Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #1

[MsSherlock]

When he was charged, a mug shot or even a quick cell phone picture was likely taken and then shown to the potential witnesses. Not all photo/lineups happen before the suspect is caught, many happen after the suspect had been identified to ascertain that the correct suspect is in custody and to aid the case in court.

You've lost me! Are you saying that when DM was charged, LE took a cell phone pic of hm and then travelled around with it, showing it to potential witnesses confirming that they had the right person? I'm confused with this process.

 

[Juballee]

DM was identified by his thumbprint in the RAM.

Funny how MS's fingerprints were not, almost like if he hid his hands in his sleeves when he touched the truck, as if he knew it could end up being fingerprinted.

 

[Tamarind]

IMO, AJ didn't say that DM was living there- he indicated that he had living quarters there. He also had living quarters at Maple Gate. I agree with Sillybilly- DM wasn't a 9-5 type of guy. Personally, I don't know when he slept- considering the activities on Monday- LE have him at the hangar until the early morning hours of the 7th. Then he had to strip the truck down- when AJ got there on the 8th, it was sitting nicely on a green tarp. I'm assuming that on the 9th he drove from somewhere to pick up CN and then back out to the hangar to get the trailer, then all the way to Kleinburg to drop it off and then all the way back to the farm, drop the toolbox off at 4 am early Friday morning, must have dropped CN back home and then back to the hangar to meet with the accountant on Friday morning. We know he was at the hangar all day on Friday, and was still wide awake when he fired AJ, finishing off his night by being interrogated by HPS.

I haven't been able to find the reference that his phone was in Oakville in the am, but IMHO, DM had no problem driving anywhere at anytime and kept a very erratic schedule- seems like he could be anywhere at anytime. MOO

He was obviously meeting with a lawyer and possibly a Real Estate person on the Tuesday when he bought his condo. He was busy with Real Estate investments which can be erratic as you may know.

 

[MsSherlock]

LE do show photos of people of interest to others. I've heard of a young girl who was taken to the police station for walking from a bar to a taxi cab. She was put in a cell for a few hours to sober up ! During the time she was there she was shown pictures of several people and asked if she knew who they were. She was being asked to put names to faces and she was let go as she wasn't guilty of anything other than being a young girl out having a drink with friends !

Tamarind, I'm not saying that this may not have happened exactly the way it's set out, but I can't take it hook, line and sinker because the girl was obviously drunk. Inebriated hearsay? lol

 

[Juballee]

Do you have a link for this? Is this the official process? Isn't showing one picture on a cell phone prejudicing the witness?

Speaking as someone who has both been photographed by police after being charged with a crime (that I happened to be innocent of), and as someone who has been asked to identify a suspect in a photo lineup, I can say yes, this is the process.

This is also likely one of the contributing factors as to why announcing DM's arrest and the subsequent plastering of his face all over the media was delayed for a day, to give the witnesses a chance to try to identify the suspects before their lawyers can say that they were influenced by seeing their photos in the media.

There will also be a record of the time and date when any identification was made by a witness, which should be entered into evidence as well.

 

[Tamarind]

Tamarind, I'm not saying that this may not have happened exactly the way it's set out, but I can't take it hook, line and sinker because the girl was obviously drunk. Inebriated hearsay? lol

No there were a few of them, they had been for dinner and a few drinks... not inebriated and certainly not a liar. The city they were in is known for overly zealous police, she was quite upset and contacted a lawyer. Just pointing out that strange policing exists and they do often put photos out there for ID purposes.

 

[MsSherlock]

[/B]

He was obviously meeting with a lawyer and possibly a Real Estate person on the Tuesday when he bought his condo. He was busy with Real Estate investments which can be erratic as you may know.

IIRC, erratic? Is there something about this deal I've missed? IIRC, his lawyer was simply closing a deal. I remember someone posting here that DM had purchased the Distillery Condo on pre-sale in 2012. It closed on the 7th. The signing for the deed and final payment would have been done 3-5 days prior. All he would have had to do on the 7th is pick up the key from his Lawyers office. Usually the only time the Buyer has to run around on closing day is if they don't have their money together/ or there's a last minute problem with the mortgage necessary to pay the balance owing. MOO

 

[Juballee]

You've lost me! Are you saying that when DM was charged, LE took a cell phone pic of hm and then travelled around with it, showing it to potential witnesses confirming that they had the right person? I'm confused with this process.

When you are charged with a crime, LE takes a mug shot of you.

If you have been identified as being a potential witness in a case, LE shows you a series of mugshots in the hopes that you can identify the same suspect that they caught, or that it will aid them in catching a suspect if none has been caught yet.

