Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #16

[Typhoo1961]

The way I see it is like there is a banana strawberry milkshake and two people are on video in the area it was made, and more or less admit involvement in making the milkshake. As to who put in the banana and who put in the strawberries, we don't know. We have text messages that prove they were meeting up to make the milkshake. As outsiders we see two culprits and the result--one mess of a milkshake. We know beyond reason it was them and only them that made it. Whose recipe was used, we know not. Who said when to stir, we know not.

If I were meeting my pal to make a milkshake, I'd probably ask where, when, what do I bring, what's the plan, what are we doing with it after, what if it doesn't turn out, what if we're caught midway, will we get dirty, do we need tools, etc.

I'm in trouble. I'm the type to kick the other person out of the kitchen and make the milkshake myself.

Annnnnd now I want a milkshake. LOL

 

[hellkat2]

Could this whole tragedy be a combination of both?
Example- MS using a belt/rope behind TB but not successfully subduing him, then DM shooting him dead spontaneously (or DM escalating the violence somehow quickly)when there's a struggle, hence 'Mark effed up a simple robbery' combined with "DM is a lunatic, nobody was supposed to die"
(Or even same scenario with both of them armed) IMO only

Yes these are all possibilities IMO. MS wants so badly to have himself away from the scene of the crime (out of TB's truck) and his story has big gaps.....so IMO it is the exact opposite of what MS is coming up with. He was in TB's truck when everythng went down.

 

[Arnie M]

So if he gives the location of the gun it doesn't change a thing. Can someone please explain to me why giving up the gun would change a first degree charge? What does it prove?

Giving up the gun as well as coming clean on a few other issues would have given him a lot of credibility on the witness stand ... and his "taken by surprise" defense could at least be slightly believable.

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

And what if he said isho has it?

Then I start to believe his testimony because he's telling the truth about things. As it is right now, he lied about the gun so I assume he lied about everything else.

 

[canadiangirl]

Then I start to believe his testimony because he's telling the truth about things. As it is right now, he lied about the gun so I assume he lied about everything else.

How do you determine what the truth is? Ask isho? And when isho doesn't have it because he got rid of it to save his own a$$ so he admits to nothing? We're back to MS being a liar again. Full circle

 

[hellkat2]

I see your theory but the fact is we don't know.

Yes we don't know. But there was a time that many did not want to even consider that MS was present when it occured so I think this is as valid as MS's version of what went down given that it has so many gaps. And with MS selective memory and cannabis use .... maybe he just forgot things that we are all filling in for him via websluth discussion. Sometimes it helps when people jog your memory.

 

[canadiangirl]

Giving up the gun as well as coming clean on a few other issues would have given him a lot of credibility on the witness stand ... and his "taken by surprise" defense could at least be slightly believable.

Notice you used the word "slightly", which to me indicates it doesn't matter what came out of his mouth on the stand. People made up their minds, some even before trial. Guilty as charged.
JMO

 

[Claroon]

Ok....lets talk about this. DM had short sleeves on and a man purse. I think if he had a gun in the manpurse that it would not be accessible enough to use given he was driving and sitting beside TB. DM may have used his manpurse to transport the weapon to MS. As DM was the driver of the vehicle and posing as the potential purchaser of TB's truck, I think that DM's role was to keep TB engaged and distracted. I think it is likely the job of shooting TB went to MS. MS had the gansta hoody worn a lot for the purposes of concealing weapons. MS was sitting in the back seat of TB's truck with the gun loaded and ready to be fired with no warning to TB at all. Maybe that is why MS stayed on the fringes when at the Bosma house. It is my opinion that MS shot TB in the truck from his position in the back seat before they got to the place in the farmers field. To answer your question as to who brought the gun....I would say likely DM via his man purse and then passed it to MS. I thought I read that a certain kind of bullet that MS was talking about is less messy than the other kind. And MS mentioning on a text or something that DM got the good one that took the good bullets. I wondered if the reason MS said he F'd up was because he used the wrong gun or the wrong ammo and that is why there was so much blood and such an extensive cleanup as a result. I think they are both guilty as hell in other words.

