Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #18

[deugirtni]

This applies to both of my posts above. Just saying that the 'f'd up' conversation, and other conversations (gun conversations) may not have happened on the same days, in fact they couldn't have, since:

one day: DM drops MS off at his mother's 'house', MS whizzes past BD, MM brings down the weed and tells him to scram

next day: BD visits MS at his mother's 'house' again, MS says he 'f'd up' (this seems to be repeated over and over again in testimony that it was the day after the dropping off by DM and MS whizzing by; imho BD seems pretty sure about this, since he says the next day, he asked what that was about.)

one completely different day: BD and MS are talking about the gun in the toolbox; the gun in the toolbox wasn't even dropped off in the stairwell until May 11th; DM was arrested at dinnertime on May 10th. So that makes it impossible for the f'd up conversation to have happened on the same day when the gun talk happened, if the 'f'd up' remark came a day after May 10th.

First, MS and MM weren't living at MM's sister's until when?

Second, once they moved to MM's sister's place, wasn't MS said to be holing up there, not coming out, laying low, not being seen? I doubt if MS would have been travelling back and forth between his mother's house and MM's sister's apartment, since he seemed paranoid.

The best that I can put together from all of what has been said, MS said 'I f'd up' on May 8th to BD. My opinion, of course.

 

[deugirtni]

I concede that MS may have said this to Daly on May 10 before they knew DM was arrested. But it was not May 7 or 8 as some have suggested.

The essence of Daly's testimony was that he never noticed a change in MS's behavior until after DM was arrested. However, the Crown asked him to refresh his memory from the police statements. After doing so, he mentioned seeing MS get dropped off, blowing past him, and sending MM out with the his weed and telling him to scram. This most logically occurred on May 9 after they heard about the Crimestoppers call.

I deleted the Smich army remark since it was inappropriate. And it wasn't directed at you -- sorry about that. There does seem to be a constant barrage of pro-Smich sentiments on this board from some members, and it's often difficult to tell what their underlying intentions are. It's ok if 1) they don't understand the evidence, 2) they're playing devil's advocate, or 3) they're countering the mob mentality and its lack of reasoning. But an outright bias in favor of either of the accused (or against them, for that matter) and the resulting willful blindness and spreading of misinformation just ruins the discussion for those who wish to analyze the evidence objectively.

It seems that everyone here has an outright bias, and also 'resulting willful blindness'. If I look up something I'll go to the tweets and do a search since it is much more productive than trying to search on WS for details. I posted what I found, and that is what was tweeted by a very respected journalist who isn't given to making errors all that often, imo. I'm not sure how producing his tweet could be considered 'wilful blindness' and 'spreading of misinformation'. As it turns out, after looking at all of the tweets, it seems AC may have been the only one to report the date accurately of when MS first said he f'd up to BD, but in any case, it is unfair to suggest that others are spreading misinformation and experiencing wilful blindness when they are merely looking up what was said according to what we have as our reports. If one wants to examine evidence objectively, one would have to be objective, and consider everything, not just what goes with their own personal opinion. moo

 

[Inspector_North]

We heard from MS that he cut out the carpet and removed the seats from TB's truck and stored them in the back of the red truck, and they burned the contents on the 9th. We also heard from SS that he assisted DM in 'parking' the Red truck at some friend's house.

They must of used a tarp to protect the red truck? With all this bloody stuff, we heard nothing of TB's DNA found in the red truck.

The ambiguous pre mission texts and activity leave many folks looking for something, anything that will help put those activities in a context that removes doubt around their actual meaning. Different approaches are occurring from those following this trial due to the mountain of evidence, and IMO some of it muddies the water. Trying to pick out those pieces that support our perspective is difficult, and it should be, as the evidence needs to be analyzed as a whole. The only problem is that the amount is overwhelming.

I find myself looking at the two accused post activity as key to unraveling the pre test drive evidence. I am of the camp that showing a premeditated murder of TB is difficult, but showing evidence of a generic plan for murder is the correct path. These two may have not known TB was the one, but they knew someone was going to be the one. And when I interpret the evidence in that context, I see these two as guilty as charged.

