describing why they didn't finish the race.

Ding..ding..ding! We have a winner! Wonder what super SS mechanic is thinking now LOL
Just as I've said. That TJ wouldn't even pass pre race inspection. They can run the course before the race without pre tech inspection.
 
Respectfully, I disagree. Both statements were made by AM when asked about the plan for DM to steal a truck. Yesterday AM said he didn't think DM needed to steal a truck and today AM said clearly the opposite and corrected Sachak to say DM didn't simply want the truck, he needed the truck, IMO.

What am I misunderstanding? Yesterday AM perceived DM as not needing to steal a truck and today he said he did need it?

All MOO.

Michalski said DM needed the truck, but he didn't need to steal the truck. JMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
211
Guests online
1,688
Total visitors
1,899

Forum statistics

Threads
599,528
Messages
18,096,131
Members
230,871
Latest member
Where is Jennifer*
Back
Top