Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #4

[brightii]

Feb 25 2016 11:45 AM

Adam Carter (via Twitter)
"We know now you don't have any expertise or real knowledge to opine on the financial affairs of a corporation," Sachak says. (said to LW).

I wish LW had responded to the defense attorney's dismissive suggestion by saying she wasn't called to testify as an expert. :gaah:

All MOO.

 

[Kamille]

I'm wondering about how the trial will proceed. It's approximately a fourth of the way in now. Does the Crown continue with its evidence for the next month and then the Defense takes over for the final two months? I've no experience with following a trial closely, therefore I have no idea what to expect, or if there is a usual way for the proceedings to play out over time.

Any information on how it works would be appreciated. Thank you in advance! :tyou:

Also, I cannot wait to hear what story the Defense will present to counter the Crown's assertions regarding what happened to Tim Bosma. I can't imagine what that might entail, or if the Defense will even present a story to explain, defend or try to dismiss the alleged involvement of one or both of the accused of this heinous crime.

All MOO.

The Crown will continue to present it's case in chief until they have finished presenting all their evidence. There is no time limit. It will go for as long as is necessary. Once the Crown presents all it's evidence it rests it's case. Then the defense may or may not choose to call evidence. They are not required to prove anything, the burden of proof is on the Crown. If they choose not to call evidence and present a case, the Crown will move on to their closing arguments/statements and then the defense will have the opportunity to present theirs.

Now if the defense does choose to call evidence, then they will start with their opening statement and call their evidence in the order they choose, again with no time restrictions (in this case we have two defense sides so it's going to be a little different if each chooses to do something different I assume).

If the defense chooses to call evidence, the Crown can usually have a rebuttal, based only on the evidence that the defense presented. They cannot present more or new evidence of their own unless it is in reply or "rebuttal" to something the defense brought up during their case. Once this is done, they move on to closing arguments/statements.

So if the defense presents a case, their closing argument/statement is first. If they do not then their closing argument/statement will be last and the Crown must present it's closing arguments/statement first.

HTH

 

[Kamille]

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6...-trial-hears-about-accused-killer-s-finances/

"Williams' testimony was interrupted by legal arguments, so she will resume her place on the stand at some point. Perhaps then Millard's financial situation will become more clear."

According to this column by Susan Clairmont, LW is expected to be recalled to complete her testimony at some point.

Apologies, if this was already posted by others. I was wondering if LW would be back.

All MOO.

Actually this article was originally written and posted on the first day LW was on the stand and that line was in it. It appears to have been updated with the line still there. So as of the first day SC wrote the article, that was correct...LW was expected to return but we're still not sure whether she is still expected to return or not. We didn't get any clarification about whether she was actually dismissed on Thursday. They just went into legal arguments and released the jury near the end of the day.

MOO

 

[brightii]

.

No doubt M.Air & associates were "cash poor" for a while but that does not mean "broke" ... there were still plenty of assets , most of which have now been sold and turned into cash or other investments

Presuming the sale of Riverside dr paid most of the 3.7M loan , that left the hangar , farm , and MapleCourt house which were sold ... could be anywhere from $6 to $8 million depending on how much they got for the new hangar ... plus there is the distillery condo and MB most likely owned her own home .... so a couple million to the lawyers and still plenty left over.

The daily bookkeeper talking about peanuts is not an indication of net worth.

.

rsbm

Arnie M: I agree that the bookkeeper is not testifying about the company's net worth, and IMO nor was she expected to, and the attorney's would all know this too, IMO. Her experience as a bookkeeper would be with MA's business operating accounts. The company's net worth means little in terms of available cash in the coffers, IMO. If the company, MA, was over-extended through credit it may not be so easy to get more credit extended should the need arise, especially since it had, as was testified to by LW, no active business or income at the time. Perhaps DM personally had funds - or could get access to funds (ie savings, cashing in stock investments, family, friends) - that LW was not aware of, but that scenario will need to be explained by others in court, if so, IMO. As a witness, speculating beyond her ability to know what other sources of income DM had was not her function. That she had originally seen an invoice for the 2011 Baja trip in her role as bookkeeper for MA, I think it is reasonable to presume that the planned Baja trip for May of 2013 was also going to be financed by the company, and not DM personally, IMO, as per her testimony about a meeting at MA with DM on May 3rd 2013 where the subject of the trip was discussed.

