I know, right, lol! That's new to me!
Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #15
- Thread starter Sillybilly
- Start date
- Status
That victim was killed trying to recover his stolen truck. He was riding the running board so it was somewhat accidental.
Typhoo1961
Active Member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 951
- Reaction score
- 192
Why do people feel someone who is left handed cannot shoot a gun with their right hand?
ABro
Verified Expert
Here's what was said. I misspoke when I said it was stated "explicitly." Upon rereading my notes, I see what was stated explicitly was that MS feared the victim's friends coming for him:
The jury is sent out and then returns.
End of re-examination.
Here is Adam Carter's account:
Mscree
Active Member
- Joined
- May 23, 2013
- Messages
- 199
- Reaction score
- 88
I do remember smich testifying to that as well. that he ment Mr Bosma's friends
ABro
Verified Expert
Well, that's consistent.
An HVAC posse....very interesting.....
brightii
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 1,141
- Reaction score
- 26
I don't doubt that there are legitimate reasons for memory loss, but if we were to make excuses for every defendant who testified that they "can't remember" key facts in their cases, then it would be very difficult IMO to convict anyone. Even if an expert did testify about memory loss for MS, wouldn't that be akin to conducting a lie detector test which is inadmissible at trial because of its unreliability? I think the jury will just have to make up their own minds about whether or not they find MS credible overall.
When I evaluate MS's memory loss it seems to me to be too convenient. MS can't and won't admit to anything that implicates him in TB's murder, only the clean up after the fact. I think MS believes that by saying he can't recall events or his own conversations with others or why he said or did or didn't do certain things, that it may make room for reasonable doubt with the jury. MS's memory lapses are hard to disprove, but when I consider the big picture of all MS's testimony and with regard to his memory loss, his story just isn't convincing to me, it's convenient, (i.e. can't recall any details about DM's 50 minute visit with MS on day of DM's arrest, can't recall details at all about gun burial, can't recall telling his mother about not getting the Cadillac once DM was in custody, forgot about or outright lied about sending a text to AM asking him to bring "the thing" (gun/s) from MH to him, can't recall details of the one time he abused MM, can't recall details about his own criminal record, can't recall whether he or DM penned the .380 gun lyrics, can't recall what happened to his red hoodie, can't recall speaking to CN although both MM and CN testified that MS did speak to her after DM's arrest! etc.)
I think we each seem to define reasonable doubt a bit differently and perhaps the threshold for it is more flexible for some and more stringent for others.
All MOO.
ABro
Verified Expert
You're right. I can't really answer. How about we talk about it once this all wraps up?
I have swampland in florida for sale.
Prison hardens .
Nobody gets caught the first time.
brightii
New Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2016
- Messages
- 1,141
- Reaction score
- 26
One good thing about MS testifying is that now we know from him that he was at the scene of the murder (or within minutes after depending on what one believes) and he was at the farm and the hangar to clean up and he did receive a gun which he later buried. So MS being on the stand corroborated other witness testimony in some instances. For me, who is admittedly suspicious of all those close to MS and DM, that is helpful because I was so often unsure of who or what to believe. So with MS's testimony at the very least he places himself in the action or very near to it, whether or not he's tailoring some of his evidence according to what has already been stated by others in court.
And by MS choosing to testify it also made DM feel compelled to tell the jury his alternate version of the murder. Long gone are the days when DM was denying any involvement in a truck theft or murder because he was just too nice a guy or too rich to have done the crime. DM relied on his "framing aspect" which was debunked explosively when his letters were revealed. Now all he has left to do, as does MS, it point fingers at the other one being the shooter. But we'll never know for a fact, I believe, which one, or if both of the accused shot TB. TB was killed on that planned test drive, one or both had a gun, and there is enough evidence to show that both had planned for things to escalate dangerously. They both accepted the risks and IMO both must accept the consequences.
