Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #16

[MrsThreadgoode]

I can only assume the furniture was someone's that MS wanted to steal. Can't see why else they'd want to "protect bystander's"?

Humphreys didn't say THE PICS weren't made public ... He said that the text messages in Exhibit 144 weren't made public ... They were "read only" so that the reporters could report on the gist of what was said in the text messages, but the texts included info about non-involved persons, so couldn't be published.

Quite a lot of discussion about this in yesterday's thread, where it was posted that Adrian will be publishing those particular photos. When he does, they can be uploaded here.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[hellkat2]

Well SS was obviously aware of what happened to TB and who was responsible wasn't he? He remained loyal. What about CN? Didn't see her running to the cops did you? MM? Either very stupid or very loyal. Should I go on?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely they did not. The gang of thieves and liars could not tell the truth if their life depended on it. DM and MS cannot tell the truth either and their life does depend on it. They going bye bye for a long time.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

Is it possible this pic of the furniture was taken in someone's yard, and their house/yard may be identifiable so it was decided not to publish it for the public?

Humphreys didn't say THE PICS weren't made public ... He said that the text messages in Exhibit 144 weren't made public ... They were "read only" so that the reporters could report the gist of what they said but the texts included info about non-involved persons, so THE TEXTS couldn't be published.

There was quite a lot of discussion about this in yesterday's thread, where it was posted that Adrian Humphreys will be publishing those particular photos. When he does, they can be uploaded here.

Also, regarding the fireside furniture pic, the tweets from the day that evidence was introduced state that FIRESIDE FURNITURE was a caption on that particular image, i.e. that the words "fireside furniture" were not sent as a separate text.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[DeepWoodsOff]

This has actually been quite interesting reading everyone's take now that the evidence is concluded. The one comment that stood out to me...and I apologize for not giving credit to the original poster...is, what differentiates the evidence against DM vs. MS as it pertains to premeditation? It seems to me that there wasn't anything that stood out to suggest that DM had planned to murder TB. We don't know who brought the gun, we don't know who was in the truck when TB was shot and we definitely do not know who pulled the trigger. For all the reasons people are stating they don't think MS knew the plan, these same reasons could be applied to DM, no? It would be the same for forcible confinement as well. Without knowing who brought the gun, who was in the truck, who pointed the gun....are they not both equally covered by reasonable doubt? I just don't see anything that DM said/did/texted that definitively shows differences between himself and MS. MOO

For the record I don't believe for a second that they both were not fully aware of the plan. One thing I think we can all agree on is that the two people who were involved in this are the two that are on trial. The question is what is the sentence. MOO

 

[hellkat2]

Who brought the gun in this case? Did the other know about it?

Well we can't really talk about this can we and I won't be going down the road again just to have posts removed for the same reason the jury was told to disregard information involving weapon talk recently.

 

[canadiangirl]

Well we can't really talk about this can we and I won't be going down the road again just to have posts removed for the same reason the jury was told to disregard information involving weapon talk recently.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. My question is, in the case of TB, who brought the gun? And did the other person have knowledge they brought it?

 

[hellkat2]

This has actually been quite interesting reading everyone's take now that the evidence is concluded. The one comment that stood out to me...and I apologize for not giving credit to the original poster...is, what differentiates the evidence against DM vs. MS as it pertains to premeditation? It seems to me that there wasn't anything that stood out to suggest that DM had planned to murder TB. We don't know who brought the gun, we don't know who was in the truck when TB was shot and we definitely do not know who pulled the trigger. For all the reasons people are stating they don't think MS knew the plan, these same reasons could be applied to DM, no? It would be the same for forcible confinement as well. Without knowing who brought the gun, who was in the truck, who pointed the gun....are they not both equally covered by reasonable doubt? I just don't see anything that DM said/did/texted that definitively shows differences between himself and MS. MOO

For the record I don't believe for a second that they both were not fully aware of the plan. One thing I think we can all agree on is that the two people who were involved in this are the two that are on trial. The question is what is the sentence. MOO

I agree with you and that is why they can both rot in prison. i am not buying into this he said she said crap that DM and MS and their band of thieves are doing. DM has more trials ahead of him and that influences me strongly. But I think they are both guilty as hell. I think the drugs warped their brains to the point that they lost any humanity and turned into the lowest of the low.

 

[canadiangirl]

I agree with you and that is why they can both rot in prison. i am not buying into this he said she said crap that DM and MS and their band of thieves are doing. DM has more trials ahead of him and that influences me strongly. But I think they are both guilty as hell. I think the drugs warped their brains to the point that they lost any humanity and turned into the lowest of the low.

Other trials should not be a factor in this one.

 

[mimimic]

I can only assume the furniture was someone's that MS wanted to steal. Can't see why else they'd want to "protect bystander's"?

Yes looking at the furniture with pure and honest eyes it was about a camp fire and recipe sharing. MS seemed fond of double meanings and or lingo. I thought the pics were just pulled off of the internet. not sure though, i suppose i am guilty of writing the honest meanings away and assuming it as their favored sort of talk of missions and more. sorry i seem so ** and for a Friday! tisk

 

[RandomName479]

Why? He did nothing more incriminating.

