Canada -Timothy Bosma, 32, Hamilton Ontario, 6 May 2013 - #7 **ARREST**

[OntarioGal]

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/0...was-always-a-little-different-classmate-says/

I haven't seen this link here yet. Sorry if I missed it and it's already up. There is quite a bit of subtly new information.

 

[Carli]

I felt compelled to clear this up as our court system is highly favoured to the accused, however the interrogation and police investigation is highly powered imbalanced to favour the police.

Thanks very much for such a skillful and clearly expressed summary, Storme.

 

[NiagaraElle]

Its a barn in the sticks. The problem of vermin would likely be continuous.

And an incinerator wouldn't help with that either... we had raccoons, rats and snakes in ours... separate from the horses lol!

The only way to keep them out or attempt to is a better word.. tear it down and rebuild.

The other reason this theory doesn't hold water....

The location of the Eliminator to the Location of the barn.... the distance is far too great for that to have been the use.

To consider using it to cut down and remove the amount of trees I have seen out there... he would have to leave it in a will to his heirs to continue where he leaves off lol!

If you get rid of timber on a farm, you cut, pile, pour flammable fluid, and light it. AND most importantly... you tell the fire dept first.

 

[Patience]

https://twitter.com/CBCAlerts/status/336285601596862464
Ontario police find more remains where slain man found . Not known if human; Tim #Bosma's remains found last week

 

[SnooperDuper]

Back to the incinerator.

The model DM purchased is designed for small animals and there are larger models for larger animals. It doesn't make sense to me that he would buy the smaller model if its intent was specifically for cremating a human being.

Veterinarians use deadstock incinerators to dispose of diseased animals. DM's uncle was a veterinarian. Maybe the barn was full of dead vermin, and his uncle suggested the purchase of the machine to remove the carcasses, or DM was aware of the machine because he had seen one in use at his Uncle's practice.

Im pretty sure if the incinerator was ever used to cremate a human being, this would be detectable by forensics. So if it was, we will find out. The police have said they are not sure if this machine was used in the cremation of the body or bodies at this time.

- manufacturer Supernova suggests its two smallest models are suitable for funeral homes
- only a vet in a rural location would be able to use an incinerator - there are regulations as to how close to the neighbours you can set one up...most vets would use a deadstock service (the vet I worked for had a chest freezer and deadstock service and he was rural too)

 

[flipflop]

And an incinerator wouldn't help with that either... we had raccoons, rats and snakes in ours... separate from the horses lol!

The only way to keep them out or attempt to is a better word.. tear it down and rebuild.

The other reason this theory doesn't hold water....

The location of the Exterminator to the Location of the barn.... the distance is far too great for that to have been the use.

To consider using it to cut down and remove the amount of trees I have seen out there... he would have to leave it in a will to his heirs to continue where he leaves off lol!

If you get rid of timber on a farm, you cut, pile, pour flammable fluid, and light it. AND most importantly... you tell the fire dept first.

do you mean incinerator? An exterminator is someone you call to get rid of critters.

 

[tayaway]

Gah! Deleted.

 

[flipflop]

The incinerator model is called the 'Exterminator'.

The Eliminator

http://www.supernovamfg.com/

 

[Patricia_Ann]

do you mean incinerator? An exterminator is someone you call to get rid of critters.

I think that's what she meant. From what I know, no exterminator has been on the premises during the investigation.

However, the way things are progressing......who knows what's next?

 

[frazzled]

quote=flipflop;9461533]

 

[SnooperDuper]

Its a barn in the sticks. The problem of vermin would likely be continuous.

There would have to be a food source for vermin to be attracted to the barn and if all there is is composted straw and dung...maybe you'd have field mice, but anything bigger would travel down the road to a farm where there is animal feed to get into

 

[tayaway]

"Exterminator" was given as the model name for the incinerator.