I hope that helps.

 

[MsSherlock]

Speaking as someone who has both been photographed by police after being charged with a crime (that I happened to be innocent of), and as someone who has been asked to identify a suspect in a photo lineup, I can say yes, this is the process.

This is also likely one of the contributing factors as to why announcing DM's arrest and the subsequent plastering of his face all over the media was delayed for a day, to give the witnesses a chance to try to identify the suspects before their lawyers can say that they were influenced by seeing their photos in the media.

There will also be a record of the time and date when any identification was made by a witness, which should be entered into evidence as well.

How do you know that this is what happens? FWIK, LE are very careful on stuff like this for fear that it may not hold up in court- are they not? MOO

 

[MsSherlock]

When you are charged with a crime, LE takes a mug shot of you.

If you have been identified as being a potential witness in a case, LE shows you a series of mugshots in the hopes that you can identify the same suspect that they caught, or that it will aid them in catching a suspect if none has been caught yet.

I hope that helps.

But when DM was arrested, the only witnesses they had were SB and the tenant. I can understand them being asked to identify DM, but as far as I'm aware, there were no other witnesses at that time. MOO Awww...I just remembered that the test drive guys would be in there as well!

 

[Juballee]

How do you know that this is what happens? FWIK, LE are very careful on stuff like this for fear that it may not hold up in court- are they not? MOO

I know that this happens because I have seen this happen from both sides personally, as I have said.

I cannot say what has happened in this case, but I can say that it would have been irresponsible of LE NOT to have put DM's mugshot in a photo lineup for potential witnesses like Sharlene, her tenant and Igor to identify before his picture was plastered all over the media.

 

[Tamarind]

IIRC, erratic? Is there something about this deal I've missed? IIRC, his lawyer was simply closing a deal. I remember someone posting here that DM had purchased the Distillery Condo on pre-sale in 2012. It closed on the 7th. The signing for the deed and final payment would have been done 3-5 days prior. All he would have had to do on the 7th is pick up the key from his Lawyers office. Usually the only time the Buyer has to run around on closing day is if they don't have their money together/ or there's a last minute problem with the mortgage necessary to pay the balance owing. MOO

My post said that he had closed a deal on the Tuesday AND was busy with Real estate which can be erratic. Looking at places can have you running all over the place and at different times to suit a seller or agent. I think that is quite commonplace. I think you have mixed the last sentence into the first sentence of my post. IMO.

 

[Tamarind]

IIRC, erratic? Is there something about this deal I've missed? IIRC, his lawyer was simply closing a deal. I remember someone posting here that DM had purchased the Distillery Condo on pre-sale in 2012. It closed on the 7th. The signing for the deed and final payment would have been done 3-5 days prior. All he would have had to do on the 7th is pick up the key from his Lawyers office. Usually the only time the Buyer has to run around on closing day is if they don't have their money together/ or there's a last minute problem with the mortgage necessary to pay the balance owing. MOO

My post was in response to this post of yours:

IMO, AJ didn't say that DM was living there- he indicated that he had living quarters there. He also had living quarters at Maple Gate. I agree with Sillybilly- DM wasn't a 9-5 type of guy. Personally, I don't know when he slept- considering the activities on Monday- LE have him at the hangar until the early morning hours of the 7th. Then he had to strip the truck down- when AJ got there on the 8th, it was sitting nicely on a green tarp. I'm assuming that on the 9th he drove from somewhere to pick up CN and then back out to the hangar to get the trailer, then all the way to Kleinburg to drop it off and then all the way back to the farm, drop the toolbox off at 4 am early Friday morning, must have dropped CN back home and then back to the hangar to meet with the accountant on Friday morning. We know he was at the hangar all day on Friday, and was still wide awake when he fired AJ, finishing off his night by being interrogated by HPS.

I haven't been able to find the reference that his phone was in Oakville in the am, but IMHO, DM had no problem driving anywhere at anytime and kept a very erratic schedule- seems like he could be anywhere at anytime. MOO

I did bold the area of your post that I was responding to, HTH.

 

[swedie]

Not to mention, how ballsy is that to tell your roomie you've stolen a truck when half the country is on the lookout for Tim and his stolen truck?

Pretty ballsy unless this roomie was involved in previous thefts with DM also. So it may not have come as a surprise to him. Someone helped DM with MM's HD and trailer. I think those close to or associated with DM all had their hands in some shady business. As was stated in MSM, right after DM's arrest, "this group" or something similar. Could all these people be what lead to one of the largest computer seizures in Ontario? JMO.

