Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #2

[Tamarind]

:goodpost: I think, part of the reason it's been discussed over and over is due to the section I've bolded above. In a sense, you kind of answered your own question. However, I agree with you 100% and frankly don't give a rat's booty who pulled the trigger. I think the logic of the evidence of GSR clearly shows the shot came from the front of the truck, but at the end of the day, the person in the back never called 911 and spilled the beans.

I respect your right to an opinion but I can't agree, as we still have no idea who killed whom and how.
For all we know there may have been an argument, a third person, or blackmail involved. There are a lot of scenarios IMO, so for me to claim not to give a 'rats booty who pulled the trigger' is incomprehensible. That's just my opinion, and as I said I also respect that you have yours.

 

[Tamarind]

There will be more blood spatter evidence introduced likely, but it's an obvious inference that the amount of blood spatter in the front of the truck, along with the pattern and velocity of the spatter, that TB was a) shot b) in the head. IF he was cut w a box cutter there wouldn't be gun residue or high impact spatter. IF he was shot in the thigh for example, it is very unlikely that the spatter would be on the interior ceiling and/or the driver's side. That someone was shot in the head isn't proof of death, but increases the odds. Why does it matter, can I ask, if TB was merely incapacitated by a gunshot to the head vs the incinerator?? When there's proof of both things occurring, and both occurrences being linked to DM/MS.

Because a link doesn't make a whole chain. Thats why the trial is scheduled for 4 months. Hopefully during that time more 'links' will be revealed even if linking to another chain. So far the prosecution are the ones trying to build their case. Eventually the defense will have their turn at destabilizing the foundation. It is still early days and time has a way of bringing new things our way.

 

[Ontario Mom]

I respect your right to an opinion but I can't agree, as we still have no idea who killed whom and how.
For all we know there may have been an argument, a third person, or blackmail involved. There are a lot of scenarios IMO, so for me to claim not to give a 'rats booty who pulled the trigger' is incomprehensible. That just my opinion, and as I said I also respect that you have yours.

We know Tim Bosma got in that truck alive with DM and MS and he alone didn't survive it. So yes, we do know WHOM was killed. Arguments, 3rd person and/or blackmail has never once been mentioned by the Crown. Ever. If there was any evidence of that whatsoever, wouldn't we have heard about it by now? Especially given the opening statement which clearly states they intend to prove Tim was shot in that truck by DM and MS? My saying I don't care who pulled the trigger is very simple: both were there, and neither came forward to speak to police about what happened before they were tracked down & arrested. BOTH had the opportunity. Neither came forward, and BOTH attempted to cover it up. One of them had more cold blooded disregard for life to shoot another human being without cause, but both are equally responsible for the fact that SB is a widow, and that baby girl doesn't have a daddy anymore.

It would appear you genuinely believe the Crown is wrong or somehow mistaken. We disagree, 100%.

 

[swedie]

Hi all, I've been following closely but not logging in... I want to ask something of anyone willing to shed some light:

Why is it being disputed, whether it might have been DM or MS who pulled the trigger? While the angle of trajectory might or might not shed light, the Crown statement of fact argues that BOTH shot TB.

This is, in a layman sense, factually impossible--two people would not very likely pull the trigger. However, as so many other posters have pointed out, if TB was killed in the commission of a felony (i.e., theft of a truck), it is automatically 1st degree. Meaning, even if DM was misled or whatever by his friend, he still went along with this crime, forcibly confined someone, and was involved with a murder. I think there is very little doubt or dispute that they, at the very least, were stealing a truck?

I feel like the time spent on "who did it" is moot, given the criteria for 1st degree murder in Canada. I'm Canadian (live about an hour from the crime), so maybe some of this nuance is lost outside the country, or maybe I'm missing something in some posters' rationale. I'm asking honestly. How can anyone advocate for 1 of 2 people to not be guilty of 1st degree murder, when both were present (this is proven, as I've never heard of a "planted" fingerprint), both were committing a crime (theft, forceable confinement), and a death occurred--under our criminal code??

Thank you for your well thought out and logical post and :welcome5: Figuring.

And you're exactly right, makes no difference who did the shooting. There was premeditation on the theft of a truck; DM told his room mate they were planning it and MS told his girlfriend after the fact, also said TB was gone, gone, gone.Both equally responsible in the eyes of the law, of murder in the first degree. Now had either one of them fled or called LE after the fact, one of them might not be sitting in jail right now. JMO.