Eliminator! my bad. :facepalm:

 

[ArianeEmory]

Either very few sets of photos of Dellen Millard have been released or distributed (as was noted early on, he doesn't have much of an online footprint?) or the guy is overly fond of that white polo shirt with the plaid collar. I've seen it in three different photos. Edit: make that four.

(This is a purely random observation and nothing is implied by it. I just keep noticing that shirt over and over.)

 

[swanna]

Blomquist, I am a legal professional in Ontario (12 years) and I cut my teeth in criminal law, first w/Min. of Atty Gen, then w/ a prominent defense lawyer in Toronto and now I work in something less adversarial although I still negotiate all of the time in a sometimes adversarial manner (if the other party's lawyer is American, particularly!). It is the DUTY of the Crown to disclose inculpatory and exculpatory evidence when requested for disclosure by the defense. This requirement exists both for evidence the Crown intends to use and does not intend to use. However, it is the Crown's sole prerogative whether or not evidence may be refused disclosure as it may deem it privileged or irrelevant. This is where the Crown has gotten into trouble in the past (that led to several precedent rulings), but only when the defense has challenged it and the court reviews this evidence and finds the Crown did not act in the spirit of Stinchcombe, S7 of the Charter, and the LSUC (law society) may discipline the Crown.

If the Crown finds that evidence was either incorrect or even perjurious, it is required under both the rules and ethics of our law society, the courts, and Canadian precedent (see Stinchcombe and later rulings affirming Stinchcombe) to disclose this to the court. The same applies as well as withholding new developments that prove evidence/witnesses as either incorrect, exculpatory, or perjurious. It is also a breach of the accused's S7 Charter rights. Failure to do so can warrant acquittal, charges, overturning of conviction, and even disbarment from the professional body.

We do operate in an adversarial system which greatly favours the accused over other systems such as the Inquisitory System (used in France, etc), so the Crown does not have the duty to provide exculpatory evidence in its argument. Further, the defense is also held to the same standards as the Crown, so the suggestion that the defense is not subject to the same rules of ethics is very much untrue. There have been defense lawyers disbarred for this activity, and not many disbarred when acting for the Crown. This tells us that the Crown is under incredible scrutiny and does not have the same motive to act below the ethical standards imposed upon all barristers and solicitors in our province.

I felt compelled to clear this up as our court system is highly favoured to the accused, however the interrogation and police investigation is highly powered imbalanced to favour the police. This is why it is so important to remain silent as everything that is said is potentially damning evidence to be used by the Crown.

With that, I'm moving back to the case at hand so as not to veer O/T.

:yourock: Maybe this will finally clear up the earlier comments about this.:deadhorse:

 

[MsSherlock]

CORRECT INFORMATION.....

After being out all day and just reading through from several pages back... I can't tell you how it saddens me that people are NOT all going according to the same basic information that is guaranteed to be accurate.

What I am referring to is the LE Media Releases... all you have to do is sit and watch... so I took the privilege of sitting through one of the first ones again and made notes to correct MIS-INFORMATION.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!! TAKE A MOMENT AND READ THIS


1. May 6th Test Drive approx 9:20pm, Suspect #1 (DM) drove during the test drive, Suspect #2 was in the rear seat behind TB and TB was in the front passenger seat (NOT DRIVING).

2. TB Phone was found in an industrial west side of Brantford.

3. TB Truck was see by a PERSON (NOT A CAMERA) driving downtown at approx 10:10pm.

4. Based on having TB Cell phone, LE obtained a "Production Order" (warrant) to get information from the phone number that called TB to see/test drive his truck.

5. The phone that called TB was a "Burner Phone" and was only activated for 3 months, has not been active since TB Disappeared that night, was purchased with a bogus name, many calls originated from different parts of Etobicoke area.

6. From the Production Order, LE obtained the cell phone records from the Burner phone, they called all the numbers on the list, this is how they found Test Driver #1 from Etobicoke area. (HE DID NOT CONTACT THEM WITH A TIP - LE FOUND HIM)

7. First Test Drive individual was contacted in the same manner as TB, his truck was on Kijiji, he was very suspicious as he is in an industrial area and the 2 suspects walked up on foot, no vehicle and his Truck was NOT a pleasure vehicle, it was a working type truck, newer model than TB's. LE believes and stated that this Test Drive individual is a very large man and LE said he thinks this man would have been able to overpower both suspects and this may be why he was left.

8. First Test Drive individual said suspect #1 had on a SHORT SLEEVE ORANGE SHIRT, he observed several tattoos but, the word "AMBITION" was the only one he could remember and gave description. SB said it was an orange long sleeve shirt when he came to her house, the size, age and other parts of the description match.

9. Description of 2nd suspect was the same between the witnesses (1st Test Drive and SB)

9. NO VEHICLE was seen in either test drive to have brought the Suspects to either test drive... but, LE presumed there was a 2nd vehicle at the TB residence.

10. LE confirmed TALLER SUSPECT drove the Test Drive Vehicle in both test drives.

LE said NO MOTIVE but, very unique case.

***** THIS VIDEO RELEASE WAS BEFORE TB BEING CONFIRMED DEAD *****

After TB was found deceased... LE stated that TB was targeted for the TRUCK, NOT his personage.

Source: http://youtu.be/-QQvNrsjgBk


CAN WE ALL WORK WITH THIS INFORMATION PLEASE THANK YOU!

Thank you Niagaraelle for reposting this link! I'm sure it's been in conversation here already...but on getting a refresher on the Toronto Ram owners experience from LE, with the configuration of where the suspects were sitting...Suspect 1 driving...Suspect 2 behind the owner..(strange arrangement, because you would think the second one would sit behind the driver so he could have face to face communication with the owner) There is a possibility that Toronto Ram man was suppose to be the kill, but suspect 2 couldn't do it. Usually, when people are stealing cars, they don't want the owner anywhere around...but if the car is the bonus to the kill...makes all the sense in the world.
Observance: Toronto Ram sounds like it was in the daytime. How close was it to DM's properties? If Suspect 2 was sitting directly behind the passenger...what method of disabling the owner in the car could be used in broad daylight? People would notice someone slumped in the passenger seat...no? That would draw attention to them. Where did they go on their test drive? Was it in the direction of one of DM's properties..or the 401? Size apparently mattered..but why? If there was a knife or gun to the side..size wouldn't matter. Were they concerned Toronto Ram would start beating on them before they could do anything to him? There's no mention of what they were doing to make Toronto Ram suspicious. I think that's an important piece of information. Also if DM was into producing *advertiser censored*..and his employees were into assisting.. there is a much uglier side to *advertiser censored*...and now I'm wondering if Toronto Ram owner just wasn't what they were looking for.

 

[NiagaraElle]

do you mean incinerator? An exterminator is someone you call to get rid of critters.

Yes, you are correct... slip of the keyboard lol!!

(ERROR WAS --> The incinerator is called "The Exterminator", hope that helps)

(thanks for the correction)

 

[matou]

In addition to finding the burned remains of Bosma last week, police tell CBC News they have also discovered other remains on that property. Forensics investigators are now working to determine whether those remains are human or animal.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2013/05/19/toronto-millard-remains-discovered.html

 

[Kelannsha]

I have said it before and ExileRed and I had similar theories.....but i still cant believe that LE doesnt know who suspect 2 is at this point...I wouldnt be surprised if the additional remains are his.

 

[ExiledRed]

There would have to be a food source for vermin to be attracted to the barn and if all there is is composted straw and dung...maybe you'd have field mice, but anything bigger would travel down the road to a farm where there is animal feed to get into

My last home had an attic full of squirrels. There was no food in the attic.

 

[ArianeEmory]

The incinerator is called "The Exterminator", hope that helps

Haha. It doesn't.

(Someone already replied it's called The Eliminator. Needless to say you all have us city folks fully confused now.)