DM would need to get his hands on liquid funds from somewhere to have his Baja adventure and to purchase a truck, IMO. It would take time, and the confidence of lenders, or a liquidation of assets to get his hands on additional funds based on his net worth, IMO, (or from some other source as noted above), and he appeared not to have that kind of time nor the inclination to prepare for that alternative, IMO.

It will be interesting to see how the real net worth of MA, and DM personally, is explained later in court and how that will relate to the case.

All MOO.

 

[brightii]

The Crown will continue to present it's case in chief until they have finished presenting all their evidence. There is no time limit. It will go for as long as is necessary. Once the Crown presents all it's evidence it rests it's case. Then the defense may or may not choose to call evidence. They are not required to prove anything, the burden of proof is on the Crown. If they choose not to call evidence and present a case, the Crown will move on to their closing arguments/statements and then the defense will have the opportunity to present theirs.

Now if the defense does choose to call evidence, then they will start with their opening statement and call their evidence in the order they choose, again with no time restrictions (in this case we have two defense sides so it's going to be a little different if each chooses to do something different I assume).

If the defense chooses to call evidence, the Crown can usually have a rebuttal, based only on the evidence that the defense presented. They cannot present more or new evidence of their own unless it is in reply or "rebuttal" to something the defense brought up during their case. Once this is done, they move on to closing arguments/statements.

So if the defense presents a case, their closing argument/statement is first. If they do not then their closing argument/statement will be last and the Crown must present it's closing arguments/statement first.

HTH

Thank you so much for this very thorough explanation, Kamille! I find it extremely helpful. :loveyou:

 

[brightii]

Actually this article was originally written and posted on the first day LW was on the stand and that line was in it. It appears to have been updated with the line still there. So as of the first day SC wrote the article, that was correct...LW was expected to return but we're still not sure whether she is still expected to return or not. We didn't get any clarification about whether she was actually dismissed on Thursday. They just went into legal arguments and released the jury near the end of the day.

MOO

Okay, thanks for the clarification, Kamille!

I guess I'm waiting with all of you to know the answer. I'm in good company! :laughing:

 

[brightii]

Kamille: I didn't know what HTH meant. I though it meant "How the hell" lol. I looked it up and see that it means "Hope that helps". lol It did. Thanks again. :biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

 

[amis_]

rsbm

Arnie M: I agree that the bookkeeper is not testifying about the company's net worth, and IMO nor was she expected to, and the attorney's would all know this too, IMO. Her experience as a bookkeeper would be with MA's business operating accounts. The company's net worth means little in terms of available cash in the coffers, IMO. If the company, MA, was over-extended through credit it may not be so easy to get more credit extended should the need arise, especially since it had, as was testified to by LW, no active business or income at the time. Perhaps DM personally had funds - or could get access to funds (ie savings, cashing in stock investments, family, friends) - that LW was not aware of, but that scenario will need to be explained by others in court, if so, IMO. As a witness, speculating beyond her ability to know what other sources of income DM had was not her function. That she had originally seen an invoice for the 2011 Baja trip in her role as bookkeeper for MA, I think it is reasonable to presume that the planned Baja trip for May of 2013 was also going to be financed by the company, and not DM personally, IMO, as per her testimony about a meeting at MA with DM on May 3rd 2013 where the subject of the trip was discussed.

DM would need to get his hands on liquid funds from somewhere to have his Baja adventure and to purchase a truck, IMO. It would take time, and the confidence of lenders, or a liquidation of assets to get his hands on additional funds based on his net worth, IMO, (or from some other source as noted above), and he appeared not to have that kind of time nor the inclination to prepare for that alternative, IMO.

It will be interesting to see how the real net worth of MA, and DM personally, is explained later in court and how that will relate to the case.

All MOO.

