Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #9

[SnooperDuper]

He was not the one who called crime stoppers.

Susan ClairmontVerified account ‏@susanclairmont Apr 7
"I was scared of getting my name out there." Dungey "You had no consideration for the #Bosma family." Hagerman says called CrimeStoppers.

 

[hellkat2]

Yup....Smich was walking around feeling that the boogy man was after him.

 

[hippy_chic]

He was not the one who called crime stoppers.

AJ called CS 2x on May 9th, but hung up before giving them information on the location of the truck, then called again on the 10th with it's last known location. Sometime after May 10th but before May 22 (when MS was arrested), MH called Crimestoppers twice (anonymously), once to tell them about MS likely being the 2nd person they were looking for in relation to the crime, & a second time to suggest searching the farm in Ayr. MH admitted this on the witness stand.

 

[mimimic]

shoot no...um when billandrew puts a post up - at the bottom of it you will notice three links you can click that bring you to some evidence pages are those only available through a post of his? - sorry if it is still only as clear as mud. I will let it go after this and continue on as if i am normal lol

If I understand you correctly, you just need to click on his name in the top left and view his posts. Hope this helps.

 

[deugirtni]

Just wondering on the MO thing. Wondering if this was another 'mission', like the others, or if this one was different on purpose.

Wondering if DM had possibly sent a call-out to his past participants-in-thievery to see if anyone was interested in performing a necessary task in *this* mission too? A 'driver' perhaps? For a remuneration of $3000 possibly? Is it possible the friends on the stand were invited to participate, but just aren't admitting it (or those that were invited have not yet testified)? I still can't help waiting for a bombshell to drop to say there was in fact a third participant present for part of the night's events. I noticed that at the time MS was arrested for murder (May 22, 2013), police were still seeking a third suspect. By June 6th, the lead detective said he wasn't sure if there was a 3rd person:

"he is not sure whether there are three suspects responsible for kidnapping and then killing the 32-year-old Ancaster father, who left his home on May 6 for a test drive and never returned. ...

"Kavanagh now says police are not sure whether Smich, who is said to have been in the back seat of the truck while Millard was driving, exited that vehicle after leaving Bosma’s home and got into the driver’s seat of the Yukon.

“That is possible right now, yes, but I’m not going to commit either way,” Kavanagh said.

If there is a third suspect, Kavanagh said, police do not have any leads on who it might be.

Millard’s girlfriend, whose identity is protected by a court-ordered publication ban, is not believed to be involved, the detective said.

“Millard’s girlfriend has been cleared of that,” he said."

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...rd_suspect_exists_lead_investigator_says.html

A year later, a third suspect IS arrested:

Widow struggles as 3rd Bosma suspect appears in court

"And like she did for Millard and Smitch, Sharlene Bosma was there to face the third person accused in the crime that took her husband. Sharlene sat in court, stone-faced fighting back emotion until after it was done."

http://www.chch.com/new-bosma-suspect-appears-court/

How could the Crown so assuredly state that TB was shot by 'both men' ' inside his truck' unless there was indeed a third person tasked with driving the Yukon?

Also, we now know that there were others involved in assisting a murderer (DM) conceal evidence, knowing that he had committed murder (or ought to have known).. who also were not so cooperative with police/Crown (MH imo (and in TD's opinion) knew there was a gun(s) in the toolbox and he helped DM conceal that evidence, and lied to police during 3 separate interviews, and possibly more), and yet the others (perhaps AM also?) were not charged with Accessory. Is it possible that CN was charged with Accessory because she was the driver of the Yukon, which made her involvement that much greater?

 

[hellkat2]

What is even more interesting is that Millards minions would join in without knowing any of the details of that specific mission. Makes me wonder if Smich knew anything more than the fact that they were going to steal Bosma's truck?

Here is something you may want to consider regarding Dellen M's sycophants and thinking they will learn from this, Nobody gets caught the first time. They have all been doing this for a long time IMO.

 

[SnooperDuper]

<rsbm>

Is it possible that CN was charged with Accessory because she was the driver of the Yukon, which made her involvement that much greater?

Participating in the crime itself is not "after the fact".

CN actively helped DM evade capture and investigation for nearly a year. She helped him in a way that put her DNA on gloves that also had TB's DNA. She helped hide the truck and the DVR. She was asked to help get someone to change their testimony in the case. She helped in every sort of way possible to keep DM from being convicted. Isn't that enough for her to face accessory to murder after the fact?

 

[deugirtni]

AJ called CS 2x on May 9th, but hung up before giving them information on the location of the truck, then called again on the 10th with it's last known location. Sometime after May 10th but before May 22 (when MS was arrested), MH called Crimestoppers twice (anonymously), once to tell them about MS likely being the 2nd person they were looking for in relation to the crime, & a second time to suggest searching the farm in Ayr. MH admitted this on the witness stand.

