Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #17 [06.03.16 to 06.09.16]

[XiolaBlueX]

Hey I get that, if there is evidence to show that a defendant is actually innocent. But to have someone say "maybe this text means something else" or "maybe he actually did that" doesn't exactly sound like an opinion that can be compromised. <modsnip>

I'm guessing this post has already been replied to, but just a reminder on the basic premise that our justice system deems it necessary that somebody is found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, not that they are found to be innocent. In fact, I have seen juries post acquittal speak out and say they almost 'wished' they could have convicted somebody of a particular charge but based on the evidence itself, it did not support it.
Somebody having reasonable doubt on a murder1 charge is not the same as thinking "he's innocent" . Eg. Perhaps not convinced of it being a premeditated and planned murder esp for MS (even by the horrible events that transpired after the actual death of TB) .

Charges to the jury should help clarify this quite a bit for some IMO, (if it was a planned theft of truck with a gun both participated in, etc, forcible confinement, etc)

 

[Georgeo]

A trial that was three years in the making. i don't call this justice for the Bosmas. In my opinion in relationship to the time it took to get to trial was far greater than the amount of time this trial has actually been going on. They should have taken the time. If it isn't allowed then this lawyer is a strategic genius to play it the way he did for his client MS. And that makes me kind of sad with regard to the justice system and the way it operates at times.

An outcome where the lawyers playing what can be compared to a game of cards, and playing a certain hand, and outwitting the other players is not justice. It is just that - playing games. Justice is these 's paying for the murder of a truly innocent man. The word innocent is far overused in murder trials.

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

If anyone wants to see a 'model' of a judge's charge for the 1st degree murder portion - here's something I found - https://www.nji-inm.ca/index.cfm/pu...2-first-degree-murder-planned-and-deliberate/

 

[Georgeo]

Absolutely. If I ever sell a car private instead of trade it, after what happened to TB I will not be going on a test drive. I have learned from this. I know some people who do not have the buyers come to their home. They meet them in a public place where there are cameras all over the place. Local plaza, mall, Lowes, Gas Station.....

Better yet, have them meet you at a police station!

 

[hellkat2]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/news/bosma-closing-argument-crown-1.3612291

I agree with TL when he said to the jury "If you are spending your time trying to decide who did what, you are missing the point." It is not necessary to figure out which one - DM or MS - shot TB to find them both guilty of first degree murder. They both planned to rob TB of his truck and had a gun and TB ended up dead within minutes of having met MS and DM, and then within a couple of hours, TB was incinerated.

Sometimes the devil really is in the details and that devil is tempting to distract people from seeing the totality of the evidence clearly. Every detail when piled one upon the other adds up to a huge mountain of evidence against both accused. It's a mountain of evidence that LE and the Crown expertly compiled, but there's no doubt in my mind that it was DM and MS who built the mountain together! Thankfully, by their mutual carelessness and overconfidence both, DM and MS lead LE and the Crown directly to the base of the mountain and practically gave them a guide map to climb it. Thanks to these two vicious killers the mountain of evidence was built on a very firm foundation and when the Crown started at the bottom they found their way to the top and once the guilty verdicts are formalized, I hope the Crown will place it's victory flag on top in honour of Tim Bosma.

Neither accused nor their counsel could climb over the mountain to dispute its existence or make it disappear simply by denial or wishful thinking. No amount of creative writing by DM in his letters or earnest story telling on the stand by MS could change the facts or challenge the overall outcome of this trial. We don't have to know all the details, all the where's and why's or why not's to accept what the Crown has convincingly concluded. We just have to believe that the Crown is acting with integrity in their thorough presentation of the facts in their totality, and advocating for justice for Tim Bosma with genuine conviction in their belief that the mountain of evidence makes a first degree murder conviction for both accused the right decision for the jury in the end. I trust that in this very complicated murder case the Crown got it just right.

All MOO.

Very well stated re sometimes the devil is in the details. In this case especially. These two are gonna be gone gone....for life.

 

[hellkat2]

LOL.....a portable steel smelter!

I am assuming by the lol that it is ridiculous to think that the incinerator could melt steel?

 

[hellkat2]

I agree completely, and I think that most women would mentally take note of a man wearing a purse too.

Manpurse could mean...gender bender, bi, gay, office dandy, metro sexual who is fashion challenged and full of himself. On the other hand it could be just a big bag that he carries his dope around in as well as ammo and/or gun, burner phones, walkie talkies, oxy's, etc... Wasn't it from a hemp store? .