Plausible, but one thing is where you get the short sleeve shirt from because SB clearly said, "She remembers him wearing blue jeans, a long-sleeved orange shirt." http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6...y-man-one-reclusive-showed-up-for-test-drive/

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

How do you determine what the truth is? Ask isho? And when isho doesn't have it because he got rid of it to save his own a$$ so he admits to nothing? We're back to MS being a liar again. Full circle

It is believable so its adds credibility. Saying you burying it in some location that no one in the world including him can never find is an obvious lie.

 

[canadiangirl]

It is somewhat believable so its adds credibility. Saying you burying it in some location that no one in the world including him can never find is an obvious lie.

Somewhat believable for those who choose to believe it. Sure. And if it doesn't change the outcome he's going to be a rat in prison and possibly wind up dead himself. Isho is not a friendly looking guy. Not really worth the risk for a maybe. He likely knew telling where the gun was proves nothing nor does it add to his credibility. He said he got rid of it.. That's enough. He admitted it. He didn't say he gave it to BD to get rid of. He got rid of it where no one will ever find it. I believe that to be truth

 

[CJPRINCESS]

If we are going to disregard or assume that every piece of testimony against MS is a mistake or a misunderstanding then it's going to be impossible to find him guilty.

Not sure where your coming from? I can't pull false testimony out my butt to suit anyone. It's all there for everyone to see.

I'm reading AC'S blog, SB wasn't asked about the satchel nor she volenteer that information. Maybe one of the other reporters have something different?

WB (Tennent) was not certain if DM had a satchel or MS had a backpack.

Testimony for Feb 1st and 2nd.

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

Somewhat believable for those who choose to believe it. Sure. And if it doesn't change the outcome he's going to be a rat in prison and possibly wind up dead himself. Isho is not a friendly looking guy. Not really worth the risk for a maybe. He likely knew telling where the gun was proves nothing nor does it add to his credibility. He said he got rid of it.. That's enough. He admitted it. He didn't say he gave it to BD to get rid of. He got rid of it where no one will ever find it. I believe that to be truth

So if he's willing to lie to avoid Isho, does it not also make sense that he would lie to avoid life in prison?

 

[canadiangirl]

So if he's willing to lie to avoid Isho, does it not also make sense that he would lie to avoid life in prison?

No. Which is a greater risk?
If says he gave it to isho, and winds up with life in prison anyways, because the gun adds no value at this point, I'm willing to bet he doesn't have an easy go of it.

If he says nothing and takes a chance one out of 14 people believe him. He may not end up with life.

I'd be willing to bet he'd appeal it anyways and he just might win. JMO

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

Not sure where your coming from? I can't pull false testimony out my butt to suit anyone. It's all there for everyone to see.

I'm reading AC'S blog, SB wasn't asked about the satchel nor she volenteer that information. Maybe one of the other reporters have something different?

WB (Tennent) was not certain if DM had a satchel or MS had a backpack.

Testimony for Feb 1st and 2nd.

Without going to look it up - if that is the complete testimony - there is no evidence that DM had the satchel while there is evidence that MS had his hands in his hoodie the entire time.

 

[RandomName479]

Somewhat believable for those who choose to believe it. Sure. And if it doesn't change the outcome he's going to be a rat in prison and possibly wind up dead himself. Isho is not a friendly looking guy. Not really worth the risk for a maybe. He likely knew telling where the gun was proves nothing nor does it add to his credibility. He said he got rid of it.. That's enough. He admitted it. He didn't say he gave it to BD to get rid of. He got rid of it where no one will ever find it. I believe that to be truth

I don't think it's fair to say MS is "allowed" to lie about what he did with the gun because if he told the truth he would be considered a rat. (Obviously in this scenario we are assuming he gave/sold the gun back to isho).