Is it said somewhere that MH called CS on 2 separate occasions? I was taking it that he had called one time, giving both pieces of info during the same call, that MS could be the 2nd suspect they were seeking, and that DM owned the property in Ayr.

 

[palisadesk]

I feel empathy for TB's family and to those who loved him. I feel no empathy for DM's sycophants who are now at the court's mercy and are testifying in their own best interests. Tears or no tears. The tears are only happening because they got caught. As for why no charges? I think the police now and then are giving them all enough rope and given enuf are hoping they will hang themselves inside their own testimony and outside. I am hoping that they will be arrested and charged for something before this is all over.

That's a distant possibility, perhaps, but it is very unlikely, particularly in view of the fact that nothing these witnesses say on the stand in this case can be used against them in future cases (with some technical exceptions too complicated to go into).

Police and the justice system tend to take the longer view: in order to catch and convict the big fish, the little fish are netted but ultimately allowed to swim away. The system has no appetite for going after criminal trial witnesses at a later date, even when they have compelling reasons to do so (Karla Homolka being a good example - she broke the terms of her plea resolution agreement and could have been brought up on further charges, but the politicians at the top said No, leave it. So police and Crown could do nothing).

The Charter of Rights protects witnesses from having testimony they give in court be used against them in the future. It would also be a much harder slog for police and Crown to get witnesses to testify if there were a perception that doing so would lead them to being criminally charged themselves. The Crown needs the good will of these people even if, as is often the case in criminal proceedings, many are less than model citizens.

This explanation, while it starts from a family law perspective, explains the Charter issues fairly clearly and succinctly:

http://www.joshuaclarke.ca/tag/section-13-of-canadian-charter-of-rights-and-freedom/

 

[SnooperDuper]

Is it said somewhere that MH called CS on 2 separate occasions? I was taking it that he had called one time, giving both pieces of info during the same call, that MS could be the 2nd suspect they were seeking, and that DM owned the property in Ayr.

When you call Crimestoppers (or access them by web), they give you a case number in case you call back on the same info, want an update from LE, etc. AJ would have used this case number to get back to the same people he was dealing with the first time. AJ could easily be confirmed to have called CS because he obviously saved the case number, knew very specific info that had been passed to CS, and had the photos of the truck on his phone.

MH OTOH doesn't seem to have saved or recalled that he had a case number, and his information given was so general, so possibly non-unique, that it could have come from anywhere.

 

[deugirtni]

<rsbm>


Participating in the crime itself is not "after the fact".

CN actively helped DM evade capture and investigation for nearly a year. She helped him in a way that put her DNA on gloves that also had TB's DNA. She helped hide the truck and the DVR. She was asked to help get someone to change their testimony in the case. She helped in every sort of way possible to keep DM from being convicted. Isn't that enough for her to face accessory to murder after the fact?

Yes, absolutely. Like I said, I am still somehow waiting for a bombshell to drop about there being a third person afterall, just my own little conspiracy theory. And now I believe there were potentially others, at least one, who could have (should have?) been charged with Accessory, but he/they wasn't/weren't, even though he lied to police consistently during multiple interviews. *If* CN had been present as the driver of the Yukon, AND she was not aware that there was a plan involving murder until after it was done, and she was not physically present in the truck when it happened, but she later helped to hide and conceal, then couldn't she still get an Accessory charge?

 

[deugirtni]

When you call Crimestoppers (or access them by web), they give you a case number in case you call back on the same info, want an update from LE, etc. AJ would have used this case number to get back to the same people he was dealing with the first time. AJ could easily be confirmed to have called CS because he obviously saved the case number, knew very specific info that had been passed to CS, and had the photos of the truck on his phone.

MH OTOH doesn't seem to have saved or recalled that he had a case number, and his information given was so general, so possibly non-unique, that it could have come from anywhere.

As far as I know, there is no indication that MH called CS twice, not that it matters how many times, I was just wondering where that info came from. In fact, MH may not have called CS at all, as noted by TD in court. MH is saying that he did, but there is no way to prove that.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Yes, absolutely. Like I said, I am still somehow waiting for a bombshell to drop about there being a third person afterall, just my own little conspiracy theory. And now I believe there were potentially others, at least one, who could have (should have?) been charged with Accessory, but he/they wasn't/weren't, even though he lied to police consistently during multiple interviews. *If* CN had been present as the driver of the Yukon, AND she was not aware that there was a plan involving murder until after it was done, and she was not physically present in the truck when it happened, but she later helped to hide and conceal, then couldn't she still get an Accessory charge?

I think simply LE were initially looking for a 3rd and even 4th person because DM had told the B's that they had been dropped off by a buddy.

It came clear shortly afterwards that they'd stashed the Yukon and been able to pull the heist without help.

I don't know why people aren't able to let go of the idea of a third suspect.

CN was charged with a date of May 9 for a reason, for legal reasons. That is the date when she started to participate.