 

[hellkat2]

You never know, did Millard shoot him? Did Smich shoot him? Did both shoot him? We'll likely never know, not that it matters. There has been sufficient evidence that both these guys moved on this mission knowing in advance that they would be killing Bosma and incinerating his body before the morning. Both will be guilty and that's that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Too bad water boarding wasn't legal for these kinds of situations.

 

[hellkat2]

If a juror has a nagging doubt, it is their duty to NOT put someone away for that very reason. As a juror it is your duty to find someone innocent if there is reasonable doubt and you are not convinced they are guilty. I would hope that a reluctant juror would NOT be "convinced", that would be a grave injustice to someone.
We don't lock people away for any crime if the evidence isn't there. It's scary to think there could be people with this same mindset out there deciding someone's fate.

Yet Karla Homolka is walking free because of improper sentencing.

 

[cansleuther]

Manpurse could mean...gender bender, bi, gay, office dandy, metro sexual who is fashion challenged and full of himself. On the other hand it could be just a big bag that he carries his dope around in as well as ammo and/or gun, burner phones, walkie talkies, oxy's, etc... Wasn't it from a hemp store? .

<rbbm>

No, it was Diesel brand.

Pillay also asked about a canvas Diesel bag that was seized from Millard's home. Court heard the bag was found in a washing machine.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/news/bosma-trial-investigators-searched-for-gun-at-smich-house-seize-ipad-1.3471003

 

[hellkat2]

Curious as to what that "statement" might be?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

An expression would be another way of saying it. Example: he is making a fashion statement.

 

[Traymar]

I am assuming by the lol that it is ridiculous to think that the incinerator could melt steel?

You didn't ask me, but I'll chime in because I work at a steel mill. We melt scrap to make steel plate and coil. The metal has to be heated to 3000° in order to transform it into something else. Steel has to be at 2500-2750° just to begin to melt. At 3000° you have liquid steel that you can pour into molds to produce slabs, for instance.

What could DM have possibly wanted to do with his melted steel assuming he didn't know he wouldn't be able to produce the heat necessary to melt it? We use EAF, or an electric arc furnace, to produce the heat.

But assuming he really thought he'd melt some steel, then what? In any event, the steel doesn't burn away: it is infinitely recyclable. Additionally, melted steel would likely break through any non-commercial vat. The whole idea is ludicrous.

Of course I realize he likely had no intention whatsoever of melting metal in the incinerator.

This is my opinion only.

If you're interested, you can read about melting steel here: http://www.steel.org/making-steel/h...es-info/electric-arc-furnace-steelmaking.aspx.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

This is why I'm interested to hear the judge's charge. Without going through long explanations of details again, just to touch on two brief points that stand out to me amongst a bunch other things. Very scattered text messages (that can and have been interpreted however people want) with hidden sausages pictures, and absence of any kind of evidence DNA or otherwise of MS in the Yukon or TB's truck has me stuck. Add that to the letters DM has written on all the ways to frame someone, and tamper with witnesses, let's say I'm not 100% convinced. Of course CN "said" she didn't tamper with any witnesses for DM.

And oddly enough none of these reasons have anything to do with MS testimony. So people can say all day long the guy got on the stand and lied. Or his lawyer didn't ask these questions on purpose. That is only a part of a bigger picture IMO

OK ... Let's remove the fireside and sausage pics from the discussion. As you know, we disagree regarding the evidentiary value of the text messages. I personally give them a lot of weight, when combined with the evidence of DM and MS's actions. To say, though, that they can be interpreted any way that people want is a huge stretch, IMO, given what the outcome was. That adds a considerable amount of probability to the actual meaning of those coded messages.

We don't need DNA evidence to prove that MS was in Tim's truck and the Yukon. He testified to being in both trucks, and was never challenged. He was in both trucks.

DM's letters to CN were completely damning to DM ... Proof of his attempts to tamper with evidence/testimony, talk about framing MS. But that is a moot point if you are considering that perhaps DM was successful in his attempt to frame MS ... Evidence that DM was successful in his attempts to frame MS was never introduced in this trial, so it won't be a part of the jury's deliberation because it is baseless speculation.

IMHO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[canadiangirl]

Yet Karla Homolka is walking free because of improper sentencing.

Karla Holmolka is walking free because of plea deal she made. That is a completely different situation all together is of no comparison to a jury finding someone guilty or not based on evidence presented in a trial.

 

[mimimic]

I can tell you unequivocally that for all three of those people getting dragged into court was a nightmare. If you think any of them enjoyed the attention they received as a result of this, you are dreaming in technicolour. What's more, all three of these witnesses were accompanied by family members who were there to support them. Being a witness in a murder trial is not sitting around a dinner party telling fish stories.