I am not certain I've seen enough evidence to convict MS of first degree murder, but I do believe that producing the gun would have gone a LONG way towards establishing his credibility. (unless he is absolutely telling the truth and can't remember where he buried it.....but I find that doubtful)

I am going to wait for the closing arguments and judge's charge to the jury, but I think it's important we don't sit too firmly on either side here......for those who think MS is guilty it is easy to disregard evidence that he was not as involved (ie: hurt shoulder) and for those who think MS is not guilty it is important not to put blinders on when it comes to evidence he could be involved (ie: disposing of the gun). I see many posters on both sides digging their heels in.....and that doesn't make for constructive discussion. MOO

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

No. Which is a greater risk?
If says he gave it to isho, and winds up with life in prison anyways, because the gun adds no value at this point, I'm willing to bet he doesn't have an easy go of it.

If he says nothing and takes a chance one out of 14 people believe him. He may not end up with life.

I'd be willing to bet he'd appeal it anyways and he just might win. JMO

Appeal what?

And they'd both suck pretty badly. Yes - being killed is worse than life in prison. But I'd do pretty much anything I can think of to avoid either one.

 

[RandomName479]

DM had the line of credit to pay for these things. I don't doubt MS put in his 2 cents about what they needed, but it's clear MS would not be paying the bills.

I think it has been established that DM's financial situation was not as it first appeared and that despite access to lines of credit/etc he still chose to steal many items. MS didn't need a truck. DM did. MS was not going to the Baja race......with his criminal record he wouldn't be crossing any borders...after hearing all of the testimony about thefts and DM's finances, your argument that DM had money for the truck doesn't hold water for me. MOO

 

[Georgeo]

My brother's friend in high school drove while impaired, hit and killed a young boy, panicked and left the scene to go home.

He went back to the scene and was arrested. His blood alcohol was over the legal limit. He remained silent and his family retained a lawyer. The lawyer sat down with him, going over the evidence and told him that as he left the scene, the police could not definitely say that he was driving impaired at the time of the collision. His lawyer didn't ask him if, in fact, he was drunk when the collision occurred. He was advised he could plead not guilty, and he might be found guilty of leaving the scene of an accident.

(He did plead guilty, and told the truth. He served a short sentence and was ordered to speak about what he did to high school students as part of his community service. He still voluntarily makes speeches about what he did and the impact it had on the family of the little boy.)

wow. Instead of telling him to do the right thing and plead guilty, lawyer actually seems to suggest pleading not guilty? That's where I draw the line and say that the laws are written to protect the criminals and not the victim. Very sad.

 

[canadiangirl]

I don't think it's fair to say MS is "allowed" to lie about what he did with the gun because if he told the truth he would be considered a rat. (Obviously in this scenario we are assuming he gave/sold the gun back to isho).

I am not certain I've seen enough evidence to convict MS of first degree murder, but I do believe that producing the gun would have gone a LONG way towards establishing his credibility. (unless he is absolutely telling the truth and can't remember where he buried it.....but I find that doubtful)

I am going to wait for the closing arguments and judge's charge to the jury, but I think it's important we don't sit too firmly on either side here......for those who think MS is guilty it is easy to disregard evidence that he was not as involved (ie: hurt shoulder) and for those who think MS is not guilty it is important not to put blinders on when it comes to evidence he could be involved (ie: disposing of the gun). I see many posters on both sides digging their heels in.....and that doesn't make for constructive discussion. MOO

Ok so I'd revise my post to say I believe him when he says he doesn't know where the gun is today. Which is the question he was asked on the stand.

I'm not digging my heels in. I'm willing to see both sides. And I have said many times I'm waiting to hear closing arguments and maybe it will tie it all together nicely.

But I'm not seeing first degree at this point. JMO

ETA my original post said I believed he said he didn't know where it was. That's not saying he's allowed to lie?

 

[Georgeo]

April 27 - Millard writes "headed to Waterloo, figure out the BBQ situation for this week"

This is the key right here.
- Millard is talking to Smich
- This text is talking about "The mission".
- The BBQ is clearly referring to the incinerator (SS testified to this)
- "Next week" refers to Apr 28 - May 4 (but we know Millard was unexpectedly busy on May 2 & 3, so we can extend to May 6.

In one text Millard has tied Smich to the incinerator and the incinerator to the Mission and the Mission to the date. For all those standing up for Smich, please explain this!

this is the aha moment. Both knew of the plan.