MOO

 

[Miranda16]

I have been thinking about this for days. In the middle of the nite when I can't sleep.
It does not make sense that they would plan to kill the owner in the truck.
Too serious. Too dangerous. You never know where a bullet might go.
Through a window? Through a door? Through the dash? Through your buddy?
And it makes a lot of mess.
Millard’s: “No more money bro, we take what we want at the source.”
I think this must have meant to force the owner out, take his truck, and just drive away.
Change the colour. Change serial numbers.
Who knows the difference?
I think they had no plan to kill just to steal. Murder is too foolish and way too serious.
The gun was to give the plan Back Up.
The plan got cancelled with IT.
Everyone knows Don't pull a gun on a soldier. Unless it has smooth edges.
I don't think murder was ever the intent.
Kick the owner out and just drive away.
Worst charge would be possession.
I have no doubt they were both armed.
The plan went terribly wrong.
The details don't matter.
I do think this puts both MS and DM up for M1.

One word: incinerator

 

[billandrew]

Also from Adam Carter:

• Moodie asking about Smich's demeanor after Millard was arrested. "He said that he was scared that someone was going to come get him. He didn't really say who," Daly says. Moodie asks if Daly ever asked Smich about the Bosma investigation. "I just asked what was going on, and he just said he wasn't there and he wasn't involved. I guess defensive would be a better word," Daly says.
• "These guys don't **** around, they're going to find me. He said he f---ked up," Daly says about a conversation with Smich. "I f---ked up man, I f---ked up man."

Daly also testified that he never noticed a change in MS's behavior until after DM's arrest, but then refreshed his memory from his police statement and mentioned MS's odd behavior in whizzing past him, which occurred a day before the "People are coming after me, I ****ed up" comments, which he said happened after DM's arrest.

Based on the plethora of evidence, it makes sense that MS would have been paranoid after hearing about the Crimestoppers call on May 9. DM was also paranoid, and after he dropped the toolbox off to MH he sent MS a reassuring message "Retooled for stormy weather, all clear." The subsequent messages from MS to DM on May 10 indicate a level of paranoia from MS.

MM never said anything about MS acting paranoid, anxious, or nervous until around the time DM was arrested.

Similarly, the messages between DM and MS from May 7-9 don't indicate any change in MS's behavior either. There's just no sign anywhere that MS was freaked out or paranoid before the Crimestoppers call.

But if one chooses to dismiss all of this evidence, and also concludes that it's more likely that an unemployed pothead like Daly would be waiting to pick up weed at 8:30 in the morning on a Tuesday versus 9pm on a Thursday, then I suppose that person is entitled to their opinion.

 

[DMB]

Perhaps MS didn't want to tell MM he was going on an all night mission because it would have caused a fight or argument. Some men are notorious for lying to their women like that because they like to come and go as they please. And if you recall, these two were inseparable and MS didn't seem to approve later in their relationship by telling MM she needed to get a job. MS wanted his freedom and not a ball and chain. Was she worried sick or upset because she may have ran out of weed and needed a fix from her supplier boyfriend? We'll never know. MOO.

Curious, we do know that MM was one of the last people who contacted DM the night at TB's prior to the test drive but I don't recall ever hearing what that text said or if it was a phone call. We are led to assume that MM had some knowledge that this evening was to be different and she was up all night worrying, if that is the case why would she not check her emails as she knew MS's phone was not reliable or text/call DM as she knew they were together and he did have his phone on????

 

[redwing7225]

But also remember, if you put out dog food and have TWO dogs, which one ate the dog food when you came back?

Interesting way to look at it...
You can be certain if one dog ate all the food the other would be begging for some.
You all bring up valid thoughts/opinions and facts...
Personally I continue to go back to the loaded illegal gun and what purpose it had being there during a test drive.
IIRC, MS wanted to go west, what a perfect opportunity (if he wasnt involved), to go to police with the facts. This may have gained him an opportunity for protection.
However, MS made the decision to help with the cleanup/cover up, even after DM was arrested.