 

[Kamille]

But when DM was arrested, the only witnesses they had were SB and the tenant. I can understand them being asked to identify DM, but as far as I'm aware, there were no other witnesses at that time. MOO Awww...I just remembered that the test drive guys would be in there as well!

I don't believe any of these people are being asked to identify either of the accused in court? Probably for a reason. Witness identification can be disputed as notoriously incorrect so when a case is so strong with so much physical evidence, it's probably wise for the Crown not to bother with witness identification in the courtroom just so that the defense team can't go at them with the "are you sure it was that person sitting there" "how can you be sure" line of questioning. Unless they personally spoke to one of the accused in their home or place of business and were told by the accused that it was in fact the person whom they believed it was, like in the case of the investigating officers, or they personally know the accused, I don't think the Crown would need to bother having those witnesses identify the accused in court. In fact, they did ask IT if he was asked to identify MS out of a photo line up. That was probably just to give MS's attorney the chance to formally state that MS was conceding to having been in the vehicle.

I don't think it's written in stone that any witness has to identify a suspect prior to arrest or after. Especially not with the physical evidence they had.

MOO

 

[Kamille]

Pretty ballsy unless this roomie was involved in previous thefts with DM also. So it may not have come as a surprise to him. Someone helped DM with MM's HD and trailer. I think those close to or associated with DM all had their hands in some shady business. As was stated in MSM, right after DM's arrest, "this group" or something similar. Could all these people be what lead to one of the largest computer seizures in Ontario? JMO.

Like I said earlier, maybe the roommate was expecting him to steal a truck so the roommate could drive it to the "races" and DM was just confirming that he got one.

MOO

 

[Tamarind]

Heres a compilation of much of AJ testimony from Thursday. I have added a few things that jumped out at me. Can someone tell me if I have overlooked anything or misterpreted something please?

In regard to the Thursday ? pictures taken by AJ . Both doors are open. Front seats
still intact. Rear view mirror still in its proper place. VIN still in place. Not a drop of blood visible not even on the tarpaulin that is spread out under the truck (where theoretically blood might have been dripping.)

(By the way there's also no sign, in the background, of chopped vehicles anywhere, either, which also looks very clean. )

If the truck looked all pristine and squeaky clean like that on the previous day ( according to AJ) and still looked like that on Thursday, then when, where, why and by whom did the truck become stripped and trashed as per the police photos which, one presumes, were taken on Sunday?

Apparently only DM's fingerprints were found on it when police found it, so whoever cleaned it was very careful except they missed wiping DM's fingerprints it would seem.

On the Weds/Thursday where's any indication of huge amounts of blood leaking down through the floor from a person who has been mortally wounded and apparently died there some 30 or so hours earlier. There should be some indications of up to 5 liters or more of blood somewhere if he bled out in the vehicle ( and dripped through the chassis) - not just a tiny dab on the dashboard. In the opening statements the prosecutor said there was "blood all over the interior." If so it was all masterfully tidied up by Wednesday when A.Jennings first noticed it and it remained absolutely pristine by Thursday for the photos.

So presumably we are meant to understand that all this reconstruction and cleanup of the truck took place on Tuesday at the hands of the two accused.

So A.Jennings's testimony indicates that:

Everybody told to stay home from work on Tuesday so he first noticed the Ram truck on Wednesday, May 8 and felt uncomfortable about it because of its resemblance to the missing Bosma truck. Something about the chrome configuration caught his eye. He testified that the truck's
interior was stripped, except for the rear seat, and it sat on a green tarp. No license plates.

By Thursday , May 9th, his continuing discomfort led him to let himself into the hangar early - where he was alone to take pictures (only he and his SIL were at the building that day) and where he surreptitiously took pictures of the truck and its VIN number, then called and reported the truck's VIN number, asking if it was the Bosma vehicle. They called back to say it was. He wouldn't give
them the truck location. It's a bit unclear when he sent them the pictures presented in evidence, but presumably he did that on Thursday, too.

That Thursday night he quarreled with his SIL SS, long time MillardAir employee and SS got angry with him and went home.

All the neighbors but one have said they heard the big trailer backing into the Mom's driveway on Thursday night and that's where it was on Friday morning. This matches Jenning's testimony that on
Friday morning when he gets to work, the truck and the trailer are gone.

Further on Friday A. Jennings testified that he was sent to the hardware store and when he returned an hour later the the police had been and gone. According to Jennings testimony, DM and SS came out onto the floor. His SIL gave him a "funny look" and soon after AJ was fired by DM. Later in the day DM was arrested by the police.