 

[hellkat2]

IMO Matt H, (Dellen's childhood sycophant friend) could have called crimestoppers to tip the law enforcement off to Smich because he did not want to be found out about stuff he did by the police if their sleuthing process went on too long. Also .....doesn't crimestoppers pay for tips? Another question re Michalski and Matt H hiding the backpack that smelled of weed and the toolbox with the gun or guns in it under a step . Does anyone know if the drop off under a step was in oakville? If so....Smich could have picked this drop off up easily or had his girlfriend and this would mean that Michalski and Hagerman were still actively involved in criminal activity and hiding it from police. Smich would be motivated to participate for the pick up because of the weed alone. Also Michalski and Matt H could be telling him if Smich doesn't pick up their drop off they would call crimestoppers on him. I know....this is conspiracy theory big time but just a thought. The news article clarified a bunch for me. But like everything that is fact and that is posted it just leads to more questions. This is a very complicated case. I find that the more individuals that are involved the more difficult it becomes using just the initials of all of Mallards sycophants.

 

[palisadesk]

<rsbm>


Participating in the crime itself is not "after the fact".

Precisely. I've often wondered if CN was in fact driving the Yukon. If so, she would be liable for further charges (and since they weren't laid, I infer that it has been determined that the Yukon was driven by someone else, MS for example).

However, if she was the driver of the Yukon and a party to the kidnap (etc.) plan, that would have made her an accomplice (Canadian law doesn't use the term " accessory before the fact") at minimum.

Here's how the Criminal Code defines a party to an offense (the principal) and the accessory after the fact (what CN is charged with being):

21. (1) Every one is a party to an offence who(a) actually commits it;(b) does or omits to do anything for the purpose of aiding any person to commit it; or(c) abets any person in committing it.(2) Where two or more persons form an intention in common to carry out an unlawful purpose and to assist each other therein and any one of them, in carrying out the common purpose, commits an offence, each of them who knew or ought to have known that the commission of the offence would be a probable consequence of carrying out the common purpose is a party to that offence.

23. (1) An accessory after the fact to an offence is one who, knowing that a person has been a party to the offence, receives, comforts or assists that person for the purpose of enabling that person to escape.

(see here http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-21.html
and here:
http://yourlaws.ca/criminal-code-canada/23-accessory-after-fact)

 

[deugirtni]

I think simply LE were initially looking for a 3rd and even 4th person because DM had told the B's that they had been dropped off by a buddy.

It came clear shortly afterwards that they'd stashed the Yukon and been able to pull the heist without help.

I don't know why people aren't able to let go of the idea of a third suspect.

CN was charged with a date of May 9 for a reason, for legal reasons. That is the date when she started to participate.

People perhaps are having some difficulty letting go of the idea of a third suspect because it has never been truly answered. The trial is not yet over. We don't yet know everything. As I noted above, a full month later, police were still searching for the third suspect. A year later when CN was arrested, they called her the third suspect, although her charges were Accessory and not Murder. There has been silence surrounding her case since her arrest. The Crown states with confidence that TB was killed, shot dead, by both accuseds (DM and MS), but yet I'm not sure that is possible if MS was driving the Yukon. To me, it only makes sense that there may still be some of us who are still wondering about a potential third participant that night.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

If I thought my son was innocent, you could not keep me away. I would be showing my support.

Would she still believe that after 3 years?

 

[mimimic]

I wonder why MH mentioned the farm at all, when he said he called Crime stoppers to give MS name as suspect and also the farm> why the farm in reference to the TB disappearance? I thought these thieves always went to the hanger afterwards to dance around their ill gotten spoils.

 

[hellkat2]

The other question is, why would a pot enthusiast want to smoke harsh, two-week-old, dried-out weed on a regular basis? Fresh is best.

IMO ...and this is kind of off topic but a lot of heavy cannabis users are "warpers" meaning they are in a time warp....have arrested development big time and are likely still living with their parents at an age where they should be moving on to life's milestones. Therefore I think it is likely that they would be buying small amounts because that is all the money they can come up with.

 

[hippy_chic]

Is it said somewhere that MH called CS on 2 separate occasions? I was taking it that he had called one time, giving both pieces of info during the same call, that MS could be the 2nd suspect they were seeking, and that DM owned the property in Ayr.

Susan Clairmont &#8207;@susanclairmont 1h1 hour ago
Crimestoppers can't be traced, says Dungey. Hagerman says he told CS about Smich and farm. " What are you snivelling about?" Shouts Dungey.

Hagerman says he called Crime Stoppers and said the other suspect they might be looking for was Mark Smich.
by Adam Carter 2:05 PM

:blushing: Sorry Deugirtni, I was confused by the trial tweets, thought they were from the same source, but rather they were two different sources, & one mentioned MS & the other had made mention of the farm, I took them as two separate calls made by MH.