Bosma Murder Trial 05.24.16 - Day 54

[Georgeo]

This frosts my glass.
If Isho DM text evidence shows that DM bought two guns, it cheeses me off that this isn't allowed. We have a good Justice system in Canada, but it seems heavily weighted in favour of the criminals rights, than the victims rights.
The justice system should be a voice for the victim, not trumped by legal system.

this is the part I find most frustrating!!! Jury should hear ALL evidence.

 

[Errrr]

I believe this was covered in MS's first testimony (but I could be mistaken). The change of clothes were darker clothes to be used at night when stealing the car. They didn't want to use the dark clothes to go on a test drive and arise suspicion. I could be mistaken and filling this in myself though.

So if that is standard procedure for their thefts, why did DM have to tell him that?

 

[Claroon]

Back in the very early days of this case LE mentioned in some interviews that the area of the Ancaster fair grounds was significant , and that they believed TB was killed a few minutes after he left home. (police wanted witnesses who may have seen anything around the Ancaster fairgrounds)

That stuck in my mind all these years mostly because it was never mentioned again. At least not until the trial and the Super Sucker video which is close to the fairgrounds

And I confess to this day I would not be surprised if the turnaround (and maybe killing) happened in the fairgrounds ... it is a large vacant area , gate open , and no people around at that time of day or year. It would also make more sense than doing the shooting and turnaround on a busier highway (by turnaround , I mean to retrieve the Yukon from the hayfield)

Sorry for the long answer Sphinx , but yes , back in 2013 police sounded very certain TB was killed minutes from home

And I find it hinky police (crown) kept a lid on the two extra truck sightings in the SS video , it would help fit those pieces together , and ironically it was Millards lawyer who pointed out the extra trucks to disprove MS' claim he was innocent and in the Yukon

Well, there or at Bobcat, it was within about 45 min, so I might call that "within a few minutes" in the bigger scheme of things.

 

[musicaljoke]

Yes but if that was the "norm" on missions why was he told to bring them this time? He should just know to bring them

You are right to question the "norm". If it was normal to bring a change of clothes, then MS defense would have been all over that. They would have presented at least one text or witness to show that a change of clothes was discussed in the plans for the other thefts.

But, there is no supporting evidence, and no witness testimony to show that they brought along a change of clothes at any other time, until this particular mission, and imo, it's because this time, they planned to burn their clothing.

Too bad MS can't remember where he left his clothes from that night. He could have proved me wrong.

 

[Claroon]

You are right to question the "norm". If it was normal to bring a change of clothes, then MS defense would have been all over that. They would have presented at least one text or witness to show that a change of clothes was discussed in the plans for the other thefts.

But, there is no supporting evidence, and no witness testimony to show that they brought along a change of clothes at any other time, until this particular mission, and imo, it's because this time, they planned to burn their clothing.

Too bad MS can't remember where he left his clothes from that night. He could have proved me wrong.

Interestingly, the clothes they wear in the video are not black, though obviously changed.

 

[hellkat2]

Has the crown determined via the texts that the incineration was premeditated? I am thinking yes.

 

[Errrr]

And it's only the norm according to MS which no one else can refute. Who knows if it's really the norm.

Simply ask the other guys on the missions.

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

Interestingly, the clothes they wear in the video are not black, though obviously changed.

Would be interesting to see if MS clothes are changed in the hanger video versus when they picked up MM. Of course they could have changed before the hanger video...

 

[hellkat2]

/

So if that is standard procedure for their thefts, why did DM have to tell him that?

It may be that he is a "F..up" if we are to believe what MS said about himself?

 

[redheart]

I'm very impressed with Craig Fraser. He's really emphasizing how ridiculous Smich's testimony is as a whole.

 

[brightii]

this is the part I find most frustrating!!! Jury should hear ALL evidence.

It's really frustrating, but the accused must have their rights respected because if their rights were trampled over in favour of the victim's rights that would not be impartial or fair, and it could possibly result in a mistrial or a successful appeal upon conviction.

The onus is on the Crown to prove the accused guilty, and the accused each have lawyers who will defend their rights via legal arguments as much as possible. Every accused enjoys the right to presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and yet I don't see that concept respected all the time either. I think though that the Crown must have won some of the legal arguments in this case. It's a legal dance between all three sides I guess.

The judge in this case is reportedly highly respected and careful to ensure both accused get a fair trial. If the accused are convicted, then the victim will have true justice in a legal sense, IMO, because I believe that both accused are guilty - but what if I'm wrong? - or in whatever other case, what if the accused was actually innocent? - then we'd be very grateful that their rights were protected and if acquitted, justice would indeed be served in such a case.