By the time police found the Bosma truck inside the trailer on Sunday, May 12, it had somehow became all trashed and covered with blood and gunshot residue as per the pictures submitted in evidence. When did that happen? DM was in jail so who ripped apart the vehicle? At the very least,
wouldn't one or another of those alert neighbors seen or heard something?

 

[swedie]

Well...the Crown said in their OS they intend to prove it was Dellen EVAN Millard who made the calls to TB and other Dodge owners. IMO it doesn't matter who owned the burner phone (although I tend to believe it was DM's). DM had the motive and ambition of finding a Dodge Ram to steal with his dopey sidekick MS. I don't think it's going to be imperative to the jurors who pulled the trigger either killing TB. It's a possibility the Crown cannot prove who did. Doesn't mean the accused are going to get a pass on murder. They were both there and someone has to be held accountable.

Once the judge reads the jurors the instructions on the charges before deliberating, IMO the jurors are going to find both guilty of first degree murder according to the law. The Crown has a mountain of evidence to go through yet. Igor provided a 12 page statement to LE and he's back on the stand tomorrow. Perhaps he has the answer to who owned the burner phone. But really, how important is it regarding who owned it. JMO.

*It is not apparent that in his dealings with Tim Bosma the caller provided his name, nonetheless the Crown intends to prove the identity of the caller as Dellen Millard.

*On Saturday, May 4th, Tim Bosma was phoned by a person the Crown intends to prove was Dellen Millard.

*Mr. Millard called Tim Bosma a second time as he was arriving in Ancaster just after 9:00 p.m.

*Sharlene saw both her husband Tim and the taller of the two, Mr. Millard, on their cell phones. She saw that they hung up their cell phones at the same time. She took from this they had been speaking to each other.

 

[deugirtni]

I found that odd that they weren't asked to identify DM, especially since the two police officers were asked to. You would think that would be a good extra point for the Crown if they did.

Since this point is so glaringly left out (identifying whether the person in question (DM) is the same person sitting in the accuseds' box), and none of the Crown, nor either of the defence lawyers, is asking the witness(es) to identify him in the courtroom... I am wondering if it is possible that, for some unknown reason to us, it is part of the publication ban somehow.

Otherwise, even if the Crown could not ask, for a reason such as, say the witness just simply couldn't identify him as being the same person they saw, I'm sure that RP would be more than thrilled to ask the question on cross examination.

'Do you see the person who got into the driver's seat that day here in the courtroom today?'.. 'um no, I can't say that I do', or, 'hmm no, it *could* be, but I'm not really sure'.. but that isn't happening. Why? There has to be a logical reason that we don't know yet. The pub banned stuff is the only thing I can think of, but yet I can't think of a reason why that would be pub banned.

ETA: I should have said.. rather than 'part of the pub ban', 'part of what the jury cannot hear due to whatever was agreed upon during the pre-trial motions', and therefore, also pub banned.

 

[swedie]

I did up a timeline for the week according to AJ's testimony. HTH.

Monday, May 6th/7th, 2013 - TB was murdered and incinerated.

Between the early morning hours of the 7th, and prior to employees showing up at the hangar for work on the 8th, TB's truck interior was stripped and cleaned by presumably DM and MS.

Tuesday, May 7th, No employees at hangar. They received text to stay away. This is also the day DM purchased condo.

Wednesday, May 8th, AJ went to work at the hangar and saw TB's truck.

Thursday, May 9th, AJ took pictures, called CS. CS verified it was TB's truck. After AJ left the hangar that day, sometime in the evening DM and CN loaded TB's truck into the trailer, drove it to MB's house and left the trailer in her driveway, drove to farmland and moved the incinerator amongst trees with CN's help. {CN's involvement - charged with helping to escape/accessory after the fact.}

Friday, May 10th, AJ went to work at the hangar, TB's truck was gone from the hangar, AJ was fired by DM, LE showed up at hangar, DM arrested later that day/evening.


From the article linked below:
On May 8th, Jennings said the truck’s interior was stripped, except for the rear seat, and it sat on a green tarp with paint cans nearby. There was no licence plate.

The next morning, on May 9, he went back to work at the hangar and was alone, he said, so he examined the truck. He photographed the vehicle identification number, snapped a picture of the truck and then called Crimestoppers.

When he returned to work the next day, {May 10}, Jennings said he noticed the black pickup truck was gone. Sometime later that day, he called police and told them what he knew.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...rt-hangar-testifies-at-trial/article28553691/