Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #9

[hellkat2]

Once Millard got into buying a gun for himself he wrote his own life sentence. I find it interesting that, correct me if I'm wrong, MarkS lived in the basement of DM's home just prior to his death.

It would be interesting to know if Dellen had lots of guns and if his father had lots as well.

 

[Abitcountry]

So you're suggesting DM had the foresite to prevent his buddies from being caught on the surveillance camera, but stupid enough to get caught himself? Makes no logical sense to me.....

No I would not say that Dell was protective of his buddies....he only ever used them.

I think it could be as simple as he and Smich went in one door and probably set on some sort of low intensity lights to navigate by...and the 'rat pack' may have come through another entrance altogether. I do recall there was a lot of shuffling of truck and Yukon from the north end to the south end and evidence of people walking back to the north end etc. Etc. Sort of like whose on first??

 

[brightii]

Okay, but we still have to work with what evidence we have. If we have no evidence that other people were present, we cannot assume they were. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. We can speculate about who shot him, DM or MS and why they shot him. We can speculate about their reactions after the fact. However, we can't make evidence appear out of nowhere.

MOO

If I'm reading your message correctly, that would mean a lot of the "missing pieces" theories and arguments should not be openly discussed, not just mine?

I have no idea why anyone would be so resistant to speculating about and discussing all possibilities. We are not on the jury, we're amateur sleuths.

All MOO.

ETA: bbm Absence of evidence does not necessarily equate to others not being present, IMO.

 

[SnooperDuper]

If I'm reading your message correctly, that would mean a lot of the "missing pieces" theories and arguments should not be openly discussed, not just mine?

I have no idea why anyone would be so resistant to speculating about and discussing all possibilities. We are not on the jury, we're amateur sleuths.

All MOO.

I think what Orderly may be trying to argue is your logic.

You've created a story, and the only way you are able to support it with evidence is to say, "there's no proof it didn't happen". All of your arguments are to explain why there is no evidence to support your theory, instead of actually drawing on evidence to support it.

In debating, that's called an "argument of ignorance"...no one knows, everyone is ignorant, there's no proof...so it could be true. That argument is considered flawed logic.

 

[MsSherlock]

It would be interesting to know if Dellen had lots of guns and if his father had lots as well.

WM was an "animal activist". I would be very surprised to find out that WM had any guns registered to his name. Ever...MOO

 

[Wysteria]

I spent the day at the trial yesterday and was able to form my own views and opinions of MH's testimony. IMO he was only telling the truth to the extent that he had to, and the rest was vague answers and lies shrouded by his poor memory and weak emotional state:

• He held firm to his position that he never considered whether the toolbox contained anything other than drugs, even though any rational person in his situation would have been more suspicious.
• He claimed that the contents of the box never crossed his mind, even though he admitted to asking DM about it. He "just assumed it was drugs."
• He claimed that he and Michalski never discussed the contents of the toolbox and backpack, even though they met in a park to discuss what to do with those items.
• He cried that he was in shock over his friend's arrest, and kept reverting back to lines like "I made some stupid decisions" and "I just wanted nothing to do with the toolbox", and "I wanted to protect myself and my family."

IMO, MH is a weak individual who maintains a highly selective memory of the events of this case because he is unwilling to own up to his actions and just tell the truth. I find it awfully difficult to feel sorry for him. JMO.

I was on the fence regarding my opinion of MHs' testimony.
Thanks to this post; I'm off the proverbial fence and firmly agree with your opinion.

When you share your opinions, you have the innate gifts of clarity, precision, common sense and...(humility? grace?) I'm trying to find the proper adjective...perhaps it's something that can't be explained.
I come from a long line a journalists; my grandfather was the editor of our daily newspaper; naming one out of many in our family.
Clearly; the gift of writing, journalism and the like was not passed on to me , you've acquired that gift.

What I'm attempting to convey is that in a roundabout matter, while you share your opinions and your outstanding timeline; you give sweet Tim and his loved ones precious gifts...integrity, grace, humility; aiding in the quest for the truth.