I can't seem to find the tweet from Adam Carter I believe it was but in my notes I have that DM received a cheque written to him by the neighbor for the cornfield they rented on May 1st, 2013 for $7800.00 so we know he personally had at least that much a few days before Tim went missing.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[swedie]

Article dated: May 6, 2014
Everything has changed and yet, for some, it is as though nothing at all is happening. After the initial flurry of a massive manhunt and arrests and the more recent news of further charges, it may appear the wheels of justice are still.

The fact is, there is lots of work being done behind the scenes on the prosecutions of three people charged in connection with Tim's murder.

"For a case this serious, this time frame is not unusual," says assistant Crown attorney Craig Fraser, who is handling the matter along with assistant Crown Tony Leitch.

Though little is happening publicly right now, behind the scenes police are continuing to investigate and the Crown and defence are reading mounds of information.

"There's a lot of volume in this case in terms of material and disclosure," says Fraser.

In the past, Leitch said the case involves "one of the largest computer seizures in Ontario criminal law history."

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4...r-must-be-an-eternity-for-tim-bosma-s-family/

 

[swedie]

Article date: April 11, 2014
Project Capella has involved Toronto police, Hamilton police and the OPP.

Tony Leitch, the Hamilton Crown attorney prosecuting the Bosma case, says the project involves "one of the largest computer seizures in Ontario criminal law history."

After Millard and Smich were originally arrested, search warrants were executed toseize computers and cellphones which the OPP have analyzed, he says.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4...ed-bosma-killer-s-girlfriend-was-incinerated/

 

[hopingforjustice]

Curious about a couple things...

What happened to the Forcible Confinement and theft over $5000 charges for DM? Are they dropped when the additional charge of 1st degree murder comes into play? Or are these charges still applicable and just on the back burner for now?

Also, JAN 2015, MS was charged with contacting his gf who was on his do not contact list. What about that charge?

And if MS was charged with this..why wasn't DM?


I know in the big scheme of things, these charges are incidental, I am just curious where they went...

TIA for any help understanding this.

 

[NashBridges2]

BBM. The Crown knows the big picture. They know all the details, whether important or not, and they will present the most relevant points to support their case.

Us sleuthers, on the other hand, do not know the big picture, nor do we know how each little detail fits into it. We have a desire to absorb every detail in order to understand what's happening. We wonder why the Crown didn't ask a question about some matter or another. It's natural to be curious. But it's always important to maintain faith in the Crown. As the trial unfolds the story will begin to make more and more sense.

Not only that, the general public isn't privy to what is being argued outside of the jury presence. So while it can seem like stuff is being missed, there could be issues infront of the judge that we wait for rulings on etc. People just need to be patient, the crown has got this under control.

 

[deugirtni]

[h=1]The first part is from 2011, showing which category and number DM was listed under, plus the date. Second part is for 2013 - date, price of entry fee (assuming he was going under the same category as 2011). I have a PDF showing the 2011 info, but I don't know if I can post a PDF here.

43rd Tecate SCORE Baja 500
Round 3 of five-race 2011 SCORE Desert Series
June 2-5, 2011—Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico

Pro Cars & Trucks
CLASS 3 (Short wheelbase 4X4)–
303 Dellen Millard/Andrew Michalski, Canada, Jeep Wrangler TJ
--------------------
SCORE Class 3[/h] From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


SCORE[SUP][1][/SUP] Class 3 is production short wheelbase 4x4 class that competes in the SCORE off-road race series races including the Baja 1000, Baja 500, San Felipe 250, Baja Sur 500 and the SCORE Desert Challenge.

[h=2]Vehicle description[/h]
Vehicles must be a four-wheel drive vehicle capable of being driven through all four wheels. Vehicles are typically Jeep,[SUP][2][/SUP] Ford Bronco,[SUP][3][/SUP] Kia Sportage[SUP][4][/SUP] or Chevrolet Trailblazer.[SUP][5][/SUP]

No pickup trucks are allowed in this class. Minimum vehicle weight is 3500 lbs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCORE_Class_3
==========
For 2013:

45th Annual Tecate SCORE Baja 500
May 30-June 2, 2013—Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico
PRO LEVEL 2 - $1,920
3 - Veh #300-399 (Short wheelbase 4X4)

 

[deugirtni]

It's probably the reason Paradkar was sacked by DM. It's a big conflict of interest, IMO. Or, I'm guessing there is a dearth of good criminal lawyers who will take up wretched cases.

