Bosma Murder Trial 04.27.16 - Day 41

[JuneBug67]

IT is the same tweet by the same reporter from early today. The only one that has reported this and not one of the main reporters in this case.

Maybe Alex Pierson hasn't been coughing into her sleeve...

 

[Gibson67]

IT is the same tweet by the same reporter from early today. The only one that has reported this and not one of the main reporters in this case.

I think he means her own trial...but I tweeted him to clarify as he is the only one who has reported it.

 

[SnooperDuper]

I agree with "intelligent" .... I will even go so far as to say she will be acquitted on accessory charges if she sticks to the same story(s) ....

--- it is plausible for her to think the DVR was a stereo
--- it is plausible for her to help DM check the locks on the trailer (thus fingerprints or whatever)
--- it is plausible for her (and even MB) to believe DM had a "mothers day present" in the trailer .... thus a bit of "secrecy" .... DM had even mentioned in a letter he wanted to buy MB a Tesla Car
--- it is plausible she would put on gloves to help move industrial equipment (incinerator)
--- it is plausible she would accept DM moved the incinerator because of the creaky second story wooden floors in the barn
--- it is plausible DM would try to conceal the incinerator in the trees to prevent somebody from stealing it (aah the irony)

Whether she is telling the truth or not is beside the point ..... between the crown and CN ... CN wins this round !!!!

Only thing I can think of if she obeyed DM's letters and tried to influence witnesses it could be construed as helping DM get away with murder .... however I doubt that too .... because her charge was in regard to what she did on May 9th when the trailer was moved

I don't agree on a couple of counts.

The "Mother's day present" was brainstormed as an idea between CN and MB after DM's arrest, she said.

It's hard to believe that creaky floorboards would be such an urgent issue that DM would drive at night to solve it. Why not address that when he first discovered the floorboards were creaky when he moved the incinerator in there? Why a midnight mission?

 

[Nosey Parker]

I was sitting in today. The judge did not say anything to the jury along the lines of her being protected in other murder trials. He told them that what she says in her testimony in the TB trial against DM and MS cannot be held against her in her own trial in the TB case, where she is being charged as accessory after the fact. The only way it can be used is if she perjures herself. She is protected under the Evidence Act.

michelle, did you find CN as snippy and evasive as the tweets suggested?

 

[mimimic]

I agree. I don't think that she cares to protect him at all but only herself.

It looks like both (to me) in her sexy shoes and barf/unclassy comments. I bet her bf is quite pleased. What a ...*

 

[Massasauga Rattler]

I agree with "intelligent" .... I will even go so far as to say she will be acquitted on accessory charges if she sticks to the same story(s) ....

--- it is plausible for her to think the DVR was a stereo
--- it is plausible for her to help DM check the locks on the trailer (thus fingerprints or whatever)
--- it is plausible for her (and even MB) to believe DM had a "mothers day present" in the trailer .... thus a bit of "secrecy" .... DM had even mentioned in a letter he wanted to buy MB a Tesla Car
--- it is plausible she would put on gloves to help move industrial equipment (incinerator)
--- it is plausible she would accept DM moved the incinerator because of the creaky second story wooden floors in the barn
--- it is plausible DM would try to conceal the incinerator in the trees to prevent somebody from stealing it (aah the irony)

Whether she is telling the truth or not is beside the point ..... between the crown and CN ... CN wins this round !!!!

Only thing I can think of if she obeyed DM's letters and tried to influence witnesses it could be construed as helping DM get away with murder .... however I doubt that too .... because her charge was in regard to what she did on May 9th when the trailer was moved

Great observations.

I'm now wondering if the charges against her were just a scare tactic by LE for her belligerence. They might have known they really had nothing on her that would stick, but did it because she was being difficult and to try intimidate her into saying more.

I'm also now thinking that if the rest of her testimony goes as today, the Crown may wind up withdrawing charges before her trial even though she still has not been cooperative. She may have been counselled by her lawyer to believe the charges against her are a pure bluff.

 

[Gibson67]

agreed..I do believe she has been well groomed by her Lawyer and I think Dungey is up for a challenge on this one...he can yell all he wants but I can't see him breaking her down. She is here for herself..she did not commit the crime and was not really in contact with him after the 6th. I think she answers short and direct, wants this over and done with. She obviously follows social media..she must know DM is going away for 25 years..I don't really think there is much evidence on her from what we have seen so far..but maybe that won't come out until her own trial? Not sure.

 

[mozzagirl]

Great observations.

I'm now wondering if the charges against her were just a scare tactic by LE for her belligerence. They might have known they really had nothing on her that would stick, but did it because she was being difficult and to try intimidate her into saying more.

I'm also now thinking that if the rest of her testimony goes as today, the Crown may wind up withdrawing charges before her trial even though she still has not been cooperative. She may have been counselled by her lawyer to believe the charges against her are a pure bluff.

IMO, The fact that she has had to wear a monitoring bracelet for years and that a trial is scheduled, means this is more than a bluff to get her to talk.

 

[EspressoBean]

Great observations.