So now I see the two accused going head to head, the anger is palpable between them, each hoping the jury will buy their own story and reject the other, but I think their strategy is going to backfire against them both. They filled in some blanks for the jury, and perhaps the jury can see a bit clearer into the motivations of each of the accused, but what DM and MS really did this past week, IMO, was prove their own guilt.
All MOO.
And by MS choosing to testify it also made DM feel compelled to tell the jury his alternate version of the murder. Long gone are the days when DM was denying any involvement in a truck theft or murder because he was just too nice a guy or too rich to have done the crime. DM relied on his "framing aspect" which was debunked explosively when his letters were revealed. Now all he has left to do, as does MS, it point fingers at the other one being the shooter. But we'll never know for a fact, I believe, which one, or if both of the accused shot TB. TB was killed on that planned test drive, one or both had a gun, and there is enough evidence to show that both had planned for things to escalate dangerously. They both accepted the risks and IMO both must accept the consequences.
So now I see the two accused going head to head, the anger is palpable between them, each hoping the jury will buy their own story and reject the other, but I think their strategy is going to backfire against them both. They filled in some blanks for the jury, and perhaps the jury can see a bit clearer into the motivations of each of the accused, but what DM and MS really did this past week, IMO, was prove their own guilt.
All MOO.
Don't most guns have a bit of a kick to them? Left hand a little weaker and not as precise as your right hand. If you are right handed and vice versa if you are left handed.
A this point all of that testimony with the girlfriends and friends amounts to "he said she said BS". But had to be done in order for this conclusion to be had.
I'm trying to look at this case as a juror would. Posters sometimes mention the LB and WM cases. As a juror, that cannot have any influence on my decision. The charge against both DM and MS is first degree murder. There are four elements that need to be met for me to arrive at that decision.
1. that DM and MS committed an unlawful act;
2. that DM and MS's unlawful act caused TB's death;
3. that DM and MS had the intent required for murder; and
4. that DM and MS’s murder of TB was both planned and deliberate.
Here is a link to an example of what a judge might say when instructing a jury in a case of first degree murder. I found this very interesting especially the comprehensive explanations of each element.
https://www.nji-inm.ca/index.cfm/pu...-murder-planned-and-deliberate/?langSwitch=en
1. that DM and MS committed an unlawful act;
2. that DM and MS's unlawful act caused TB's death;
3. that DM and MS had the intent required for murder; and
4. that DM and MS’s murder of TB was both planned and deliberate.
Here is a link to an example of what a judge might say when instructing a jury in a case of first degree murder. I found this very interesting especially the comprehensive explanations of each element.
https://www.nji-inm.ca/index.cfm/pu...-murder-planned-and-deliberate/?langSwitch=en
Do you have verifiable evidence? I was looking online for some.
And he doesn't like carpets.
don_quixote
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2016
- Messages
- 334
- Reaction score
- 41
There are so many clues that the murder was premeditated, that the sausage evidence by itself does not make any difference. Neither of them worked they don't have to wait for any weekend to party.
Yes, it's a very odd way of doing it. But they messed up on every step. Seems, every other person in the GTA knew that they are going to steal a truck. May be he wasn't meant to die at that point. It doesn't matter because he did die. But if things deviated from the plan, when do you abandon that plan? Why not dispose of the truck, burn all the evidence. Or, at the very least, hide it for a period of time?
Seems, DM didn't expect the publicity this case was going to receive. And he failed.
One thing I find odd is the arguments about "oh, who would believe the Tim Hortons story", or "wouldn't Tim Bosma see that there is nobody in the Yukon". It doesn't really matter. Up to the point when the gun was drawn and discharged, they could say anything. They could say that their imaginary friend found a 3 lb nugget in the field and they wanna go check it out. If that doesn't work out, they can call it off.
What is impossible to dispute is that Tim Bosma didn't come back from that test drive. Sachak calling one of them clever is a bit of a stretch, don't you find?
- Status