Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #9

[chaines]

IMO, unknown others were involved in the TB truck theft mission. I don't think there is evidence that LE has that can prove it, hence no additional charges for others - YET - but I really think others were in on the whole thing that fateful night of May 6th. What if there were the usual suspects used as "lookouts" nearby TB's home that indeed dropped off DM and MS at TB's home and then parked and later pulled out of the field and drove ahead to the chosen Bobcat location to meet up with DM and MS? It is possible, IMO.

Also the Crown does say in its OS to consider the evidence and witness testimony as it given and to go by that essentially should things come up in trial that point in other directions than what the Crown asserts. IMO, the Crown has its case and its own theories and is presenting it as such. In order to prove any other theories the defense would have to call witnesses or present evidence to the contrary to make a case for reasonable doubt about the involvement of either accused, IMO. I don't think either defense will be able to prove others are involved, yet they may try to allude to it by exposing through witness testimony that others are unsavory and criminal characters known to one or both of the accused and have motive to frame one of the accused?

My personal theory and all MOO is that MS was set up on a casual bet among thieves, as sick as that sounds, and outright devilish. DM wanted TB's truck for his future Baja race escapade with closest partners in crime, AM and SS, JMO. DM was both cash poor and morally bankrupt. DM was intent on having his mission accomplished and so he recruited his go-to gang, those who were ever ready and willing to help him realize his harebrained schemes on a moment's notice, all for the fun of it, no harm done, just a promise of some excitement to distract from their otherwise boring lives, and I do believe the others involved may have included CN. DM never acts alone. They just planned to be there for DM to help him on his mission to steal the truck which was scoped out for months before. All fun and games. DM chose MS as his primary accomplice much to the delight of the others, not because MS was the most trusted thief among them, but rather because he was the least stable, the one with the criminal record, Say10 video history, the wannabe rapper, the cagey demeanor, the desperate drug addict lacking confidence and needing somewhere to fit in, the one with an all around blatantly loser lifestyle as their Mark, and just on the off chance they were ever caught, they were prepared to throw him swiftly under the bus, and would make sure it was going downhill fast and completely out of control. If caught, the joke would be at the expense of dispensable and pathetic MS that night for sure! Hahahaha!

I can see them all laughing and thinking how funny such a scenario might be, not truly expecting it might happen, and likely honestly hoping it would not . . . but just in case, they had to have someone in the shadows to blame, the same story to stick to, and neat and tidy alibis all lined up, just in case LE caught them red-handed or came around asking questions, after the fact. They'd all plead ignorance and surprise and point fingers at MS! I believe DM then veered off the chosen path unbeknownst to any of them and he impulsively escalated from wanting only a truck, he wanted to use his gun and prove it was no toy and he was not one to be trifled with, to feel the ultimate power and relive it as he had known it before, (LB and WM) and chose to display it for his enamored audience, and so he went full speed ahead with his own twisted plan to kill for the thrill of it and shot TB in truck at the Bobcat location. When DM parked at the Bobcat location (so familiar with Bobcats) with the Yukon right behind, and the others were already waiting to help him subdue the driver for a time until they could all get away. DM and MS then jumped out of the truck and suddenly DM shot TB point blank while standing outside the truck but with his arm extended deep inside the cab. Silence. Shock. The laughter stopped. I think when this happened his gang was immediately awestruck and in the presence of the all-powerful DM after witnessing firsthand his blood-lust, and they were forever changed and tarnished by DM's actions. After all it was supposed to just be a simple truck theft and they didn't consider a murder, but they were all there. Now what? In the aftermath, a barrage of tense words were exchanged: WTF man! Why did you do that? OMG! and then they all scrambled to come up with a new plan, an escape route, a fresh story to tell among themselves, because now they were implicated in a murder, and they then all got into their vehicles and someone took TB's phone and on their way to wherever next, threw the phone outside the vehicle.

What were they feeling then? Panic. Pandemonium. Exhilaration. The thrill and the horror of having been a part of a gamer's fantasy that in a flash became a reality that would take time to process, knowing it could never be undone. DM had MS convinced that since DM used MS's gun, DM would have no problem accusing MS of TB's murder and DM knew none of the others would go against DM and tell the truth. MS knew it as well. Therefore, fearful of DM and the threat of TB's murder pinned on him MS agreed to help DM get rid of TB's body in the incinerator because he felt he had no other choice. MS likely thought if he didn't cooperate he too would end up killed and incinerated. He was paranoid in the days after, he was petrified and all for good reason.

Okay, now let the heckling begin...lol

Just wild speculation by me and All MOO.

do you write movie scripts for a living? If you don't, you should!