Or..... perhaps by the time he received enough disclosure from the Crown, the client no longer met his specs?

"I never take a case without thinking I can win it," the 50-year-old lawyer says.

http://www.therecord.com/news-story...er-deepak-paradkar-i-treat-trials-like-wars-/

 

[deugirtni]

Kamille: I didn't know what HTH meant. I though it meant "How the hell" lol. I looked it up and see that it means "Hope that helps". lol It did. Thanks again. :biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

Thank you so much for posting that! I have been wondering same thing, but too lazy to look it up. I was always seeing 'hard to handle' whenever I was seeing HTH. hope that helps. hope that helps. now to just remember.

 

[brightii]

I can't seem to find the tweet from Adam Carter I believe it was but in my notes I have that DM received a cheque written to him by the neighbor for the cornfield they rented on May 1st, 2013 for $7800.00 so we know he personally had at least that much a few days before Tim went missing.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

Good observation, amis_! I agree that he would have those funds available at that time, but we don't know with certainty what DM's financial obligations were at the time, so that money may have been earmarked or used for a purpose other than his Baja trip or to purchase a truck, IMO. Time will tell once more evidence becomes known.

All MOO.

 

[brightii]

Thank you so much for posting that! I have been wondering same thing, but too lazy to look it up. I was always seeing 'hard to handle' whenever I was seeing HTH. hope that helps. hope that helps. now to just remember.

deugirtni: Thank you for that - it put a smile on my face this evening, and it is definitely welcome! :happydance:

 

[deugirtni]

I am super curious about the financial situation of both MA and DM. Others have a much better grip on the money thing, and the property thing... but what I am wondering..

Remember when just after DM got charged/incarcerated, and the properties were put into MB's name for a price of $1 each. And then she subsequently sold them off... and not sure on the timing of each sale.

That whole cost of the hangar being built.. and the new business start-up costs, ie the licensing, the staffing, the consultants, the engineering, drawings, building permits, project management, etc. The Sharif fellow..

When everything was said and done.. and immediately after WM's untimely death, DM started selling off the equipment at a fraction of the dollar.. severances paid to all of those (was it 14??) employees.. whatever broken contract fees there may have been(?)..

How much money did WM have? Was he a never-ending bucket of money?

If MB was organizing the cash situation.. what did she find? There were properties sold, bank loans paid off.. the eventual sale of the hangar.. what was the end result? Was there any money left over in the end? If so, how much? Would whatever was left over have qualified DM to seek legal aid? Just wondering if that could potentially be a factor in Paradkar's sudden departure from the case? Although.. I'm sure that if DM was receiving legal aid, we would have heard about that!

 

[Mette]

The flashy lawyer departed the case when Dellen Millard's accounts were frozen.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/201...d-jackson-and-his-lawyer-deepak-paradkar.html

It’s Friday September 12th (2014) at Toronto’s Old City Hall courthouse. I’ve come to see Matthew Ward-Jackson aka Krucifix14 aka Big Iisho, who currently has three sets of charges pending against him, including having supplied Dellen Millard with the gun he allegedly used to kill his father Wayne. That’s the case I’m really interested in but it’s not the one on the dockets today. This session is about an earlier drug possession and intent-to-traffic case. (Ward-Jackson is pleading not guilty to all three sets of charges against him.)

Things were supposed to get underway at 10 a.m. but, because many judges operate in a parallel time universe, at 10:30 we were still all sitting around waiting for her honour to arrive. There was the accused, Matthew Ward-Jackson; the co-accused; the co-accused’s mother; the two defence lawyers, making (minimum) $300 an hour small talk; the wife and paralegal of one of the defence lawyers; the Crown; the court clerk; the court reporter; me; and the Toronto police constable guarding the prisoner and fixing her wonky chair.

Tweet Ann Brocklehurst 25.2.2016:

Lisa Williams says she visited Dellen Millard about six times between may 10 2013 and sept 2014, the last visit


Why did she stop with her visits, I wonder?