Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #16

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
MrsThreadgoode said:
I am not sure ... But I think it has some potentially coded significance due to the date/time sent.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I haven't really read into these pics as most know. This one is weird though (first aid kit) that also reads trauma kit. Sent to DM form SS on May 8th at 6:26 pm (no one was at the shop on the 7th, also the day SS HAD to just happen to get a new phone) At this point (on the 8th) SS would have seen the truck and maybe a message for "damage control repair". I don't believe SS didn't know anything about the truck or TB! Or it could mean nothing except that SS got a new first aid kit for the shop.
 
Thanks to Adrian Humphreys for releasing a few more details about the text messages for us. I was able to clean up the timeline a little bit and fix the ordering of some messages. Here's my current analysis of the conversation between Smich and Millard on May 2 and 3:

On May 2, Millard texts Smich that he will "check him after 4pm" the next day to work on "the mission". Smich then replies, "Ok it's fireworks tomoro night." These two messages clearly indicate that there is a plan to work on "the mission" on May 3, and the plan is known to both of them. Whatever Smich meant by fireworks, the conversation suggests to me that fireworks is somehow related to the mission they are working on.

In the morning of May 3, Smich asks if Marlena and Pedo and can reach and chill while they do their thing, and he sends the photos of the log bench and stools. I make a couple of inferences from this: 1) Smich thinks they will be travelling somewhere (hence wondering if Marlena and Pedo can tag along), and 2) the log bench and stools relate to Marlena and Pedo hanging back and "chilling" while Millard and Smich go off to do their thing, whatever that is.

In the afternoon of May 3, Smich texts "High Five!" along with the photo of the sausages arranged in a hand shape. I agree with others that it's difficult to draw a conclusive sinister inference from this photo, however, in my mind it doesn't completely rule out symbolism of using of the incinerator. From previous messages, it is clear that Smich and Millard speak in vague and symbolic terms when it comes to discussion of the mission. The fireworks, reaching and chilling, and the furniture photos suggest that the plan involved something outdoors-y, IMO.

At 4:18pm on May 3, Smich texts "Wut's good cracka". Up to this point, Millard hasn't responded to him all day, and there seems to be an air of excitement or eagerness on Smich's behalf to work on the mission together.

Millard finally responds at 4:20pm: "just finished a 6 hr meeting at hangar", and Smich immediately replies, "Can u bring me gloves and tape and maybe an orange guy? The first two I need more." Smich's quick reply and the way he jumps straight to business bolsters the idea that he is excited/eager about their plan to work on the mission. The orange guy wasn't so important, but he really needed the gloves and tape.

At 4:56pm (note: I assume AH made a typo since his video states 4:56am) Millard writes, "I'm reaching your ways now, ete 50 mins", suggesting that they did in fact get together that evening.

Between 8:30pm and 10:30pm that night, Millard was at Maple Gate looking up trucks on Kijiji/Autotrader and he also called Araujo and Palmilli. So, based on the earlier text messages, it would seem that Millard picked up Smich and took him to Maple Gate where they checked out trucks for sale.

Based on all the text conversation leading up, I would suggest that their original plan was to try to find a test drive that night (May 3), but it ended up being too late and/or they couldn't book a time with anyone (e.g. Araujo, Palmilli). This would give proper context to the fireworks, gloves/tape, and the excitement to carry out "the mission". Smich thought it was fireworks that night, but it wasn't yet.

Although the plan fell through that evening, they kept pushing for it over the weekend until they eventually got Bosma on May 6.

All my opinion, of course.
 
Arnie M said:
.

Thank you Jen Darme !!!

I was always cautious about reading too much into the bench-sausages-saga because of what you quoted in your post ....

Seeing a series of messages sent from the iPad--but can't see who they were sent to. These are those 'orphaned' messages mentioned earlier.
As part of that Ryder says he can't confirm this is a conversation, or if these messages are related at all.
Click to expand...

But were these messages part of the "orphaned" grouping? The tweets had them presented as cohesive correspondence with sender and recipient identified, as I had interpreted.

ETA: Looks like this was further clarified a few posts down:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...Weekend-Discussion-16&p=12591259#post12591259
 
I find the fireworks stuff difficult to classify because the second text in particular has the feel of Smich informing Millard of something or clarifying something Millard is not completely in the loop about, more than it has the feel of shared knowledge.
 
XiolaBlueX said:
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
Click to expand...

Well your theory suggests that they did not intend to kill which i think they did given all the BBQ talk.
 
A quick word on the rap lyrics....

A few people have vehemently dismissed Smich's rap lyrics saying that they cannot suggest or prove anything in this case. According to those people, rap lyrics are simply an expression of art, and Smich's lyrics are no different. Somebody even drew a comparison to Beyonce rapping about dismembering a female rival: Of course she would never actually do that! Nor would Smich actually use a .380 to shoot somebody!