I accept that the justice system has got things right overall and where an accused's life and liberty are at stake and hanging in the balance, we must be careful that they have every chance for a strong defence. I find it hard to convict anyone, even on this crime forum where I know my opinion has zero impact on the verdicts, but if I was sitting on the jury at this trial I would want to feel assured before I voted to convict or acquit an accused that they had the full advantage of their every right protected under the law. I'm so glad I don't have that incredibly heavy responsibility.

All MOO.

 

[Ontario Mom]

Finally caught up from this afternoon. I have to say I'm a bit underwhelmed by the Crown. I'm not sure what I expected but I think I just expected a lot more. I think I was hoping they'd come out with some hard core argumentation for why it was stated in the opening address that they BOTH shot Tim Bosma. But, maybe that will come tomorrow.

If not, I'll remain unconvinced MS was in the truck when MS fired the fatal shot. However, a murder did occur in the commission of another felony so I don't think that matters as far as the 1st degree charge is concerned.

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

Finally caught up from this afternoon. I have to say I'm a bit underwhelmed by the Crown. I'm not sure what I expected but I think I just expected a lot more. I think I was hoping they'd come out with some hard core argumentation for why it was stated in the opening address that they BOTH shot Tim Bosma. But, maybe that will come tomorrow.

If not, I'll remain unconvinced MS was in the truck when MS fired the fatal shot. However, a murder did occur in the commission of another felony so I don't think that matters as far as the 1st degree charge is concerned.

Did they really say they both shot him?

 

[ABro]

Did they really say they both shot him?

No, they didn't. The exact quote is:

The Crown intends to prove that on this date in the late evening hours, Tim Bosma was killed in his truck, shot by the two accused at close range, while on a test drive with his truck; his body then incinerated hours later by the two accused.

 

[brightii]

Did they really say they both shot him?

I think what the Crown has proved - at least to me - is that both accused were in on the plan to steal TB's truck and to murder him and then incinerate him. They did everything as a dynamic duo including the clean-up and cover up.

The Crown will not say which accused shot TB because they don't have to - TB is dead because of both accused.

All MOO.

 

[CanSleuth]

I think the shooting was premeditated. If it was merely a scope mission, and the plan was to return later to steal the truck, why bring a loaded gun? Why not steal Igor's truck? His size and army training wouldn't matter if there was no need to overpower a victim. I think Tim was targeted because he had the right type of vehicle and was a 'nice guy' with a skinny build. I think DM and MS wanted the thrill kill.

However, if it was premeditated I do find it odd that TB was shot inside the truck. I would have expected that they would force him outside at gunpoint in a vacant lot or on a lonely side street in order to avoid the mess and interior damage. Of course, if the truck wasn't the ultimate prize--and the thrill kill was--then it makes some sense.

I also find it odd that the Eliminator was not already set up on the farm, and 'ready to go' so to speak. Its crazy that they towed it in after the murder. Would it be 'normal' to see one of these being towed down the street or would it turn heads? I live in a suburban area on the Prairies, and know many friends who live on ranches or farms, and had never even heard of a livestock/animal incinerator before this case.

I also find it odd that DM didn't do a better job of altering his appearance. When he showed up at TB's door, SB and their basement suite renter both got a good look at both men. DM didn't even cover his tattoo. Whether you are planning a murder or a simple theft, either way it seems sloppy.

I wonder how things would have played out if either SB or the renter had gone with TB on the test drive?

 

[sleuther76]

No, they didn't. The exact quote is:

"shot by the two accused at close range,"that would imply both shot them Abro

 

[sleuther76]

I think what the Crown has proved - at least to me - is that both accused were in on the plan to steal TB's truck and to murder him and then incinerate him. They did everything as a dynamic duo including the clean-up and cover up.

The Crown will not say which accused shot TB because they don't have to - TB is dead because of both accused.

All MOO.

Sorry, I beg to differ. I don't see how they have proven forcible confinement nor have they proven premeditation beyond a reasonable doubt for MS

 

[ABro]

"shot by the two accused at close range,"that would imply both shot them Abro

That's not my inference. I read it in the legal rather than the literal sense.

I'm sure it will be addressed in the closing arguments.

 

[brightii]

Sorry, I beg to differ. I don't see how they have proven forcible confinement nor have they proven premeditation beyond a reasonable doubt for MS

We'll have to agree to disagree.

I do believe it has been proved that both DM and MS planned it all and knew TB wasn't going to get out of the situation alive.

All MOO.