 

[redwing7225]

Did you see how many doors there are into that hangar.....I counted them from the google images and came up with 10 man doors....at least 3 loading doors.....and a wall full of hangar doors. I agree they did not show on the few seconds of surveillance recording that we were shown.....I repeat, they were not on the few seconds we were shown....The DVR was running for hours I presume and we saw what ...maybe 60 seconds if lucky. And what if Dell and Smich came one door and the gang came in
another.
Do you really think she wouldn't have been up to the same task the guys were surely going to be doing....then think again. CN is no cupcake and if she was at the Bobcat dealership, she likely got the same graphic lesson that they did.
I think Millard turned off the charm offence once and for all time when they left Bobcat's and his crew knew it...the stakes just got a whole lot higher in a hurry and now it was strictly "do or die missions" going forward

To be quite honest, I had to drive past the hanger a couple weeks ago, made me feel sick to my stomach. I would drive 50miles out of my so that I would never have to go past it again.
There are no words for this crime...like everyone here, simply hoping for justice and some sort of peace within the Family and friends when this trial is complete.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Respectfully, SnooperDuper, no one has suggested that they participated in TB's murder. All that has been speculated AFAIK is that the crew that were involved in previous thefts could have been involved in the TB truck theft, and that speculation has arisen from direct evidence give by MH last week, IMO. My theory or others that I've seen doesn't say any of those mentioned above murdered TB, and in fact my theory says they were all not expecting to become involved in a murder and that DM was the murderer to their great shock and awe.

All MOO.

Well, the murder seemed to roll smoothly with just two people involved. What was this other horde of people doing, just hanging out, being the lookouts that didn't see the guy walking his dog? What meaningful role would they play to make up for the risk of being there?

And why did they not leave a trace of themselves on video, on the cell network, in the eyes of the neighbours that were in the area...?

 

[Inspector_North]

Is there a link to all phone texting activity in chronological order list format? I don't need a map, just who texted who, date/time, and from where (tower or general area). I can assemble it from the link Abro provided if not available.

 

[Just4TB]

This being a weekend thread, I'm going to diverge off the subject of the testimony of recent witnesses at the trial.


I've been thinking on the graphic and troubling evidence presented during the trial, in support of the Crown position that TB was murdered in the truck. This evidence which through DNA and blood pattern, clearly shows the bloodletting event of TB's death via gunshot. As difficult as this was to see, this evidence also could provide some comfort. Specifically, it leads one to believe that TB likely did not suffer and the subsequent indignity of the incinerator was post mortem.


If that evidence had not been available, the speculation within the family, friends and loved ones would be nearly unbearable. While the accused are not disclosing any of the details of the murder, the evidence is, and for that I am thankful, especially for those close to TB.

My opinion only

 

[SnooperDuper]

Respectfully, Abro, I don't think there is anything trivial about my theory about the crime and nor is that my intention.

All MOO.

Well, you're sort of suggesting that LE was so inept that they missed all trace of at least three additional people...that's pretty hard to believe.

LE did a good job on this case, and I think the biggest goof they made was allowing an irrelevant, empty old cardboard box to fly out of the trailer.

So if you're hoping to hear of LE's major blunder in this case, I think you're going to be disappointed.

 

[Errrr]

Did you see how many doors there are into that hangar.....I counted them from the google images and came up with 10 man doors....at least 3 loading doors.....and a wall full of hangar doors. I agree they did not show on the few seconds of surveillance recording that we were shown.....I repeat, they were not on the few seconds we were shown....The DVR was running for hours I presume and we saw what ...maybe 60 seconds if lucky. And what if Dell and Smich came one door and the gang came in
another.
Do you really think she wouldn't have been up to the same task the guys were surely going to be doing....then think again. CN is no cupcake and if she was at the Bobcat dealership, she likely got the same graphic lesson that they did.
I think Millard turned off the charm offence once and for all time when they left Bobcat's and his crew knew it...the stakes just got a whole lot higher in a hurry and now it was strictly "do or die missions" going forward

Ah yes, I guess they all snuck in on foot across the airport so they wouldn't be detected on video with the incinerator, truck and Yukon!

 

[Ontario Mom]

Well, the murder seemed to roll smoothly with just two people involved. What was this other horde of people doing, just hanging out, being the lookouts that didn't see the guy walking his dog? What meaningful role would they play to make up for the risk of being there?

And why did they not leave a trace of themselves on video, on the cell network, in the eyes of the neighbours that were in the area...?