This reminded me of one of Dm's first letters when he speaks of when he first got there with all the chains on and how he should have been flattered or something like that. So I would say they are somewhat immature/messed up.

 

[hellkat2]

If you're talking about the season four episode, Jesse is playing RAGE, not F.E.A.R., and the screen says "Mission Failed". I guess the difference is that you are shooting mutants and bandits instead of fighting the paranormal, unlike Grand Theft Auto where you can just hurt anyone you want as you drive around. I don't think GTA will be going away anytime soon since it is one of the most popular games out there and has been for a few years. Also, anyone I've known who has made it half-way through the first season of Breaking Bad is a fan, so I don't see that having any indication as to someone's tendencies towards violence. JMO

Well some people can smoke and drink in moderation and some can't. I would think that if you are a psychopath or traits of this that watching these kinds of TV series and playing some of these games could be quite triggering.

 

[CJPRINCESS]

I wondered how much scoping went on in relationship to the Bosma's. Did they watch the coming and going of the household? I don't know if TB's wife worked and he worked and if someone was watching the house would they know when they were not at home as well as the tenant. Did T.B. drive his truck every day or was it left at home and he used another for day to day work driving. Did TB keep it in the garage? I also wonder with their household was there any time that there would be nobody home that they could have gone back and stolen that truck ? They had a big dog....was he a barker? There are some households that would never be idle enough for someone to go back when nobody was at home. Was the Bosma home on that list? Because if so there was no way that they intended on coming back later for that truck. Or maybe once they established it did not have a GPS etc that they could have planned to scope the movements of the Bosma house to see when it was unattended.

Might have been answered but (if I remember correctly) TB had the truck in the garage. He pulled it out when DM and MS arrived. I don't know if it was a regular thing but one of the Kijiji Ad pics shows it in the garage as well.

I also wondered about them scoping TB house before their mission. They scoped all others (not sure about Igor's) to watch movement of the truck's. I don't recall if SB put the house location in the ad or not but if not, some people give their address well in advanced.

 

[hellkat2]

<modsnip>
First degree murder in Canada is premeditation and/or forcible confinement. And IMO I see enough reasonable doubt that he may be found not guilty of M1.
I don't have any reservations about anyone, and the fact that people make it personal is absurd here. As I've said many times, before hearing all the evidence and
sleuthing 3 yrs ago, I would've said M1 for both. Now that it's gone to trial, and the evidence is in, I can see why people would think there's a reasonable doubt for MS.

Those same witnesses you're referring to btw have been shown not to be 100% truthful themselves, so that is a moot point. IMO
As the judge stated, and I'll say it again, you can believe all, part or none of a witness testimony.

Do I believe 100% of MS testimony? No. I never once implied I did.

To have posters characterize he's not a "charming an upstanding citizen", so he must be guilty is not what the justice system is in Canada.

First degree if it happens in a car jacking.

 

[Miranda16]

This is why I'm interested to hear the judge's charge. Without going through long explanations of details again, just to touch on two brief points that stand out to me amongst a bunch other things. Very scattered text messages (that can and have been interpreted however people want) with hidden sausages pictures, and absence of any kind of evidence DNA or otherwise of MS in the Yukon or TB's truck has me stuck. Add that to the letters DM has written on all the ways to frame someone, and tamper with witnesses, let's say I'm not 100% convinced. Of course CN "said" she didn't tamper with any witnesses for DM.

And oddly enough none of these reasons have anything to do with MS testimony. So people can say all day long the guy got on the stand and lied. Or his lawyer didn't ask these questions on purpose. That is only a part of a bigger picture IMO

I respect your opinion. On the Yukon and truck points, MS did admit to being in both over the course of the evening, so how does that factor in?

I think his innocence (or guilt) on 1st comes down to whether you believe that he was aware ahead of time that a murder would or could occur. For me, his text message showing involvement in researching an incinerator is a major clincher. Combined with the other evidence it seals it. Applying benefit of doubt to each individual piece amounts to a series of unfortunate coincidences (as someone else pointed out). Applied together it seems very unlikely that they all have innocent explanations. And his clear lying on the stand really puts it away.

 

[canadiangirl]

We don't need DNA evidence to prove that MS was in Tim's truck and the Yukon. He testified to being in both trucks, and was never challenged. He was in both trucks.

I respect your opinion. On the Yukon and truck points, MS did admit to being in both over the course of the evening, so how does that factor in?

RSBM
In regards to the DNA evidence in the Yukon, I'm referring the lack of TB transfer to the Yukon. As in, if MS was in the vehicle when TB was murdered, I find it hard to believe that there isn't one bit of transfer to the Yukon by him at all. And we all saw that vehicle wasn't clean.