That's fair enough, but what if Beyonce actually got charged with dismembering somebody, and then the police found rap lyrics about dismembering somebody afterwards? Recall that Smich was arrested first and his iPad was confiscated after. The lyrics later supported the case but were not part of the original charge.

How coincidental is it that Smich would rap specifically about a .380 gun -- not just owning it (he consistently referred to it as "his" chrome piece, "his" 380) but also using it to kill someone -- and then he gets charged in a murder where there is direct evidence of a .380 being used?

Would you argue that it's common for rappers to talk about using a .380 to kill somebody? According to this article comparing the frequency of three popular gun types (9, 45, and 380) in rap lyrics, the .380 is by far the least common, representing but a small fraction of the frequency in rap lyrics relative to the 9 and 45 guns.
 
hellkat2 said:
Well your theory suggests that they did not intend to kill which i think they did given all the BBQ talk.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I guess I just can't wrap my mind around how it could remotely be a feasible plan to pick up somebody (DM) (with witnesses) and abduct DM/ plan to murder him and take the truck knowing it would be investigated a whole lot quicker and more thoroughly as a homicide/missing person investigation then just a missing truck with the person left somewhere rural (or tied up and left somewhere without phone to make their way home soon) The planned 'thrillkill' idea just sounds far fetched to me especially tangled up with a truck robbery/theft.
Regarding incinerator - Is it possible that were planning on its use to destroy any evidence? Although a) sadly, it was purchased right when LB went missing, but that is a different case b) what evidence could be needed to destroy? Perhaps another 'mission's'?
 
XiolaBlueX said:
Indeed. I guess I just can't wrap my mind around how it could remotely be a feasible plan to pick up somebody (DM) (with witnesses) and abduct DM/ plan to murder him and take the truck knowing it would be investigated a whole lot quicker and more thoroughly as a homicide/missing person investigation then just a missing truck with the person left somewhere rural (or tied up and left somewhere without phone to make their way home soon) The planned 'thrillkill' idea just sounds far fetched to me especially tangled up with a truck robbery/theft.
Regarding incinerator - Is it possible that were planning on its use to destroy any evidence? Although a) sadly, it was purchased right when LB went missing, but that is a different case b) what evidence could be needed to destroy? Perhaps another 'mission's'?
Click to expand...

Colonel Russel Williams....case in point. Nobody could believe that either. My feeling is two psychopaths (DM and MS) made for the devils playground. Add some drugs to their already demented psyche(s) and they become the lowest of the low. I think that nobody could believe the thrill kill theory. I had never heard the term before this either. But I definately think this is exactly what they were doing.
 
hellkat2 said:
Colonel Russel Williams....case in point. Nobody could believe that either. My feeling is two psychopaths (DM and MS) made for the devils playground. Add some drugs to their already demented psyche(s) and they become the lowest of the low. I think that nobody could believe the thrill kill theory. I had never heard the term before this either. But I definately think this is exactly what they were doing.
Click to expand...

I think they had been doing this for awhile and with the drugs and whatever else they were into (orange pills) they got sloppy and more deranged and removed from any conscience and got caught.
 
billandrew said:
A quick word on the rap lyrics....

A few people have vehemently dismissed Smich's rap lyrics saying that they cannot suggest or prove anything in this case. According to those people, rap lyrics are simply an expression of art, and Smich's lyrics are no different. Somebody even drew a comparison to Beyonce rapping about dismembering a female rival: Of course she would never actually do that! Nor would Smich actually use a .380 to shoot somebody!

That's fair enough, but what if Beyonce actually got charged with dismembering somebody, and then the police found rap lyrics about dismembering somebody afterwards? Recall that Smich was arrested first and his iPad was confiscated after. The lyrics later supported the case but were not part of the original charge.

How coincidental is it that Smich would rap specifically about a .380 gun -- not just owning it (he consistently referred to it as "his" chrome piece, "his" 380) but also using it to kill someone -- and then he gets charged in a murder where there is direct evidence of a .380 being used?

Would you argue that it's common for rappers to talk about using a .380 to kill somebody? According to this article comparing the frequency of three popular gun types (9, 45, and 380) in rap lyrics, the .380 is by far the least common, representing but a small fraction of the frequency in rap lyrics relative to the 9 and 45 guns.
Click to expand...

I think you might be over egging the pudding a bit in that characterization of the objections to using the lyrics. I haven't seen vehemence so much as I've seen reluctance to use such a weak support for an extremely consequential determination.

I see your argument as a form of begging the question. That MS killed somebody is a conclusion, and the rap lyrics are being proposed as evidence. You can't use a conclusion to support evidence, which is what you are doing when you suggest that the fact that MS was arrested for murder gives a meaning to the lyrics that Beyoncé, in your example, wouldn't be burdened with.