The testimony this week paints this picture that whenever DM decided to steal something in the middle of the night, others went along to help or be lookouts. The Bosma case is completely different than those other events. DM set the meeting up (albeit with a fake *sort of* name), showed his face at the Bosma place and left his DNA in Tim's truck. He didn't slink in, in the middle of the night with lookouts standing by in case someone was coming. He didn't need any lookouts, all he needed was someone else to drive the Yukon back.

 

[Inspector_North]

I don't know if the crew's previous escapades were limited only to the wee hours of the morning, but they did apparently, according to MH operate after dark. TB was murdered after dark as well, IMO. His body was burned in the wee hours of the next morning, IMO, and according to evidence.

All MOO.

But they went for a test drive with IT during the day. I don't think that was a practice run, even if IT can still tell his story. They used the exact same method. Burner phone, walked up to the seller, etc.

Do you think they were with him for that test drive?

 

[RandomName479]

I really don't think it's fair to speculate that CN, AM, MH, etc. were direct participants in TB's murder. There's absolutely no evidence to support that.

Thanks button wasn't enough......LE IMO did an incredible job of piecing together what went down and to imply they completely missed a participant suggests they didn't do their job and LE are incompetent and IMO nothing is further from the truth. Absolutely no evidence exists about their direct involvement. MOO

 

[brightii]

Well, the murder seemed to roll smoothly with just two people involved. What was this other horde of people doing, just hanging out, being the lookouts that didn't see the guy walking his dog? What meaningful role would they play to make up for the risk of being there?

And why did they not leave a trace of themselves on video, on the cell network, in the eyes of the neighbours that were in the area...?

I don't know where they all were but in my theory I suspect that they all met up at the preordained spot at the Bobcat location via the Yukon or other vehicle(s) that could have been caught on video as the defense has suggested. And I don't know if they saw or didn't see TB's dog-walking neighbour. Perhaps they did spot him at a distance and that's why they hightailed it out of the field where the Yukon was parked?

They may not have had phones, had burner phones, or as I suggested before, they may have been using DM's or MS's phones. It has always been weird to me that DM had both his own phone and a burner phone physically present with him, IMO. If someone else physically had possession of his phone in that area on the same night, that would account for it, IMO.

All MOO.

 

[Inspector_North]

I don't know where they all were but in my theory I suspect that they all met up at the preordained spot at the Bobcat location via the Yukon or other vehicle(s) that could have been caught on video as the defense has suggested. And I don't know if they saw or didn't see TB's dog-walking neighbour. Perhaps they did spot him at a distance and that's why they hightailed it out of the field where the Yukon was parked?

They may not have had phones, had burner phones, or as I suggested before, they may have been using DM's or MS's phones. It has always been weird to me that DM had both his own phone and a burner phone physically present with him, IMO. If someone else physically had possession of his phone in that area on the same night, that would account for it, IMO.

All MOO.

Their MO included using walkie-talkies.

Totally agree with
"It has always been weird to me that DM had both his own phone and a burner phone physically present with him"

 

[SnooperDuper]

Respectfully, SnooperDuper, no one has suggested that they participated in TB's murder. All that has been speculated AFAIK is that the crew that were involved in previous thefts could have been involved in the TB truck theft, and that speculation has arisen from direct evidence give by MH last week, IMO. My theory or others that I've seen doesn't say any of those mentioned above murdered TB, and in fact my theory says they were all not expecting to become involved in a murder and that DM was the murderer to their great shock and awe.

All MOO.

IMO, the truck theft = the first degree murder, so the "crew" would be facing accessory to murder charges for their assistance in stealing the truck.

Just clarifying why I felt you were accusing them of murder not theft.

 

[Ontario Mom]

I think the problem with theories is that sometimes they include details that there simply isn't any evidence for - sort of like filling in the missing pieces with what we (law abiding, rational, non-murdering forum participants) think makes the most sense given what we know.

The problem with that is, once these theories take flight, people start assuming things & repeating things that simply are not accurate. I try to avoid theories usually, for that reason (and because I can't always remember details accurately, because I'm old, lol).

 

[billandrew]

I don't know where they all were but in my theory I suspect that they all met up at the preordained spot at the Bobcat location via the Yukon or other vehicle(s) that could have been caught on video as the defense has suggested. And I don't know if they saw or didn't see TB's dog-walking neighbour. Perhaps they did spot him at a distance and that's why they hightailed it out of the field where the Yukon was parked?

They may not have had phones, had burner phones, or as I suggested before, they may have been using DM's or MS's phones. It has always been weird to me that DM had both his own phone and a burner phone physically present with him, IMO. If someone else physically had possession of his phone in that area on the same night, that would account for it, IMO.

All MOO.