 

[Sillybilly]

Hi all, I've been following closely but not logging in... I want to ask something of anyone willing to shed some light:

Why is it being disputed, whether it might have been DM or MS who pulled the trigger? While the angle of trajectory might or might not shed light, the Crown statement of fact argues that BOTH shot TB.

This is, in a layman sense, factually impossible--two people would not very likely pull the trigger. However, as so many other posters have pointed out, if TB was killed in the commission of a felony (i.e., theft of a truck), it is automatically 1st degree. Meaning, even if DM was misled or whatever by his friend, he still went along with this crime, forcibly confined someone, and was involved with a murder. I think there is very little doubt or dispute that they, at the very least, were stealing a truck?

I feel like the time spent on "who did it" is moot, given the criteria for 1st degree murder in Canada. I'm Canadian (live about an hour from the crime), so maybe some of this nuance is lost outside the country, or maybe I'm missing something in some posters' rationale. I'm asking honestly. How can anyone advocate for 1 of 2 people to not be guilty of 1st degree murder, when both were present (this is proven, as I've never heard of a "planted" fingerprint), both were committing a crime (theft, forceable confinement), and a death occurred--under our criminal code??

To clarify ... the qualifier for a first degree murder charge is not the theft of the truck in and of itself, it is the forcible confinement aspect. Please see my post from yesterday with information from the Criminal Code which sets out the qualifiers for first degree murder:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-Trial-02-11-16-Day-8&p=12350584#post12350584

IOW, the jury may find the accused did in fact steal the truck, and they may find the accused murdered Tim, but if they do not find that Tim was forcibly confined, then it would only constitute second degree murder.

 

[Sillybilly]

Thank you for your well thought out and logical post and :welcome5: Figuring.

And you're exactly right, makes no difference who did the shooting. There was premeditation on the theft of a truck; DM told his room mate they were planning it and MS told his girlfriend after the fact, also said TB was gone, gone, gone.Both equally responsible in the eyes of the law, of murder in the first degree. Now had either one of them fled or called LE after the fact, one of them might not be sitting in jail right now. JMO.

Although there will be testimony regarding premeditation of the theft of the truck, that does not equal premeditation to murder. However, carrying a gun during that premeditated theft of the truck may be what constitutes the premeditation to murder.

ETA: Premeditation doesn't necessarily mean a long period of time ... it can be hours or even minutes, depending on the circumstances. That's a whole other area of research, but the learned Judge will instruct the jury accordingly.

 

[ABro]

IOW, the jury may find the accused did in fact steal the truck, and they may find the accused murdered Tim, but if they do not find that Tim was forcibly confined, then it would only constitute second degree murder.

This is incorrect. Pre-meditation can happen in minutes, seconds even. You don't have to make a plan and tell someone in order for it to be first degree.

Forcible confinement is one of a few situations where it is automatically first degree without premeditation to kill.

 

[Sillybilly]

For some light bedtime reading ... Duhaime on premeditation:

http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/P/Premeditation.aspx

 

[Sillybilly]

This is incorrect. Pre-meditation can happen in minutes, seconds even. You don't have to make a plan and tell someone in order for it to be first degree.

Forcible confinement is one of a few situations where it is automatically first degree without premeditation to kill.

You didn't catch my ETA in time.

I'm not sure what we are disagreeing on.

 

[pecosmom]

Pacific - I always think of the movie the Shawshank Redemption and Andy telling Red it "holds no memory". Maybe MS thinks he'll be there one day. Not likely.

 

[Tamarind]

We know Tim Bosma got in that truck alive with DM and MS and he alone didn't survive it. So yes, we do know WHOM was killed. Arguments, 3rd person and/or blackmail has never once been mentioned by the Crown. Ever. If there was any evidence of that whatsoever, wouldn't we have heard about it by now? Especially given the opening statement which clearly states they intend to prove Tim was shot in that truck by DM and MS? My saying I don't care who pulled the trigger is very simple: both were there, and neither came forward to speak to police about what happened before they were tracked down & arrested. BOTH had the opportunity. Neither came forward, and BOTH attempted to cover it up. One of them had more cold blooded disregard for life to shoot another human being without cause, but both are equally responsible for the fact that SB is a widow, and that baby girl doesn't have a daddy anymore.

It would appear you genuinely believe the Crown is wrong or somehow mistaken. We disagree, 100%.

Just because it hasn't been mentioned by the Crown does NOT mean it is not a possibility. They can intend to prove whatever they like. Statistics show that they do not win every case they intend to prove.