 

[XiolaBlueX]

So, some observations from court on Friday -
DM - I've seen him in court before, but it didn't stop me from noticing just how different DM looks imo from pictures from before. He looks gaunt, and has big bags under his eyes. I suppose a few years in custody with lots of segregation can do that. On the skinnier side, with slightly ill fitting conservative clothing. In my subjective opinion in his previous pictures he definitely could be considered a physically attractive man by some, no longer however, imo.
I did not personally see any family members or obvious supporters of either DM or MS. IMO only.
MS looked the same as the other times, more lucid then pictures of him before this all, mostly serious and looking straight ahead. Dark neatly parted to the side, with conservative clothing. He is much smaller in stature in person than he ever looked in pictures, imo, also compared to DM, and probably because with slimmer fitting clothing it is more obvious.
DM on the other hand was wearing dark thick framed glasses and was often bent over his notebook with a pen or pencil.

The beginning took people by surprise (including the lawyers IMO) when the judge announced that a juror had personal private issues relayed via a letter. She ended up being discharged from the trial. We watched the juror go and the jury drop to 12. Of course there was a humming across the courtroom with people looking around at each other.

 

[XiolaBlueX]

Judges charge to jury on Friday - The judge made a point of cautioning the jury (summarizing) not to confuse the premeditation of stealing a truck with premeditation of murder. Furthermore, he said that conduct after the fact does not necessarily prove what occurred. For example, cleaning up the seats and the truck, moving the eliminator, behaviour afterwards. It can still happen if it wasn't a premeditated murder and does not make it more likely that it was premeditated murder vs a manslaughter as people react in different ways to something like a manslaughter. Whether it be from fear, panic, not wanting to get caught for something, or it could be innocent.Also somebody can get caught up in a situation that was not premeditated. Jurors can still take it all into account.
(Please note that this little blurb is from my memory of observing, most of the other things in earlier posts I wrote from my notes verbatim.)

 

[ellie b]

IMO, the IT test drive actually worked in MS's favour- it allowed him an opportunity to cultivate his "scoping" defence. I think we have to look thru the eyes of a couple of psychopaths to really understand what might have gone down. IMHO, DM would have loved to kill IT- it would fall into line with his inability to deal with authority. DM would have loved to have IT's truck that day as well- he was going to go to Baja come Hell or high-water! It was a Sunday afternoon- they could have killed him, pulled over and thru a blanket over him in the front seat; they had a couple places like Riverside, where they could have tucked in to to reposition things and they were only 45 minutes away from the Hangar. The truck could have been stripped and body incinerated on Sunday night and by Monday morning, everything would have been cleaned up IMHO, there's only one reason IT didn't die that day and that's because the test drive started off by him driving (pretty hard to kill the guy behind the wheel), even as a passenger, IT was running the show and MS was getting car sick from his oxy/booze letdown. I also believe that IT would not be comfortable having his back turned to anyone. MS was lying when he said they were just scoping IT's truck. They had already scoped it out thoroughly online. They knew exactly what it was-their mission failed. DM failed MS and visa versa.

Personally, I think the whole experience escalated things for DM: more desperate, more determined, angry with his brush with authority and that's why it became an after dark event. These two talked with each other all the way out to Ancaster that night- just like loving bro's would. They had a plan and neither of them were going to fail this time around.

MS loved DM and would have done anything for him. By all accounts DM was supporting him. MS trusted DM to the point where he was screaming at MM not to say anything when the pair were arrested. MS would have taken the fall for DM if it was part of a bigger plan, but alas- DM wasn't reciprocating his love and loyalty- soon MS saw that DM was throwing him under the bus. IMHO, MS buried the gun right after DM's arrest because it implicated the guy he loved- DM. I don't think we can ever forget how close these two psychopaths were. IMHO, MS got a reality check when he found out about the letters. His testimony was very "letter-centric"- obviously a very sore spot with poor MS and he took every single opportunity to point the finger at DM. Reminds me of nasty divorce or break-up- he said/she said, only this time it's between partners in murder who's love has long faded. MOO