I'm now wondering if the charges against her were just a scare tactic by LE for her belligerence. They might have known they really had nothing on her that would stick, but did it because she was being difficult and to try intimidate her into saying more.

I'm also now thinking that if the rest of her testimony goes as today, the Crown may wind up withdrawing charges before her trial even though she still has not been cooperative. She may have been counselled by her lawyer to believe the charges against her are a pure bluff.

I don't think the charges against her were helpful to the crown in this case at all. Quite the opposite. I think her responses are all reflective of her not incriminating herself. Accessory charges are contingent on her being aware that the crime had been committed and having intent to assist him.
I have to wonder if her testimony might have been more forthcoming if she was not facing charges.

 

[Massasauga Rattler]

It looks like both (to me) in her sexy shoes and barf/unclassy comments. I bet her bf is quite pleased. What a ...*

Oh well, poor DM and CN....won't be able to hook up again for a long long long time. The only woman DM's gonna be having an exclusive relationship with for the next 25 years is Palmala.

 

[mozzagirl]

When CN was being asked about moving the incinerator and Leitch suggested her reading her statement, her response was "oh is this about it being concealed?". It reminded me of how Rob Ford skirted questions about his drug use because he "wasn't asked the proper questions" that would require him to give the answer people wanted.

It is all a game to CN, IMO. "Oh you don't like my answer, ok fine I'll answer your question properly".

MOO.

 

[ADAWG]

I dont think the charges are a bluff maybe a threat of them in the beginning were to try get her to talk but she called the bluff. The police gradually waited and slowly built their case. There is obviously enough evidence to support charges and go to trial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[_michelle_]

michelle, did you find CN as snippy and evasive as the tweets suggested?

Absolutely. It was very frustrating to watch. At first I thought she really did have no knowledge of the incident, I thought maybe DM was trying to protect her but I do believe she's lying through her teeth.

 

[Nosey Parker]

I dont think the charges are a bluff maybe a threat of them in the beginning were to try get her to talk but she called the bluff. The police gradually waited and slowly built their case. There is obviously enough evidence to support charges and go to trial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes. She's not on trial yet. The Crown isn't trying to prove her guilt here, just elicit enough info to help convict DM and MS. Her apparent 'attitude' ain't going to win her or DM any favours with the jury, IMO.

 

[mozzagirl]

Absolutely. It was very frustrating to watch. At first I thought she really did have no knowledge of the incident, I thought maybe DM was trying to protect her but I do believe she's lying through her teeth.

Do you have any idea of how DM was reacting at all while she was on the stand?

 

[Elisabeth]

<rsbm>

In order for her to carry out his instruction, she would have to know specifics of who knew what (in order to know who "he" was), and she could only know that if he had previously discussed the details with her.

I agree.

And so a question: the way the questions were posed today, is it possible she could argue she didn't know before May 10th early hours but that he told her after that. (and based on how the questions were worded today she still was truthful in her answers today?)

 

[mozzagirl]

All I can think is *if* DM is somehow actually innocent in this, wouldn't he have been talking to CN about what he is being set up for or confiding in her instead of avoiding her questions? If I was on the jury I would be thinking "hmm. If this DM guy is innocent, why won't he answer any questions to his own girlfriend about what was going on?".

Also, the Crown probably figured it would be pulling teeth to have CN on the stand but by having her up there they can introduce the letters from DM as evidence, so that alone probably makes her stupidity worth it.

MOO.

 

[_michelle_]

Do you have any idea of how DM was reacting at all while she was on the stand?

Unfortunately not, sorry. I did read tweets that he was looking at her/they made eye contact.

 

[Inspector_North]

Most likely she turned the hose on .......... and forgot to turn it off.

I looked at the post about 'plausibility', and I am not so sure that even a Jury would believe that when CN and MB pondered on the 10th, that the trailer contained a gift for Rabbit. CN may claim she didn't know the financial situation, but MB knew that DM was broke and needed her to mortgage her home ASAP. It was not a time to buy momma a $100,000 Tesla.

Both of them knew it was used for towing vehicles, and they thought it was a mothers day gift after his arrest? Not the truck that DM was arrested for!?

Well, it was opened on mothers day, but not by MB.

MOO

 

[Arnie M]

I don't agree on a couple of counts.

The "Mother's day present" was brainstormed as an idea between CN and MB after DM's arrest, she said.

It's hard to believe that creaky floorboards would be such an urgent issue that DM would drive at night to solve it. Why not address that when he first discovered the floorboards were creaky when he moved the incinerator in there? Why a midnight mission?

Yes , but from CN's perspective any of those explanations would be believable ... even the part about the incinerator being for melting down aircraft metal .... she would not have the mechanical knowledge to question those things.

Same as if a housewife tried to explain to me the intricacies of crocheting a doily for the armrest of her sofa .... I would have to accept it as the truth because I know nothing about the subject.

Anyway , CN has helped to confirm DM moved the trailer and incinerator but has kept herself clean as far as the charges against her , and we cant really blame her for that even though we might not like it.