Because someone is a widow and has a daughter does not mean a trial should not cover both sides of a situation by way of allegations and rebuttals by way of cross questioning and final submissions.

I am not so eager to claim 'facts' until facts are proven. I believe the Crown is putting what they believe is a case forward. The defense on the other hand also has the chance to point out there case. It is required to try to achieve justice for victims and accused.

<modsnip>

 

[hopingforjustice]

Anyone know what year the Yukon is? If newer model, then wondering if GSP installed and if so, could that be tracked like a cell phone? Could pin point if it was there or not. Just a question cause I really don't know. Was just thinking..

 

[Kamille]

It could be, I'm not discounting anything. It's just that it meaning something like a "calm blue ocean" mantra was not at all what popped into my head when I first saw it. I mean, we're speculating about a person who is known to LE, chilled on and off with gang members, seems(ed) to get a kick out of acting in a very very gory video and is now on trial for murder with dismemberment and incineration sprinkled in.

I have seen no indication from the Crown or anywhere else that TB was dismembered. Do you have a link for that? And the person who produced and filmed the gore video does not present himself as a gang member. Probably more like a film student. I think we researched the reason for that video long ago.

MS was know to LE as a small time drug dealer/DWI/graffiti tagger criminal. He had to have a supplier for the drugs he was dealing. Enter the "gang" member MWJ. I actually thought I had read that he and MWJ were school friends when they were younger but I could be mistaken about that. MS was just like every other "going nowhere" guy his age who was a wannabe gang banger and likely an addict who dealt to supply his habit. He certainly was not making money hand over fist in gang related activities and did not choose to cover himself head to toe in gang tattoos. We still do not know how he and DM became acquainted, or when, but I hope it comes out at this trial. What I hope they don't attempt, is to try to indicate that this "gang" had anything whatsoever to do with what happened that night. That is absurd. And if they go that route, they are going to really insult the intelligence of the jury and every concerned citizen who is following this trial to stand witness for justice for Tim Bosma and his family IMO.

It has been alleged that DM purchased a gun(s) from MWJ and his associates and there is a pending trial for those charges. There has been no indication that MS personally knew either of the other two "gangsters" who were arrested for that. He did know MWJ, who used to hang out with him at his mother's house on the porch. In fact I believe it was reported that DM had also been seen there with MS and MWJ on at least one occasion?

Doing deals on someone's mother's porch hardly constitutes heavy Mexican gang ties IMO. And my opinion would be that during one of those porch meetings, either MS alone or with DM there as well, asked MWJ about purchasing a gun(s). And it appears that DM did in fact purchase at least one gun, although he also purchased two holsters from E-Bay so that is still in question.

Maybe two .380 guns that take the same bullets? Maybe one was used to kill WM and left at the scene to stage a suicide and the other was still in his possession on May 6th 2013?

All just speculation and all just my opinion.

 

[Canadian4]

If MS and DM are going to blame each other (not saying they are) aren't they going to have to get on the stand and explain? If they say the other did it, they will have to explain how they know that therefore admitting they were in that truck which would make them guilty. Sorry about the wording, it always sounds better in my head lol.

 

[ABro]

I'm disagreeing with your statement that

if they do not find that Tim was forcibly confined, then it would only constitute second degree murder.

Although in this case, it's next to impossible to imagine a scenario in which he wasn't forcibly confined so it's kind of a moot point.

 

[palisadesk]

A propos of the fact that two people couldn't have pulled the same trigger, and the Crown's statement referring to both accused as having shot Tim, perhaps there will be evidence to come to suggest that there were two different guns involved? I'm wondering if one or more bullets could have been retrieved from the Eliminator. We would not have heard about those yet, if there were any such. If so, and they proved to be of different types, that would be evidence for two guns. Bullets fired at point-blank range tend to stay in the body.

 

[Gumshew]

Doing deals on someone's mother's porch hardly constitutes heavy Mexican gang ties IMO. And my opinion would be that during one of those porch meetings, either MS alone or with DM there as well, asked MWJ about purchasing a gun(s). And it appears that DM did in fact purchase at least one gun, although he also purchased two holsters from E-Bay so that is still in question.

How do you know they were doing deals on the porch??

If you are a dealer of drugs, sure, you are getting them from someone, and if that someone is affiliated with a gang, then you are affiliated with that gang member and sell on their turf. That's the way it usually works.

 

[swedie]

Here is the thought that is currently swirling in my head and then I'm going to take a break until Tuesday. I think I need the break!