<modsnip>

Agree with every bit of this post.....They planned this together, encouraged each other. I bet MS was gutted when he saw the evidence of the letters, bet he was broken hearted, like you mentioned, similarities to a bitter divorce case. Yes, he waited until all the testimonies were done and manipulated his "story" to fit, although conveniently forgot so many details because he was so scared and stressed.....what a joke. The most unbelievable part of his testimony is the burial of the gun, he has no idea where he buried it, he totally blew any semblance of credibility out of the water with that tale.
I followed this case from day 1 and it is probably the most unbelievable scenario I have come across, it is devastatingly cold-hearted and selfish, and quite frankly insane. DM had an incinerator for pete's sake !! The excuses for having that are also a joke, it was bought shortly after the disappearance of LB, he wanted to get his monies worth. I would hazard a guess that if these 2 R's holes had got away with the disgusting murder of TB, then there would have been a few more heinous crimes subsequently.

 

[canadiangirl]

But if one chooses to dismiss all of this evidence, and also concludes that it's more likely that an unemployed pothead like Daly would be waiting to pick up weed at 8:30 in the morning on a Tuesday versus 9pm on a Thursday, then I suppose that person is entitled to their opinion.

RSBM
I don't think people are dismissing all the evidence, we aren't seeing the same thing. And according to WS TOS we can sit on whichever side of the fence we choose. Except that makes you part of an army when it's not the popular side?

When a question is being asked we have been sourcing tweets and your timeline. I don't think anyone is spreading misinformation. I'm not sure where all the hostility is coming from and comments about a Smich army mentality.

There are a handful of us posting who see a reasonable doubt and the remainder do not. Having those of us who are devil's advocate engage in a respectable discussion is key.

You have 50 people posting their opinion vs approx the same 5 on the opposite side. Therefore you constantly see the same 5 names as we're countering that many more questions.

I also sourced Adam Carter live blog. He is my reporter of choice for tweets as I find him easy to follow. It was not misinformation. But it was only from one media source. I also recall ABro saying how she felt BD was a credible witness. It wasn't until the judge commented that BD was all over the place that people are dismissing his testimony it seems. JMO

 

[billandrew]

RSBM
I don't think people are dismissing all the evidence, we aren't seeing the same thing. When a question is being asked we have been sourcing tweets and your timeline. (at least I have if I'm at a computer). I don't think anyone is spreading misinformation. I'm not sure where all the hostility is coming from and comments about a Smich army mentality.

There are a handful of us posting who see a reasonable doubt and the remainder do not. Having those of us who are devil's advocate engage in a respectable discussion is key.

You have 50 people posting their opinion vs the approx the same 5 on the opposite side. Therefore you constantly see the same 5 names as we're countering that many more questions.

I also sourced Adam Carter live blog. He is my reporter of choice for tweets as I find him easy to follow. It was not misinformation. But it was only from one media source. I also recall ABro saying how she felt BD was a credible witness. It wasn't until the judge commented that BD was all over the place that people are dismissing his testimony it seems. JMO

I retracted the Smich army comment and apologized for it. And I accused nobody of actually being biased or spreading misinformation, I just stated that I find it hard to tell if people are doing that or not. There does seem to be a persistent and vocal slant toward MS's favor coming from a few people and it seems odd to me because I don't see the rationale for it. Anyhow, it seems I've aggravated the bee's nest so I'm going to say no more about this.

 

[canadiangirl]

Perhaps MS didn't want to tell MM he was going on an all night mission because it would have caused a fight or argument. Some men are notorious for lying to their women like that because they like to come and go as they please. And if you recall, these two were inseparable and MS didn't seem to approve later in their relationship by telling MM she needed to get a job. MS wanted his freedom and not a ball and chain. Was she worried sick or upset because she may have ran out of weed and needed a fix from her supplier boyfriend? We'll never know. MOO.

But if one chooses to dismiss all of this evidence, and also concludes that it's more likely that an unemployed pothead like Daly would be waiting to pick up weed at 8:30 in the morning on a Tuesday versus 9pm on a Thursday, then I suppose that person is entitled to their opinion.

Snipped quoted posts, so here we have these 2 posts.