It's been shared before, had MH come forward straight away; we'd have the murder weapon. We'd have more answers than questions. There would be less angst regarding what the jury is going to decide.

MH and his lack of integrity has added to the family's' suffering.

RIP Tim :rose: While following this case, once in a while; I lose sight of the reason why we are here.
A lovely human being was viciously murdered and his family will suffer for the rest of their lives.

 

[Ontario Mom]

I wonder why he didn't destroy it.... Maybe he was planning to edit somehow so only SM was on the video tape and use it in the future for extortion or blackmail purposes. Moo

Who knows. I originally thought it was to use against MS somehow but it could have been as simple as wanting to watch it again at a later date, and re-living the moment. As twisted as it sounds, that's part of the reason some criminals actually record the act on purpose. Maybe he couldn't figure out how to destroy it and thought he'd have a chance later. Whatever his reason, I'm glad he didn't destroy it.

 

[MsSherlock]

I wonder why he didn't destroy it.... Maybe he was planning to edit somehow so only SM was on the video tape and use it in the future for extortion or blackmail purposes. Moo

DM's perfect plan went off the rails- that's what happened. Kudos to HPS for getting the blow torch on DM's rear end so quickly. Thanks to their quick action, TB's murderers will be convicted. MOO

 

[billandrew]

Earlier today there was some speculation about the use of the white spray paint that DM had asked SS to deposit in the Yukon. The speculation went on to suggest that the white paint was to repaint the black interior of of the Bosma truck????
Later in the day I was wondering on my own what the white paint might have been used for---taadaa:groucho:What would you use the white paint for??? :groucho:to clean up the mess you left in a white van, stupid? :drumroll:

It it was all so obvious...THE WHITE VAN......remember???

Millard traded the blue Yukon with Villada for the red Dodge Ram for a week or so just before the week of May 6.
Then a couple of days later Millard comes back to Villada and says he needs the blue Yukon again and this time he will trade him for the WHITE VAN......remember Villada was working and living at Riverside at the time....and remember that is where Noudga and Millard wanted to see the bathroom in the apartment that was to become theirs.
And somewhere about the same time Millard had forgotten to retrieve something out of the cargo area of the van but got it on his own before Villada returned the call....Villada never saw what was retrieved.
Could it be that something got stained or scraped in the white van or on the exterior and Dell did a quick spray can touch up or more ???
Remember Riverside...police tape all around ...evidence markers around the hoses ...water run in for 10 hours.

Just another layer of many many other layers .

I brought up the white paint last night before I went to sleep because I'm still skeptical that DM was planning to paint TB's truck with it. I'm not ruling it out, but if it was true it makes no sense why DM would want the boxes of paint loaded into the Yukon. If he was planning to paint TB's truck somewhere besides the hangar (say, at the farm), why not load the paint into the 5th wheel trailer, the red Dodge Ram, or even into TB's truck itself? Having the paint in the Yukon is pointless because he'd have to use the red Dodge Ram to tow TB's truck anywhere.

The white van is a good thought, but my mind can't make any sensible explanation of it. The truth might actually be something trivial, like he was transporting the paint to Villada for some renovation job he was doing at the time. The other questions I have are:

• How many cans of paint were in a box?
• Why did DM keep a stock of boxes of white spray paint?

The answers to these questions might provide some better insight as to what DM was going to use the paint for.

 

[brightii]

I think what Orderly may be trying to argue is your logic.

You've created a story, and the only way you are able to support it with evidence is to say, "there's no proof it didn't happen". All of your arguments are to explain why there is no evidence to support your theory, instead of actually drawing on evidence to support it.

In debating, that's called an "argument of ignorance"...no one knows, everyone is ignorant, there's no proof...so it could be true. That argument is considered flawed logic.

You are absolutely correct that is my argument. It is a theory, and obviously I have no factual evidence to support it and if LE did I'm sure they would have acted on it, but that doesn't mean it's not true.

I quite frankly don't care if my theory is logical by everyone else's estimation. It's just a theory that seems plausible to me and perhaps a few others. I don't think I should feel intimidated by others because I decided to share it among friends, IMO.

Who knows the whole truth about the crime? Why are so some members so fiercely invested in disproving my theory or discounting it as a possibility? I know I could be completely wrong of course and that's okay. So could others, IMO. Let's live and let live.

All MOO.

 

[chaines]

I don't know, but it's possible and DM for whatever reason scratched the plan.

All MOO.

IMO the plan was to overpower the driver and take the vehicle. During IT testimony he said that when he mentioned he was ex Israeli? army MS and DM gave each other an odd look. Maybe they realized that this was a guy they could not overpower easily and the plan was off. After that DM and MS figured they needed to up the ante and use a weapon to overpower and then eliminate witness. IMO they were prepared to kill Mr. Bosma, but doing it in the truck was a mistake.

 

[brightii]

Abitcountry, thank you for your words of support! I'm going out now for the evening so I hope no one thinks I'm skulking away to avoid the heat. lol

All MOO.

 

[Ontario Mom]

I was on the fence regarding my opinion of MHs' testimony.
Thanks to this post; I'm off the proverbial fence and firmly agree with your opinion.

When you share your opinions, you have the innate gifts of clarity, precision, common sense and...(humility? grace?) I'm trying to find the proper adjective...perhaps it's something that can't be explained.
I come from a long line a journalists; my grandfather was the editor of our daily newspaper; naming one out of many in our family.
Clearly; the gift of writing, journalism and the like was not passed on to me , you've acquired that gift.

What I'm attempting to convey is that in a roundabout matter, while you share your opinions and your outstanding timeline; you give sweet Tim and his loved ones precious gifts...integrity, grace, humility; aiding in the quest for the truth.

It's been shared before, had MH come forward straight away; we'd have the murder weapon. We'd have more answers than questions. There would be less angst regarding what the jury is going to decide.

MH and his lack of integrity has added to the family's' suffering.

RIP Tim :rose: While following this case, once in a while; I lose sight of the reason why we are here.
A lovely human being was viciously murdered and his family will suffer for the rest of their lives.

While I agree with much of your post, the bolded section has been repeated here over and over. The thing is, we do NOT know if this is true and it's never been presented as a fact by the Crown (AFAIK)

We don't know if MH knew for a fact (or believed) there was a gun in that toolbox when it was within his ability to do anything about it.
We don't know if the gun ever WAS in the toolbox - all we know for a fact is that there was GSR in the toolbox.
I believe the expert testified that meant *either* there was a gun in there at some point *or* something that had touched a recently fired gun (paraphrasing)
We do know, based on testimony (whether we believe it or not) that it was known that DM kept "narcotics" in the toolbox.
We also know this week's testimony is not the first time we've heard DM supplied drugs at his parties.
We also know the heat was on and DM was looking to relocate said toolbox so that *whatever* was in it, would not be found in his possession if he got busted. Could be the gun - could be his stash of illegal drugs.

We do know those in DM's circle of friends lie like the rest of us blink and breathe. It's inconsistent to believe a testimony when it fits a theory or an assumption but to dismiss it when it doesn't. I'm kind of at the point of assuming they're all lying in one way or another. Either to cover for DM for some nutty reason or cover for themselves out of sheer humiliation.

If it turns out it can be proven MH knew for a fact the murder weapon was in that toolbox, then I'm board with the rest of y'all saying it's his fault the gun was not located. I just don't know how it can be proven, and I don't think LE were able to prove that either, or he'd have definitely been charged with something.

moo.

 

[Gibson67]

https://soundcloud.com/am900chml/ma...he-ditched-key-evidence-in-the-tim-bosma-case

5 more witnesses so I am guessing MM, CN, AM, CD and maybe Arthur? I have a feeling DM's mom might be called for defence? Can't wait to hear opening statements from the defence.

 

[brightii]

IMO the plan was to overpower the driver and take the vehicle. During IT testimony he said that when he mentioned he was ex Israeli? army MS and DM gave each other an odd look. Maybe they realized that this was a guy they could not overpower easily and the plan was off. After that DM and MS figured they needed to up the ante and use a weapon to overpower and then eliminate witness. IMO they were prepared to kill Mr. Bosma, but doing it in the truck was a mistake.

bbm One last post before I scram. lol

FWIW, I think this is a very astute observation! I think it was DM's idea for the gun at TB's crime, but who knows, maybe it was uppermost in the mind of both accused after the IT test drive.

All MOO.

 

[Just4TB]

You are absolutely correct that is my argument. It is a theory, and obviously I have no factual evidence to support it and if LE did I'm sure they would have acted on it, but that doesn't mean it's not true.

I quite frankly don't care if my theory is logical by everyone else's estimation. It's just a theory that seems plausible to me and perhaps a few others. I don't think I should feel intimidated by others because I decided to share it among friends, IMO.

Who knows the whole truth about the crime? Why are so some members so fiercely invested in disproving my theory or discounting it as a possibility? I know I could be completely wrong of course and that's okay. So could others, IMO. Let's live and let live.

All MOO.

Brightii
Thanks for sharing the theory. While I don't subscribe to it, I commend you for posting it, and trying to explain it. eace:

 

[Ontario Mom]

You are absolutely correct that is my argument. It is a theory, and obviously I have no factual evidence to support it and if LE did I'm sure they would have acted on it, but that doesn't mean it's not true.

I quite frankly don't care if my theory is logical by everyone else's estimation. It's just a theory that seems plausible to me and perhaps a few others. I don't think I should feel intimidated by others because I decided to share it among friends, IMO.

Who knows the whole truth about the crime? Why are so some members so fiercely invested in disproving my theory or discounting it as a possibility? I know I could be completely wrong of course and that's okay. So could others, IMO. Let's live and let live.

All MOO.

I think, and I'm totally open to correction on this, but I think it's not so much as disproving your theory as it is the old habit (and a good one, a really really good one) of many of us here who have been here for a long time, to take only what we know as fact (supported by credible witness testimony, LE, forensic evidence, etc.) and try to piece those sections together to form a fuller picture. Of course this doesn't mean folks can't toss out all sorts of theories or speculation because we all do that but it's important to preface or close with a big fat "what if??" or "total speculation here but..." or something of that nature. But the danger lies in when a particular theory or speculation is repeated often enough that it sort of takes on a life of it's own (as it's fact) and that's when loads of misinformation starts showing up in threads and folks go down the rabbit hole of discussing things that aren't even facts, as if they are facts.

I hope I explained that well. It's not you, and it's not personal. Now here, have a lemon cookie, they're awesome (you really do bring a lot of good food for thought to this discussion, you deserve cookies too!)

 

[billandrew]

https://soundcloud.com/am900chml/ma...he-ditched-key-evidence-in-the-tim-bosma-case

5 more witnesses so I am guessing MM, CN, AM, CD and maybe Arthur? I have a feeling DM's mom might be called for defence? Can't wait to hear opening statements from the defence.

Based on what the Crown announced a few weeks ago, there are at least 10 Crown witnesses remaining.

 

[serenitynow123]

Who knows. I originally thought it was to use against MS somehow but it could have been as simple as wanting to watch it again at a later date, and re-living the moment. As twisted as it sounds, that's part of the reason some criminals actually record the act on purpose. Maybe he couldn't figure out how to destroy it and thought he'd have a chance later. Whatever his reason, I'm glad he didn't destroy it.

A trophy.... Ugh, you may be right. It's possible too that he handed it to CN (that's whose closet the machine was in?) instructing her to throw away or destroy but she chose to hang on to them like the letters.
I'm also glad it survived to be used as evidence....

 

[Ontario Mom]

Based on what the Crown announced a few weeks ago, there are at least 10 Crown witnesses remaining.

And, if we go back and look at the boatload of witnesses that have already testified, and the vast majority of whom none of us had any idea about, it will not surprise me in the least to learn of a few more that'll make our jaws hit the floor with just how much LE uncovered in this investigation. I think they did a truly phenomenal job.