If either one of these guys thought that they were only going to steal a truck, as soon as it escalated to something more substantial, wouldn't you go to the police at the first opportunity? I mean, you'd still be in a heap of trouble but you probably are not on trial for first degree murder. Maybe you have to stick with it for the night so you don't suffer the same fate as poor Tim but the first second you can...do you not go to the police to save yourself as much as possible?

These guys went to Tim's house that night (allegedly) to steal a truck, they killed the owner, drove to pick up DM's personal incinerator, drove to the airport where they...etc. etc. The deeper you go, the harder it is to come back. It's like when you were a kid on a hike into the forest. The further you went, the darker it got and the noises became creepier. At some point you decide it's time to leave before you get so far in you can't get back out. Either one of these guys was so scared of the other that they kept by their side OR this was pre-planned from the get go. It only became hectic after they determined AJ called the police and they had run out of time. MOO

OK I'll throw this out. Let's say MS is an innocent dupe. If either of the two is an innocent dupe, it would have to be MS. So...DM tells MS he's going to buy a used Dodge Ram for whatever reason (Baha perhaps). He asks MS to go along with him for a test drive, and so MS does, and that's the test drive with IT. After all is said and done, DM drops MS off at his mother's house and MS forgets his cell phone in DM's Yukon.

May 6th, DM asks and gets someone else (who's packing a gun and has planned with DM it's going to be a truck theft) to go with him to the Bosma's to take TB's truck on a test drive. Whoever is with DM in his Yukon picks up MS's phone because it signals MM has sent a text to MS at 9:19pm. That person, whoever DM has along responds back to MM's text at 9:20pm with whatever, and then MM responds back again at 9:20 also. MS's phone would obviously have pinged off tower closest to wherever the Yukon was. This other person who SB and WD saw with DM, but were not able to give a good description of because he held back and had his hoodie obscuring most of his face could have been one of many people DM knew other than MS. DM is not talking to LE and pleads not guilty because he doesn't want his other "buddy" to go to prison and DM doesn't much like MS anyway. DM may have been confronted by someone who know MS in which MS confined in about LB's murder and now DM is "getting even."

MS and MM show up at the hangar with DM on Wednesday, May 8th, ready to work and for whatever reason, DM gives MS a weird look according to AJ. Did DM contact MS telling him he bought a truck and then brought MS and MM out to the hangar to see it and was hoping to frame MS. Did DM hope MS would show interest in TB's Dodge, perhaps touching it, or somehow leave his DNA on it? IMO this is a more plausible/logical scenario than DM being framed. ALL MOO.

Jennings also testified that he had met Mark Smich half a dozen times at the hangar including the week of May 6th when Smich was there one day with Millard. Asked which day, he replied: &#8220;It had to be Wednesday because Thursday was a bad day.&#8221; He said Millard had given Smich a weird look that day.

On other occasions, Smich and his girlfriend came to work at the hangar. He and Jennings occasionally chatted superficially on their smoke breaks.

Asked about Smich, he said he and his girlfriend did whatever Millard wanted them to do. &#8220;They showed up with Dell and they left with Dell &#8230; Mark did what Dell wanted him to do. I didn&#8217;t pay any attention to what they were doing but it was obvious he was helping Dell.&#8221;

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/tag/mark-smich

 

[Kamille]

How do you know they were doing deals on the porch??

I don't ... it's just speculation. There was an article long ago about how MWJ was seen occasionally hanging on the porch with MS and on one occasion DM was also seen there. Interview with a neighbour I think. These things are hard to find now as it's been a few years. Just like I'm speculating that MWJ was actually supplying the drugs to MS to sell. We know LE allege he supplied the gun(s) to DM.

MOO

ETA: When MWJ was arrested, he was called an "Aspiring gangsta rapper"... which pretty much sums up who MWJ is IMO. The tattoos are for show IMO.

http://news.nationalpost.com/toront...-accused-of-selling-him-alleged-murder-weapon

 

[swedie]

If MS and DM are going to blame each other (not saying they are) aren't they going to have to get on the stand and explain? If they say the other did it, they will have to explain how they know that therefore admitting they were in that truck which would make them guilty. Sorry about the wording, it always sounds better in my head lol.

They could take the witness stand in their own defence or leave it up to their lawyer to try and raise reasonable doubt through cross examining witnesses and experts testimony. And in closing arguments they may speak on behalf of their clients telling their stories. HTH and MOO.