When I suggested that MS didn't know the plan since MM was freaking out because she hadn't heard from MS and was frantically looking for him at 6am texting AM in contrast to DM telling CN if it went well it'd be an all nighter,
one poster suggested in part that maybe MM was freaking out because she needed her weed fix

But the next person suggests we're dismissing the evidence and it's unreasonable to think BD a pothead would want weed at 830am?

 

[canadiangirl]

I retracted the Smich army comment and apologized for it. And I accused nobody of actually being biased or spreading misinformation, I just stated that I find it hard to tell if people are doing that or not. There does seem to be a persistent and vocal slant toward MS's favor coming from a few people and it seems odd to me because I don't see the rationale for it. Anyhow, it seems I've aggravated the bee's nest so I'm going to say no more about this.

Like I said, when you have 50 posters on one side of the fence, and the same 5 people on the other side of the fence, it's going to seem like there's a persistent vocal slant, when actually you're seeing the same few names over and over again answering that many more posts. If 5 people ask the same question and quote me for example, I'm one person answering 5 posts in a row.
Same goes for anyone else who is on the reasonable doubt side.

 

[canadiangirl]

Judges charge to jury on Friday - The judge made a point of cautioning the jury (summarizing) not to confuse the premeditation of stealing a truck with premeditation of murder. Furthermore, he said that conduct after the fact does not necessarily prove what occurred. For example, cleaning up the seats and the truck, moving the eliminator, behaviour afterwards. It can still happen if it wasn't a premeditated murder and does not make it more likely that it was premeditated murder vs a manslaughter as people react in different ways to something like a manslaughter. Whether it be from fear, panic, not wanting to get caught for something, or it could be innocent.Also somebody can get caught up in a situation that was not premeditated. Jurors can still take it all into account.
(Please note that this little blurb is from my memory of observing, most of the other things in earlier posts I wrote from my notes verbatim.)

Thanks for your notes from court! I know people were looking forward to your posts with what transpired inside the courtroom.

 

[LibTech]

I deleted the Smich army remark since it was inappropriate. And it wasn't directed at you -- sorry about that. There does seem to be a constant barrage of pro-Smich sentiments on this board from some members, and it's often difficult to tell what their underlying intentions are. It's ok if 1) they don't understand the evidence, 2) they're playing devil's advocate, or 3) they're countering the mob mentality and its lack of reasoning. But an outright bias in favor of either of the accused (or against them, for that matter) and the resulting willful blindness and spreading of misinformation just ruins the discussion for those who wish to analyze the evidence objectively.

Respectfully, I haven't seen a constant barrage of pro Smitch sentiments on this forum. I have seen a few posts from members who do not believe that MS is guilty of first degree murder. They, like you, are only voicing their opinion.

I have been following this case from the beginning. As the judge mentioned, a large portion of the evidence is circumstantial and many of the witnesses lied. I am basing my opinion on witness credibility and what I consider to be the facts in this case. It has nothing to do with playing the devils advocate. Its about applying the law to what I believe are the facts.

There is no shortage of evidence that a plan was in place between DM and MS to to steal a truck. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence that a plan was in place between DM and MS to kill a man on a test drive, steal his truck and incinerate him. I find MS's testimony of the shooting very plausible. But even without it, my opinion would be the same.

IMO there is reasonable doubt. The jury might very well decide that there isn't enough evidence to convict either DM or MS of first degree murder. But I think it is more likely that DM will be convicted as charged and MS convicted of second degree.

 

[Alethea Dice]

I have been thinking about this for days. In the middle of the nite when I can't sleep.
It does not make sense that they would plan to kill the owner in the truck.
Too serious. Too dangerous. You never know where a bullet might go.
Through a window? Through a door? Through the dash? Through your buddy?
And it makes a lot of mess.
Millard’s: “No more money bro, we take what we want at the source.”
I think this must have meant to force the owner out, take his truck, and just drive away.
Change the colour. Change serial numbers.
Who knows the difference?
I think they had no plan to kill just to steal. Murder is too foolish and way too serious.
The gun was to give the plan Back Up.
The plan got cancelled with IT.
Everyone knows Don't pull a gun on a soldier. Unless it has smooth edges.
I don't think murder was ever the intent.
Kick the owner out and just drive away.
Worst charge would be possession.
I have no doubt they were both armed.
The plan went terribly wrong.
The details don't matter.
I do think this puts both MS and DM up for M1.