We have evidence that DM bought a gun. DM bought an incinerator. DM wanted a diesel Ram 3500 to take to Mexico. DM used a burner phone to arrange test drives. DM's fingerprints were on TB's truck. DM's DNA was found on gloves. (can't remember if DM's DNA was found with TB's.....anyone have the gloves link?) DM wrote letters asking CN to tamper with witnesses. None of these facts have been questioned by DM or his defense team. This is just off the top of my head.....MOO

 

[Errrr]

Yes, yes he did. I wouldn't even know where to look in the timeline but did BD say he ever saw the gun? Or could this be a load of BS handed to him by MS, just to make MS feel all gangster and impress BD?

MS could have been pretending to be all gangster for BD but that is not what he told the court. He said BD was lying. Who makes up gangsta stories for their friend to have said, for no reason?

 

[mimimic]

This has actually been quite interesting reading everyone's take now that the evidence is concluded. The one comment that stood out to me...and I apologize for not giving credit to the original poster...is, what differentiates the evidence against DM vs. MS as it pertains to premeditation? It seems to me that there wasn't anything that stood out to suggest that DM had planned to murder TB. We don't know who brought the gun, we don't know who was in the truck when TB was shot and we definitely do not know who pulled the trigger. For all the reasons people are stating they don't think MS knew the plan, these same reasons could be applied to DM, no? It would be the same for forcible confinement as well. Without knowing who brought the gun, who was in the truck, who pointed the gun....are they not both equally covered by reasonable doubt? I just don't see anything that DM said/did/texted that definitively shows differences between himself and MS. MOO

For the record I don't believe for a second that they both were not fully aware of the plan. One thing I think we can all agree on is that the two people who were involved in this are the two that are on trial. The question is what is the sentence. MOO

Glad i don't stand out too much. lol this is better put then i am able to write, but happens to be exactly what i mean.

 

[FastLikeLight]

Other trials should not be a factor in this one.

imho, they needed to be tried as serial killers.

"molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes May 25
Fraser suggests they were both celebrating the murder of another human being a day before. "Mission accomplished," Fraser says again. #Bosma"

I don't think that was an accidental inclusion of "another" by Crown.

 

[canadiangirl]

imho, they needed to be tried as serial killers.

"molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes May 25
Fraser suggests they were both celebrating the murder of another human being a day before. "Mission accomplished," Fraser says again. #Bosma"

I don't think that was an accidental inclusion of "another" by Crown.

Good catch and very interesting. Not how the law works though as people have pointed out to me.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

I'm not sure what you're referring to. My question is, in the case of TB, who brought the gun? And did the other person have knowledge they brought it?

Hope you don't mind my responding to your question.

Legally speaking, it doesn't matter who brought the gun. It doesn't matter who shot Tim.

It is something that we would all like to know, but we likely never will.

Regarding the messages, IMO DM and MS are "speaking" cryptically and in some sort of lingo and code. There aren't many criminals who would actually plan a murder, completely detailing it in written word. If that is the expectation of proof, then I doubt we would ever be able to convict a single guilty soul.

Therefore, the jury is left to deduce the most probable meaning of those texts within their complete context, in conjunction with all other evidence ... planning missions, planning "the mission", buying a loaded gun, pictures of each of them holding that gun, both discussing the incinerator/BBQ ... Oh, I could go on and on but won't ... Numerous WSers have already stated these in much better and clearer terms than I can.

The text messages are circumstantial evidence, and are to be given the same weight as direct evidence.

I cannot think of one single innocent reason for the purchase of a loaded gun as well as purchase/setup of the incinerator, which DM and MS together had knowledge of.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[DeepWoodsOff]

Glad i don't stand out too much. lol this is better put then i am able to write, but happens to be exactly what i mean.

LOL! In fairness I had already started typing and didn't want to go back a page. My sincerest apologies.

 

[Crimeinthe6ix]

I personally think everyone here should wait until Justice Goodman gives the Jury his charge before trying to assume a position of guilty or not. The charge will instruct them which evidence to weigh with more importance, and will give the guidelines as to what qualified for 1st degree. Until we hear this charge, its very hard to know which evidence Goodman has identified to hold the most weight when they are going to assess the verdict.

 

[Kamille]

If someone is gonna bring a loaded gun to a robbery they are prepared to use it. If someone goes up to a teller in a bank and points a loaded gun at them and says give me all your money....they are prepared to use it if they need to. Is that premeditation by the letter of the law? If the teller gets murdered because she didn't cooperate or pass the money over fast enough???? DM&MS obtained a gun and ammo and brought it to a robbery and TB was murdered. That is all I need to know. IMO this is premeditation. Whether it be by the letter of the law or not. If I was on that jury.....they are both going down. Gone by by. Not a problem at all for me.

BBM

In Canada, no it is not. Which is perhaps part of the problem here. My personal opinion is that the criminal code for 1st degree murder needs to be amended to add "death occurs during the commission of an armed robbery". Then perhaps we wouldn't be having this discussion? :waitasec:

MOO

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

No single drop? Is that why 2 were found in the backseat of the Ram?

Your matter of fact post of what happened is scary to me.

According to MS story, DM went into the Yukon to grab flashlights when they stopped at the bobcat. So they were both in the Yukon post shooting and there still wasnt any evidence if you believe MS.

 

[canadiangirl]

According to MS story, DM went into the Yukon to grab flashlights when they stopped at the bobcat. So they were both in the Yukon post shooting and there still wasnt any evidence if you believe MS.

Driving a vehicle with full on contact and grabbing a flashlight out of the back seems very different to me.. Especially if you know where said flashlights are, you don't need to sit in the vehicle merely stick your arm in