Bosma Murder Trial 04.27.16 - Day 41

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps her intent is to be a hostile witness and not help the Crown out because maybe her lawyer tried to make a plea deal with the Crown and they wouldn't accept any deal. Again, maybe she knows her goose is cooked based on evidence, there's no chance of her getting off of her accessory after the fact charge. She is pretty certain she is going to prison through her own trial, so now she is now going for the glory of being a very memorable shining star during TB's trial. JMO.

Most of the hard evidence in this case involves phone and text messages. If there were any hard evidence against CN, it would more than likely be in the form of a text and it would specifically detail her participation. If such messages do exist, I think we would have heard about them today. I think they've got squat on CN and it wouldn't surprise me if the charges against her are withdrawn. I've said from the beginning that those charges were an attempt to coerce her to testify against somebody that she didn't want to testify against.
 
Question:

As a trial neophyte I have the following question.

Can the crown call back a witness? If the letters reveal CN was to reach out to someone who has already testified, can they be called back to answer to the letters?

Thanks
 
Where did I say 12 cans were used ? Where did I say the garbage can was repainted ?

I think DM planned to repaint it that first night but they were out of white so he told SS to order some. Then the heat was on and he got busy hiding trucks and incinerators and did not get the can re-painted so he tossed it in the Yukon to get it away from the hangar. He was likely expecting a visit from the cops at that point and removed everything connected to the case .... ie: can, gloves , receipt

.

Think you are right about the can being used to clean the incinerator. I think it was sprayed out behind Riverside, thus the need to run the water all day, to clean the blackened pavement.
 
Thanks. I started following this trial halfway into the proceedings so that is why I didn't know CN was ordered to wear an ankle bracelet.
It must have been removed before she testified for some reason and will likely be put back on once she is done on the witness stand.

Several people asked about it on Twitter yesterday and I don't think anyone got an answer. I'm wondering if her not wearing the ankle bracelet during the trial was an agreement reached at her bail hearing in 2014. That hearing was covered by a publication ban which would prevent the reporters from responding. I think you're right that she'll be wearing it again soon.
 
Most of the hard evidence in this case involves phone and text messages. If there were any hard evidence against CN, it would more than likely be in the form of a text and it would specifically detail her participation. If such messages do exist, I think we would have heard about them today. I think they've got squat on CN and it wouldn't surprise me if the charges against her are withdrawn. I've said from the beginning that those charges were an attempt to coerce her to testify against somebody that she didn't want to testify against.

But if they use evidence in This trial, can it be reused in her trial? I don't imagine the LE arrested and charged her if they didn't have anything on her. Would they?
 
Multiple MSM sources noted the ankle bracelet was a condition of her release, eg, Girlfriend in Bosma murder case gets bail (8/8/14):
She has been released on a $100,000 surety.

She is to reside with her parents under house arrest in Etobicoke, with exceptions only to travel to and from work and university. An ankle bracelet will monitor her every move.

Once the paperwork was filed and the ankle bracelet was strapped on to her leg, Noudga left the courthouse just after 5 p.m. with her parents by her side.



Hmmm, maybe one of the crossing lawyers needs to ask her how she managed to travel all over downtown Toronto to take photos if she was in house arrest? Oh I get it, THAT is her job. Right! :thinking:
 
Question:

As a trial neophyte I have the following question.

Can the crown call back a witness? If the letters reveal CN was to reach out to someone who has already testified, can they be called back to answer to the letters?

Thanks

Sure witnesses can be recalled. One of the most famous being Mark Fuhrman in the OJ trial.
 
Hmmm, maybe one of the crossing lawyers needs to ask her how she managed to travel all over downtown Toronto to take photos if she was in house arrest? Oh I get it, THAT is her job. Right! :thinking:

Do we know she took the photos?
 
Was the DNC list in effect when those letters were written?

Good question, I did assume it was. Maybe someone knows the answer since CN was not tied at the hip and arrested at the same time like MS and MM.
 
Wow, the mess in her bedroom is unbelievable. I know some teenagers have messy rooms but yikes. Who keeps empty liquor bottles on the shelf? Looks like both her and DM don't mind living in filth.
 
But if they use evidence in This trial, can it be reused in her trial? I don't imagine the LE arrested and charged her if they didn't have anything on her. Would they?

I think LE went into this partly blind (they didnt know her side of the story) , they only knew she was with DM when the trailer and incinerator were moved

Now that she has told "her side of the story" in court I dont think LE have much of a case any more , and they likely realize it too ... especially when you compare it to SS and AM who definitely did stuff to hide evidence to protect DM yet were never charged.

Should be interesting in court today but I doubt there can be any way to corner CN because she pretty much covered all the days from May 6th until DM was arrested and she came out looking like she was just along for the ride.

Personally I think she knew plenty , but if I was a juror I would say LE has zilch on her. And if there is some blockbuster evidence yet to come she would know about it already (disclosure) and would have tailored her testimony around it.

I may have to eat my words but I think yesterday with CN was a big yawn and today will be the same.
 
Yes , and I have a few things to add to that (thanks)

Below is a picture of the ash covered glove and ash covered incinerator rake .

But mostly what I wanted to mention is that ever since I saw the metal garbage can in the back of the Yukon my first thought was it was used for cleaning out the incinerator because it has one side flattened so it can fit up against the the back of the incinerator under the lower clean-out door

Then I had a BINGO moment when I realized that the white satin paint Dellen ordered was likely for re-painting the white metal garbage can after they used it .

The ashes were likely flushed at the hangar and the can washed out afterward , Then the orange bag , glove, garbage can, and incinerator receipt were tossed into the Yukon so DM could hide them somewhere but the cops stopped him first.

Excellent photos and great observation.....honestly, it is the only explanation that makes any sense of all the items found in the back of the Yukon. I agree that the garbage pail could have been flushed out at the hangar but I could see the pail and its contents being flushed down a steep driveway into storm drains in a back alley where water was left running for 10 hours !!!
Your explanation for the paint is as good as any....and they could leave the rest of the cans at the Riverside address for the renos that were going on. Did you check out the big bottle of Gain laundry soap !! .....for washing the murse etc.
:hanging:
 
Think you are right about the can being used to clean the incinerator. I think it was sprayed out behind Riverside, thus the need to run the water all day, to clean the blackened pavement.

We should be hearing more about it if that is the case. There was not one mention about the can during the LE evidence portion of the trial. Although they may have cleaned it of any evidence, and there is nothing to prove the theory. It does seem to fit well with horror story line. MOO
 

Excellent photos and great observation.....honestly, it is the only explanation that makes any sense of all the items found in the back of the Yukon. I agree that the garbage pail could have been flushed out at the hangar but I could see the pail and its contents being flushed down a steep driveway into storm drains in a back alley where water was left running for 10 hours !!!
Your explanation for the paint is as good as any....and they could leave the rest of the cans at the Riverside address for the renos that were going on. Did you check out the big bottle of Gain laundry soap !! .....for washing the murse etc.
:hanging:

Or it could simply be the pail that DM rode into town on? :rumor: :propeller:
 
Wow, the mess in her bedroom is unbelievable. I know some teenagers have messy rooms but yikes. Who keeps empty liquor bottles on the shelf? Looks like both her and DM don't mind living in filth.

Either those bottles are 3 years old, or mom and dad have been accompanying her to the LCBO for her supplies?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
257
Guests online
1,272
Total visitors
1,529

Forum statistics

Threads
599,604
Messages
18,097,407
Members
230,889
Latest member
Grumpie13
Back
Top