I think this is the most likely as well. Except if murder was never the intent, it doesn't equal 1st degree. Second degree, or less likely manslaughter, for both. JMO

 

[deugirtni]

We heard from MS that he cut out the carpet and removed the seats from TB's truck and stored them in the back of the red truck, and they burned the contents on the 9th. We also heard from SS that he assisted DM in 'parking' the Red truck at some friend's house.

They must of used a tarp to protect the red truck? With all this bloody stuff, we heard nothing of TB's DNA found in the red truck.

The ambiguous pre mission texts and activity leave many folks looking for something, anything that will help put those activities in a context that removes doubt around their actual meaning. Different approaches are occurring from those following this trial due to the mountain of evidence, and IMO some of it muddies the water. Trying to pick out those pieces that support our perspective is difficult, and it should be, as the evidence needs to be analyzed as a whole. The only problem is that the amount is overwhelming.

I find myself looking at the two accused post activity as key to unraveling the pre test drive evidence. I am of the camp that showing a premeditated murder of TB is difficult, but showing evidence of a generic plan for murder is the correct path. These two may have not known TB was the one, but they knew someone was going to be the one. And when I interpret the evidence in that context, I see these two as guilty as charged.

MOO

I guess what made me go looking for info on when the seats were burned, was the fact that the red Ram was never mentioned (that I can recall) in any evidence, but yet it has been stated that some of the stuff was put into the back of the red truck. When I looked, I couldn't really find anything that said the seats had gone into the back of the red truck, I found stuff saying that other stuff had been put in garbage bags and put into the back of the red truck. I think that someone here mentioned that the seats had been burned earlier than on May 9th, but I can't find indication of that. That is why I'm asking for help.

The reasons I am interested:

-the seats seem to be the only item that was burned and retained, as opposed to discarded through ash (ie the carpet, gloves, their initial clothing, tarps, rags, whatever? If this stuff, including the seats were not burned until May 9th, then I am curious as to how the metal would be burned to remove all upholstery, and then cooled down enough for them to get the metal framing back into the red truck so quickly, to be taken back to the hangar, and was there an indication of such a timeline on the cellphone data report? I would imagine the metal frame would have been awfully hot for the men to lug back into the truck, and perhaps for quite some time.

-if the seats were not burned until May 9th, where were they placed from the 6th to the 9th? Before the seats were burned, they were reported to be blood soaked, from what I remember? I am wondering how AJ and SS missed seeing them? Especially with AJ reportedly being so curious about this truck suddenly there in the hangar, and already aware of the TB case from the news, one might assume he may have also noticed the red Ram on site somewhere, and even if the seat assembly were covered with a tarp, I would imagine that may get his imagination going as to what could be underneath. I wondered therefore, if the seats could have been put into the large car-hauler trailer that was later used to haul TB's truck to MB's residence. but if they were, then the duo would have had to unload the bloody seats before putting TB's truck inside, and then reload them into the trailer behind the truck... is it possible the seat assembly was burned at the farm on the same evening as when the truck and seats were taken to Ayr?

 

[Inspector_North]

Respectfully, I haven't seen a constant barrage of pro Smitch sentiments on this forum. I have seen a few posts from members who do not believe that MS is guilty of first degree murder. They, like you, are only voicing their opinion.

I have been following this case from the beginning. As the judge mentioned, a large portion of the evidence is circumstantial and many of the witnesses lied. I am basing my opinion on witness credibility and what I consider to be the facts in this case. It has nothing to do with playing the devils advocate. Its about applying the law to what I believe are the facts.

There is no shortage of evidence that a plan was in place between DM and MS to to steal a truck. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence that a plan was in place between DM and MS to kill a man on a test drive, steal his truck and incinerate him. I find MS's testimony of the shooting very plausible. But even without it, my opinion would be the same.