It's an interesting thought, but you can be sure the police exhausted all of those possibilities and determined it was unlikely. In such a heinous crime, if there was any hint of others being involved they would not be let off the hook easily. IMO, all of the people in DM's and MS's circle would have been thoroughly investigated and the police would have concluded with satisfaction that they were not present in any capacity on the evening of May 6.

 

[hellkat2]

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/

Thanks for the info. It is it possible that the witnesses (DM's sycophants) will be prepared by lawyers to only state what they believe will build the prosecutions case and other information will not be introduced because it doesn't assist the crown? And I guess the same for the defense team? Is this justice? Is the truth ever told?

 

[palisadesk]

Thanks for the info. It is it possible that the witnesses (DM's sycophants) will be prepared by lawyers to only state what they believe will build the prosecutions case and other information will not be introduced because it doesn't assist the crown? And I guess the same for the defense team? Is this justice? Is the truth ever told?

We have an adversarial justice system, where each side is trying to "win." But I don't believe it is as Machiavellian as you seem to fear. Sure, each side has discussions with its prospective witnesses, to prepare them for their court appearance, but they certainly don't tell witnesses to only state what will benefit their side (whichever side). No, it's the lawyers' job to frame questions so that the information they are trying to elicit is presented, and witnesses are supposed to stick to the questions asked, not to go off on tangents of their own. They can and do say unexpected things, which can be a revelation, or a problem, or simply a diversion, depending, but normally the lawyers (and the judge) are trying to keep things on track.

The courtroom, however, is not the place for "the whole truth" to be told, necessarily. We here are curious about a lot of things related to the case, but that doesn't mean all of these are rightfully part of the court testimony. The jury has a huge amount of information to take in; it is essential that the focus must be sharp, and extraneous material, however interesting, should be saved for post-trial interviews, analysis, documentaries or what-have-you.

A lot of "character evidence" is excluded because it doesn't address whether the accused committed the crime in question; some will usually be introduced, in order for the jury to understand the possible motivations and actions of the accused (or other players), but strict limitations on this kind of evidence are imposed. So, too, are emotional digressions, whether they be remorse, anger at the accused, hostility for betrayal, shock and horror, whatever, because - and I think this is important - the trial is not about them. Hopefully some of these n'er-do-wells may sincerely repent of their conduct around this case - but their repentance doesn't belong in the trial. The trial is about getting the facts out as clearly as possible for the jury to make an informed, considered verdict.

But cross-examination is where testimony not favourable to the side which called the witness can come out. The defense attorney can be quite aggressive with Crown witnesses, ask leading questions, practically put words in their mouths, to elicit information believed important to the defense, and the Crown can do the same with defense witnesses. A lot of leeway is permitted on cross that is not permitted on direct. This is one way the adversarial system promotes fairness.

The judge also plays a big role here in determining when (or if) either side has taken things too far, and in limiting what evidence can be introduced. He or she is on the alert to prevent admission of testimony or evidence that might be cause later for an appeal or mistrial. When we hear what evidence was excluded we sometimes thing, "Bleep, the jury should have heard that and they would know what a Defendant X is," or something like that. But unless it's relevant to the crime in question, it should be excluded. The tell-all analyses can and should come later, but the trial needs a laser-like focus on the essentials.

Then, over the longer term, the fuller analysis can take place. I've always found that part more interesting than the trial process,but understand the relative importance of each.

 

[Orderly]

I've only read the last few pages but the amount of baseless speculation is significant. First of all, zero evidence has been presented that more than two people committed this murder. There are no finger prints, no DNA, no text messages, no cellphone signal pings that indicated anyone except DM and MS were involved in the murder. If there was this kind of evidence, these guys would be sitting in the prisoner's box next to DM and MS. CN's DNA was on the gloves that DM was carrying and one of the gloves had TB's DNA on it, thus there is something linking her. Evidence. There is ZERO evidence that MH or AM participated in the crime. Yes, they did bad things. Yes, they stole. However, just because they acted as lookouts on a rural road does not mean they participated in TB's murder. There were no texts that indicate that they were even asked to do so as there were on prior occasions. Claiming otherwise, is just getting into the realm of conspiracy theory.