Imagine Vince Gilligan is arrested for murder. Are you going to run a montage of the eighty billion violent deaths in Breaking Bad for a jury? You are not. MS is vulnerable to this tactic because he's an uneducated, underachieving somewhat parasitic low life drug dealer writing in a genre that many people, including me, have a visceral distaste for.

Once a Smich or a Gilligan are proven guilty of murder, then it becomes interesting to look back at their art and wonder what interests or instincts might underlie both. The murder becomes the evidence, and a meaning to the darkness in their art becomes the conclusion. The evidence supports the conclusion.
 
JuneBug67 said:
I think you might be over egging the pudding a bit in that characterization of the objections to using the lyrics. I haven't seen vehemence so much as I've seen reluctance to use such a weak support for an extremely consequential determination.

I see your argument as a form of begging the question. That MS killed somebody is a conclusion, and the rap lyrics are being proposed as evidence. You can't use a conclusion to support evidence, which is what you are doing when you suggest that the fact that MS was arrested for murder gives a meaning to the lyrics that Beyoncé, in your example, wouldn't be burdened with.

Imagine Vince Gilligan is arrested for murder. Are you going to run a montage of the eighty billion violent deaths in Breaking Bad for a jury? You are not. MS is vulnerable to this tactic because he's an uneducated, underachieving somewhat parasitic low life drug dealer writing in a genre that many people, including me, have a visceral distaste for.

Once a Smich or a Gilligan are proven guilty of murder, then it becomes interesting to look back at their art and wonder what interests or instincts might underlie both. The murder becomes the evidence, and a meaning to the darkness in their art becomes the conclusion. The evidence supports the conclusion.
Click to expand...

Actually, if Vince Gilligan wrote a successful TV series about himself, Vince Gilligan, killing other people with a .380 gun, and then he got implicated in a real killing using a .380 gun, then I would see no problem in drawing a possible link there.

Smich did not write his lyrics in 3rd person. He rapped about a .380 which was a real object in his life. He rapped that he wanted some chronic and "that juice cuz I'm an alcoholic." He himself admitted to smoking weed and having drinking problem. Therefore it is not a stretch to suggest that his lyrics are an artistic diary of his own thoughts, fantasies, and experiences. Just because it happens to be in the form an artistic expression, does not mean that it has to be entirely fictitious.

IMO it is entirely fair to present this as evidence in this case, and obviously the judge agreed that its probative value outweighed the prejudicial value, otherwise it would have been deemed inadmissible.
 
billandrew said:
Actually, if Vince Gilligan wrote a successful TV series about himself, Vince Gilligan, killing other people with a .380 gun, and then he got implicated in a real killing using a .380 gun, then I would see no problem in drawing a possible link there.

Smich did not write his lyrics in 3rd person. He rapped about a .380 which was a real object in his life. He rapped that he wanted some chronic and "that juice cuz I'm an alcoholic." He himself admitted to smoking weed and having drinking problem. Therefore it is not a stretch to suggest that his lyrics are an artistic diary of his own thoughts, fantasies, and experiences. Just because it happens to be in the form an artistic expression, does not mean that it has to be entirely fictitious.

IMO it is entirely fair to present this as evidence in this case, and obviously the judge agreed that its probative value outweighed the prejudicial value, otherwise it would have been deemed inadmissible.
Click to expand...

The first person perspective is a stylistic expression extremely common in the rap art form and not at all common in dramatic television. It doesn't make it autobiographical.

The evidence has been admitted, but this sort of evidence remains controversial in general and opinion on its fairness and relevance is divided. They used to admit a sexual assault victim's entire sexual history too. We don't do that anymore.
 
Without quoting the whole rap lyric post, just a question.

Would it make more sense and make Mark look more "gangsta" of he rapped "with my boyz chrome piece" or "my boyz .380''? Alot of these "gangstas rappers'' post up their songs on youtube or the GI accounts. I think MS would be laughing stock if he wanted to write about a gun and raps "my buddy's gun".
 
JuneBug67 said:
The first person perspective is a stylistic expression extremely common in the rap art form and not at all common in dramatic television. It doesn't make it autobiographical.

The evidence has been admitted, but this sort of evidence remains controversial in general and opinion on its fairness and relevance is divided. They used to admit a sexual assault victim's entire sexual history too. We don't do that anymore.
Click to expand...

I agree. I do not think it was fair to compare any of this to Vince Gilligan and Breaking Bad in the first place.

It is a fact that Smich's lyrics contain some autobiographical references. Drinking and alcoholism, smoking pot, thieving, possessing a .380 gun; these are things that were all true in his real life. Unfortunately, he introduced fantasies of violence and killing into these lyrics as well. This will carry some weight in the minds of those tasked with deciding whether he actually acted out any of these fantasies in real life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 84 more.
Total: 2,447 (members: 85, guests: 2,362)

Online statistics

Members online
85
Guests online
2,362
Total visitors
2,447
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,784
Messages
18,113,428
Members
230,991
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top