IMO there is reasonable doubt. The jury might very well decide that there isn't enough evidence to convict either DM or MS of first degree murder. But I think it is more likely that DM will be convicted as charged and MS convicted of second degree.

Just to pipe in here. I see much of the circumstantial evidence open to the observers life experience. I don't agree with many comments from both camps posting here. Not that I am right about the subject of the post, but rather I often see the interpretation of the circumstantial evidence from my experience and knowledge, as does everyone else. Even if there is good reasoning to back it up.

The point Bill just made about when BD saw MS whiz by him after getting out of DM's truck is a great example of interpreting circumstantial evidence. And based on my experience with early 20 something male chronic pot smokers, morning is not their thing. He may be different, but probability tells me it was the evening of the 9th.

I also put much of my interpretation into what their lifestyle was at the time. I know the judge frowned on that perspective, but MS and DM were definitely in a different place in their lives at that time, and it was one of escalating crime.

Both MS and AM knew of DM's plan to 'build empires', and both bought in. Only, just one of them was there for the opening fireworks.

MOO

 

[Alethea Dice]

I'm looking back at the tweets now. I'm not certain. It seems the tweets from BD's testimony, or BD's testimony itself, jump all over the place. One time he's in MS's back yard, MS is being dropped off at his 'house' when he's whizzing by BD, later he's living at MM's sister's apartment. But MS and MM apparently moved to MM's sister's apartment a couple days before DM's arrest. To me, after reading all 3 of the tweeters, it doesn't seem clear on which day he is talking about MS whizzing past him after being let out of a truck driven by DM, and it seems it was the day after that when MS said he f'd up, and BD visited MS's 'house' and asked him what 'that was about' (the whizzing right past him the day before). But then talk of the gun was obviously from after MS had become in possession of the toolbox which wasn't until May 11th, and he was living at the apartment. BD didn't start his first of three police statements until after May 22nd, after MS was arrested, so who knows how well his mind remembered exact calendar dates?

How do we know that when MS whizzed by BD, it wasn't the morning of May 7th, when DM dropped him off at his 'house', and then BD had this 'f'd up' conversation also at his house when he visited it again on May 8th?

also from SC's tweets:

Daly waiting for Smich to buy marijuana from him the week of May 6. Dell's truck rolls up, Smich goes straight into house, no words. Apr 05, 2016

Then Marlena comes out, gives Daly his weed and he leaves. Next day sees Smich again, asks what was going on. Smich was stressed and edgy. Apr 05, 2016

Smich said "I ****ed up man." Repeatedly. He was rattled and shaken. Daly had never seen him like that before. #Bosma Apr 05, 2016

Smich knew he was in serious trouble. Apr 05, 2016

Smich said "these n.....s are coming to get me. I ****ed up." Apr 05, 2016

Daly was concerned for his friend. They lived around corner from each other. Smich deleted his Facebook account. Cut off his cell phones. Apr 05, 2016

Smich used other people's phones. He was "going underground. He was preparing to flee," suggests Pillay. Daly agrees. Smich used Daly cell. Apr 05, 2016

Smich was "jumpy." Smich took Daly's phone to balcony for privacy. Erased phone before giving it back. Daly has "no idea" who he contacted. Apr 05, 2016

.

How could it have been on the morning of the 7th that MS whizzed past BD? They are on video picking up MM at the apartment that morning. How does DM drop off MS, then MM come out of the house to tell BD to leave if they were all together when dropped off? (And according to MM, happy at that point.)

MS and MM moved to the sister's apartment after DM was arrested. From MH's tweets on April 5th, line 2740 and 2741:

At one point, Daly says Smich went to live at Marlena's sister's place. Elizabeth Meneses.

Daly went there with Smich, he says. Smich moved there after May 10.

Edit: Found this as well, from MM's sister's testimony, line 4371 of MH's tweets:

In May 2013, the couple came to live with her. Stayed from May 11-18, she recalls.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zxyo_MC4bf28IMfFvSuu5ETlebQlyw__2QSDhYkGxMU/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=156108166