Also, people seem to be having an issue with MH and AM not being charged with accessory after the fact. In order to prove accessory to murder after the fact the Crown has to prove:

the accused knew a crime had been committed (possibly, true)
the accused intended to aid the principal (I've heard no evidence of this from MH or BD)
the accused did an act that enabled the principle to escape (arrest, trial, punishment) ​(this definitely didn't happen)


DM spread out all the evidence amongst his friends in order to increase the chances that some of the evidence would not be found by the police. Everyone had pieces of the puzzle but not the whole puzzle. Possibly, these people were used to handling sketchy items related to criminal activity and I believe did not question it for that reason. If you're used to drugs being in a box, then why would you think that a gun would be in it? It's a big mental leap to going from thinking your friend is a drug dealer to thinking your friend is a murderer. Then, the issue of DM's friends framing MS for the crime. Where is the evidence that they even attempted to do this? There is none. Correct me if I am wrong, but there was nothing said that painted MS more unfavourably then DM. Again, going into the realm of conspiracy. IMO, AH and AM knew the police were onto DM and they get rid of the evidence not because they are trying to protect him but because they are stuck with a murder weapon that implicates them.

MOO

 

[Ontario Mom]

I've only read the last few pages but the amount of baseless speculation is significant. First of all, zero evidence has been presented that more than two people committed this murder. There are no finger prints, no DNA, no text messages, no cellphone signal pings that indicated anyone except DM and MS were involved in the murder. If there was this kind of evidence, these guys would be sitting in the prisoner's box next to DM and MS. CN's DNA was on the gloves that DM was carrying and one of the gloves had TB's DNA on it, thus there is something linking her. Evidence. There is ZERO evidence that MH or AM participated in the crime. Yes, they did bad things. Yes, they stole. However, just because they acted as lookouts on a rural road does not mean they participated in TB's murder. There were no texts that indicate that they were even asked to do so as there were on prior occasions. Claiming otherwise, is just getting into the realm of conspiracy theory.

Also, people seem to be having an issue with MH and AM not being charged with accessory after the fact. In order to prove accessory to murder after the fact the Crown has to prove:

the accused knew a crime had been committed (possibly, true)
the accused intended to aid the principal (I've heard no evidence of this from MH or BD)
the accused did an act that enabled the principle to escape (arrest, trial, punishment) ​(this definitely didn't happen)


DM spread out all the evidence amongst his friends in order to increase the chances that some of the evidence would not be found by the police. Everyone had pieces of the puzzle but not the whole puzzle. Possibly, these people were used to handling sketchy items related to criminal activity and I believe did not question it for that reason. If you're used to drugs being in a box, then why would you think that a gun would be in it? It's a big mental leap to going from thinking your friend is a drug dealer to thinking your friend is a murderer. Then, the issue of DM's friends framing MS for the crime. Where is the evidence that they even attempted to do this? There is none. Correct me if I am wrong, but there was nothing said that painted MS more unfavourably then DM. Again, going into the realm of conspiracy. IMO, AH and AM knew the police were onto DM and they get rid of the evidence not because they are trying to protect him but because they are not stuck with a murder weapon that implicates them.

MOO

Thank you for reading my mind & typing my thoughts. Much appreciated

 

[brightii]

Well, you're sort of suggesting that LE was so inept that they missed all trace of at least three additional people...that's pretty hard to believe.

LE did a good job on this case, and I think the biggest goof they made was allowing an irrelevant, empty old cardboard box to fly out of the trailer.

So if you're hoping to hear of LE's major blunder in this case, I think you're going to be disappointed.

I am not in any way suggesting that LE is incompetent, but my theory clearly states that LE did not have the evidence to prove it. How do we know what other theories that LE had or have but simply lack the evidence to prove? That's not a slur against LE or the magnitude of their very thorough investigation, it's simply an observation and a theory of mine that perhaps they couldn't get such evidence to prove my theory in court.

New evidence has been presented in court this past week exposing DM and his comrades in previous capers involving thefts. I imagine that there are many, many details in this crime that will never be known, as others have said too, and yet that doesn't mean people think LE screwed up, IMO.

You misread me to think that if the Crown is successful in proving its case that I will be disappointed and celebrating somehow LE's blunders, IMO. That is not the case at all. I am merely considering other options and scenarios that seem plausible to me, IMO.

If my theory doesn't jive with yours or others, that's fine, but why should I feel badly for thinking other than what the majority of this group may think? That expectation doesn't feel fair to me. I show respect for the opinions of everyone here and I don't mock the opinions of others with whom I happen to disagree, IMO.

I'd suggest putting me on ignore, or simply roll and scroll my posts if anyone finds my theory so outlandish or especially if it offends. I am trying only to express my opinions and thoughts and I don't mean to bother anyone here. My thoughts are my own and I think I have a right to them.

I said bring on the hecklers at the end of my "theory" post, but it was said tongue in cheek because I know that there will be many who will not agree, though I didn't expect that my theory would be interpreted as somehow anti-police, anti-Crown, or anti-justice for TB and his family. I can assure you that none of those assumptions are true.

All MOO.