Court Appearances and Canadian Legal Terms

[swedie]

Opinion is noted Arnie.

Presumption of innocence is what it says it is IMO, I don't believe we should be contorting the English language from its literal meaning, I presume the laws weren't made on words that could mean something else ( or were they?) JMO

In regard to the part I have put in bold type, I don't see how there can be enough evidence for everybody, if there were we would not be waiting for a trial. JMO

BBM - OH? Regardless of the evidence, if any accused person plead not guilty, then a trial would eventually be scheduled and yes there would be waiting. MOO.

And yes I meant "trial" not trail....OOOPPS.

 

[Tamarind]

BBM - OH? Regardless of the evidence, if any accused person plead not guilty, then a trail would eventually be scheduled and yes there would be waiting. MOO.

'In regard to the part I have put in bold type, I don't see how there can be enough evidence for everybody, if there were we would not be waiting for a trial. JMO'

Meaning, IF everybody were able to see that there was enough evidence to convict, we wouldn't need a trial. HTH.

Did you mean trial instead of trail?

 

[swedie]

'In regard to the part I have put in bold type, I don't see how there can be enough evidence for everybody, if there were we would not be waiting for a trial. JMO'

Meaning, IF everybody were able to see that there was enough evidence to convict, we wouldn't need a trial. HTH.

Did you mean trial instead of trail?

Still doesn't make sense IMO. As long as EVERYONE pleads not guilty, and the evidence as solid as can be on everyone involved in this case, there will still be a trial regardless. Example: RW could have plead not guilty and there would have been a trial. It is a possibility LE have solid/direct, overwhelming evidence on EVERYONE involved in this case. Time will tell. HTH and MOO.

 

[cansleuther]

Tentative start date announced for #TimBosma murder trial: Sept. 28 2015. Four months allotted for the trial. Dates will be confirmed in Jan

https://twitter.com/MollyatTheSpec/status/546062994497875969

 

[Alethea Dice]

Well, they certainly can't say they're skipping the preliminary to bring the case to trial sooner. That's more than a year after the preliminary was supposed to start. And four months seems like a very long trial.

The dates for the Bosma murder trial will be confirmed at the next assignment court on Jan. 23.

http://www.therecord.com/news-story/5215785-tentative-date-set-for-tim-bosma-murder-trial/

The eight-week preliminary hearing for Mark Smich and Dellen Millard, both charged with first degree murder, has been set to start Sept. 8, 2014. By the time that wraps up, a trial date is set (if the case is committed to trial) and a jury is selected, it will almost certainly be 2015.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4206363-bosma-murder-trial-not-until-2015/

 

[Carli]

Wouldn't you think a preliminary hearing would have had the effect of shortening the trial?

 

[Carli]

Originally Posted by redheadedgal
i have never seen such a continued determination to deflect attention off millard and / or attempt to re-direct WS threads with the mention of other cases / issues before. after so many instances one begins to think it's intentional...

Since you're replying to my post I would be very grateful if you would go ahead and state exactly what you mean. I'm not very good with riddles. Tnx in advance.

Hey. Still waiting. What's the holdup?

 

[matou]

Are the two accused being tried together? What about Noudga?

 

[Sillybilly]

There are essential and primary differences in the fundamentals of US and Canadian law and practice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate

Not quite sure how you're equating the incarceration rate in the US to the definition or origins of the presumption of innocence principle :waitasec:

Anyway, if it's a Canadian article you are looking for wrt presumption of innocence (basically meaning the prosecution has the "burden of proof" and the trier of fact, the judge and/or jury must start from that principle), that principle in both Canada and the US (both common law jurisdictions) has its origins in English common law (see English jurist, William Blackstone, and further back to Roman law and canon law > the bible):

from:
http://elawtalk.com/ultimate-guide-...-proven-guilty-mean-in-canadian-criminal-law/

How is the presumption of innocence part of Canadian law?

In the past, the presumption of innocence was an important part of the common law created by judges that was passed on to Canada from England

AFAIK, the only difference between the two countries in the above regard is that in Canada, the principle is written into our Charter [Sec 11 d) as both Althea and I have mentioned before], and although it is alluded to in sections of the US Constitution, it is not spelled out like it is in Canada.

 

[swedie]

December 19, 2014

Four months are being allotted for the high-profile Tim Bosma murder trial next fall.

Family and friends of Bosma gathered in appearance court for the announcement Friday, where his accused killers appeared on video from the jails where they are held.

The dates for the Bosma murder trial will be confirmed at the next assignment court on Jan. 23.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/52...-murder-trial/

 

[MsSherlock]

December 19, 2014

Four months are being allotted for the high-profile Tim Bosma murder trial next fall.

Family and friends of Bosma gathered in appearance court for the announcement Friday, where his accused killers appeared on video from the jails where they are held.

The dates for the Bosma murder trial will be confirmed at the next assignment court on Jan. 23.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/52...-murder-trial/

So, by the time it's finished, DM & MS will have spent almost 3 years in jail? Wow!! Perhaps DM & MS feel so solid about their case that they're "all in" at this point and willing to gamble that the "glove" won't fit or something. For some reason, I've always believed that one of them would talk, perhaps work out a deal or something-always hedging my bet that one of them didn't want to spend the rest of their life behind bars because of something the other one did. MWJ? CN? Kind of dumbfounds me to think that with all the disclosure that they must have by now, that they're not gravely concerned about the potential outcomes, especially if the evidence involves them. MOO

Extremely concerning considering their ages. What would happen if one of them entered a plea of guilty before the trial date?

 

[Arnie M]

So, by the time it's finished, DM & MS will have spent almost 3 years in jail? Wow!! Perhaps DM & MS feel so solid about their case that they're "all in" at this point and willing to gamble that the "glove" won't fit or something. For some reason, I've always believed that one of them would talk, perhaps work out a deal or something-always hedging my bet that one of them didn't want to spend the rest of their life behind bars because of something the other one did. MWJ? CN? Kind of dumbfounds me to think that with all the disclosure that they must have by now, that they're not gravely concerned about the potential outcomes, especially if the evidence involves them. MOO

Extremely concerning considering their ages. What would happen if one of them entered a plea of guilty before the trial date?

Some additional thoughts .... often "the guilty" would not object to spending 3 years in remand because it comes off their sentences as "time served" at a 3 to 1 ratio (3 years remand = 9 years served) ... but that is presuming they know they will be serving time (found guilty)

Mind you , because there are multiple murders , the sentences could be 50 & 75 years which makes "time served" mute.

 

[robynhood]

..hmmm Just thinking as I READ the last few posts( above mine )....JMHO..EVEN IF ANYONE WAS talking ...Do you really think we would hear about it?...
IMO we would not hear about them TALKING...unless anyone ADMITTED they were GUILTY...hmmm and I still feel.. IMO ..it still may not be reported as it would affect the CASE...and with these HUGE trials happening in 2015...I believe the CROWN would definitely NOT want evidence spilled out...I would be REALLY interested in to what you all feel about this ONE??????...Robynhood

 

[Juballee]

So, by the time it's finished, DM & MS will have spent almost 3 years in jail? