Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #9

[billandrew]

Buying the incinerator ~10 months ahead,
getting the burner phone 3 months ahead
repositioning the camera a week ahead,
packing a gun hours ahead,
deciding to pull the trigger second ahead...

All premeditation IMO

Good insights, Snooper! I didn't think of the evidence that way but it makes complete sense. My brain has been focused on the premeditated theft/forcible confinement angle, probably because of DM's letter about Michalski ("If he knew how his words would give me a life sentence..."), where he was referring to Michalski's knowledge of the truck theft being planned.

 

[palisadesk]

If they cannot prove the forcible confinement aspect, does that mean they have to prove that the murder itself was planned and deliberate?

Yes, premeditated and deliberate, IOW not an accident. But, while planning a crime well in advance constitutes premeditation, premeditation does not mean it has to have taken a long time to plan! There has to be the intent to kill, and there has to be the decision to do it - which can be a couple of seconds of "premeditation" - the time it takes to draw and fire the gun.

Pretty hard to argue that a shooting is "accidental" if it's committed while driving. The fact that a gun was brought along is suggestive of premeditation to use a gun, if not to commit murder, to threaten or compel. It may not be possible to conclusively "prove" these elements, but taken together, they already make a very strong circumstantial case. Even if this was a robbery gone wrong, the accused had other options -- beating TB up for one. Crashing the truck and taking off, for another. There were choices other than shooting at point-blank range, even if, which seems possible, this occurred before they were planning it. I don't believe they planned the resultant shambles and gore in the truck that they had to clean up.

 

[serenitynow123]

Buying the incinerator ~10 months ahead,
getting the burner phone 3 months ahead
repositioning the camera a week ahead,
packing a gun hours ahead,
deciding to pull the trigger second ahead...

All premeditation IMO

Also there is the text message to LW (I'm paraphrasing) about having spent five days during the last year working on getting a diesel truck.

 

[Abitcountry]

This is how I understand it to be. Either premeditation or forcible confinement needs to be proved in order to find guilty of forest degree. I feel it's proven/will be proven for DM, but for MS I'm not so sure

But returning to the initial charge against DM of abduction and theft over $5000 that was then escalated to First degree Murder when evidence of the victim's body was recovered.......I was of the understanding that abduction resulting in death is First Degree Murder....and the proof is self evident---TB never returned home.

 

[brightii]

I do hope that AM and the girlfriends will be able to give truthful testimony with details about the plan for the truck theft, and anything more, if they know.

If they testify that either accused spoke about the plan as being a truck theft only, and that plan didn't include overpowering or restraining or harming or murdering the victim, TB, then there could remain reasonable doubt that one of the accused was taken by complete surprise when TB was shot by the other, IMO.

All MOO.

 

[mimimic]

Good insights, Snooper! I didn't think of the evidence that way but it makes complete sense. My brain has been focused on the premeditated theft/forcible confinement angle, probably because of DM's letter about Michalski ("If he knew how his words would give me a life sentence..."), where he was referring to Michalski's knowledge of the truck theft being planned.

I do like the simplicity of Snoopers insight here. now do we actually know it was AM's knowledge yet? sorry i thought we didn't know who it was/is yet.

 

[RandomName479]

I do like the simplicity of Snoopers insight here. now do we actually know it was AM's knowledge yet? sorry i thought we didn't know who it was/is yet.

Also on this day, May 7, 2013, Mr. Millard told his roommate that they had stolen a truck on May 6, the day before. This roommate already knew that Mr. Millard and Mr. Smich planned to steal a truck of this kind. The Accused had told him this plan on the weekend.

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/2016/02/tim-bosma-trial-the-crowns-opening-statement.html

I think it's a safe assumption that his roommate is AM....however it is still an assumption until AM takes the stand.....MOO

 

[deugirtni]

This is the weak link. It is not disputed that TB entered the truck willingly, and there are witnesses to this who have testified as much. It would require some additional evidence to prove forcible confinement. Such evidence might include one of the merry band of brigands testifying to being told by DM or MS that they were planning to steal a truck, tie up the driver and toss him out in a remote spot and make off with the goods. That would be abduction and forcible confinement. But the evidence so far doesn't show any apparent use of force to get Tim into the truck, and by your timeline (which I found brilliant BTW) the murder probably occurred within minutes so on the face of it "forcible confinement" does not seem to have occurred, although if it was in the plan and reported as such, that would be evidence of same. Also, did the vehicle have child safety locks so that the passenger side person could not get out? If forensic studies showed the truck with those still in place and turned on maybe that would be evidence (but I'm not sure about that).

Unless the forthcoming witnesses can provide some evidence of intent to confine the owner of the vehicle that will be a difficult thing to prove. Although premeditation, at least on DM's part, is more likely. We will have to wait for more testimony I think.

We also don't know if MS was even in the truck when the shooting happened. So *if* it wasn't a known plan ahead of time, AND MS wasn't in the truck.... then what?

 

[palisadesk]

....so ...IF/since TB got in the truck by his own accord and either DM OR MS sucker shot him. Not meant in disrespect but much the same as sucker punching some ( i think that means, the victim didn't know it was coming) That means they are not as guilty ??

No, that's not what it means. What it means is, IF someone is kidnapped/forcibly confined, and they die as a result (hit head on dashboard or ANY kind of accident), the perpetrators are guilty of first-degree murder even without any intention to kill. In such a case, nothing about intention, premeditation, etc. needs to be proven. Thus, IF the Crown can make a forcible confinement scenario stick, BOTH the accused are guilty of first degree murder no matter what their intentions were, who fired the gun, or anything else. Guilty, period.

But if the forcible confinement issue is not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the Crown needs to demonstrate that the murder was "planned and deliberate" (the Criminal Code terms for first-degree murder). Bringing a gun along on a supposedly innocuous venture such as a test drive is indicative of planning to do harm, if not necessarily murder, but being in possession of the gun, DM (or MS) could have then made the decision to kill and acted upon it if, for example, TB threatened the success of the "mission" in some way. There is no doubt the gun was used, and likely from the driver's side, and since DB was left handed it couldn't have been an accident -- drawing and firing would take deliberate and careful maneuvering.

Proving forcible confinement makes things simpler, but isn't necessary for a conviction, certainly not for DM. MS may be a different matter. I don't foresee an acquittal, but possibly second-degree. However, the evidence is not all in. We shall see.

 

[deugirtni]

<bbm>

He can try, but it's not just up to the accused to change their plea; the Crown would have to agree. (Example, convicted serial killer Cody Legebokoff tried to plead Guilty to second degree murder during trial but the Crown would not agree.)

from:
http://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/...bokoff-plea-to-second-degree-murder-1.1347596

I'm sure the jury would not have been allowed to know about this.. can you IMAGINE if at the end of the day, the jury found him not guilty, and THEN the jury finds out that he tried to plead guilty to 2nd degree? OMG

 

[palisadesk]

We also don't know if MS was even in the truck when the shooting happened. So *if* it wasn't a known plan ahead of time, AND MS wasn't in the truck.... then what?

At the very least, MS is guilty of being an accessory after the fact (plenty of video and cell phone evidence). That can carry a life sentence.

 

[mimimic]

Also on this day, May 7, 2013, Mr. Millard told his roommate that they had stolen a truck on May 6, the day before. This roommate already knew that Mr. Millard and Mr. Smich planned to steal a truck of this kind. The Accused had told him this plan on the weekend.

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/2016/02/tim-bosma-trial-the-crowns-opening-statement.html

I think it's a safe assumption that his roommate is AM....however it is still an assumption until AM takes the stand.....MOO

lol thank you i guess the mystery was in my head - i didn't know who the roommate was until recently . all these initials and not being familiar sooner. not that you all care about MY blunder...

 

[leafs_fan93]

We also don't know if MS was even in the truck when the shooting happened. So *if* it wasn't a known plan ahead of time, AND MS wasn't in the truck.... then what?

There would be other charges he could face..theft over 5k, accessory after the fact, perhaps we would see a charge for indignity to a body? MOO

 

[palisadesk]

But returning to the initial charge against DM of abduction and theft over $5000 that was then escalated to First degree Murder when evidence of the victim's body was recovered.......I was of the understanding that abduction resulting in death is First Degree Murder....and the proof is self evident---TB never returned home.

They laid the charge of abduction against DM when they believed TB was still alive, and they knew DM had his truck. But, much investigation later, there hasn't been any evidence submitted (yet) to support "abduction" -- TB went with them willingly. It may be that forcible confinement entered the picture later, but we have yet to hear about that. The shooting may have occurred before any such thing could have taken place.

So they may be guilty of murder but NOT guilty of abduction. The two don't have to go together.

 

[mimimic]

No, that's not what it means. What it means is, IF someone is kidnapped/forcibly confined, and they die as a result (hit head on dashboard or ANY kind of accident), the perpetrators are guilty of first-degree murder even without any intention to kill. In such a case, nothing about intention, premeditation, etc. needs to be proven. Thus, IF the Crown can make a forcible confinement scenario stick, BOTH the accused are guilty of first degree murder no matter what their intentions were, who fired the gun, or anything else. Guilty, period.


But if the forcible confinement issue is not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the Crown needs to demonstrate that the murder was "planned and deliberate" (the Criminal Code terms for first-degree murder). Bringing a gun along on a supposedly innocuous venture such as a test drive is indicative of planning to do harm, if not necessarily murder, but being in possession of the gun, DM (or MS) could have then made the decision to kill and acted upon it if, for example, TB threatened the success of the "mission" in some way. There is no doubt the gun was used, and likely from the driver's side, and since DB was left handed it couldn't have been an accident -- drawing and firing would take deliberate and careful maneuvering.

Proving forcible confinement makes things simpler, but isn't necessary for a conviction, certainly not for DM. MS may be a different matter. I don't foresee an acquittal, but possibly second-degree. However, the evidence is not all in. We shall see.

Yes I agree and i get it- mostly, but what i sort of mean to ask is TB didn't need to be AWARE that he was being confined did he? he may not have even known - My writing likely still makes no sense. just keep scrolling

 

[mimimic]

They laid the charge of abduction against DM when they believed TB was still alive, and they knew DM had his truck. But, much investigation later, there hasn't been any evidence submitted (yet) to support "abduction" -- TB went with them willingly. It may be that forcible confinement entered the picture later, but we have yet to hear about that. The shooting may have occurred before any such thing could have taken place.

So they may be guilty of murder but NOT guilty of abduction. The two don't have to go together.

Oh boy getting confusing now. i will look up the difference but likely someone has already typed it

 

[mozzagirl]

What is the max sentence CN could face for her charges?

 

[deugirtni]

Buying the incinerator ~10 months ahead,
getting the burner phone 3 months ahead
repositioning the camera a week ahead,
packing a gun hours ahead,
deciding to pull the trigger second ahead...

All premeditation IMO

Don't forget making arrangements and making a trade of vehicles with Mr. V so that DM would have the appropriate towing capacity for the incinerator!... how many days ahead was that.. .3?

 

[deugirtni]

Susan Clairmont &#8207;@susanclairmont 2m2 minutes ago
I'm working now on an end-of-trial story.

OMG, that just kind of scared me. Why today? Why now? Now I'm all full of paranoia that something has happened to cause the 'end of trial', early! God I hope nothing horrible has happened to cause that!

 

[mozzagirl]

OMG, that just kind of scared me. Why today? Why now? Now I'm all full of paranoia that something has happened to cause the 'end of trial', early! God I hope nothing horrible has happened to cause that!

Ya me too! It doesn't help that my gut feeling is today's legal arguments have to do with witness tampering or a plea change.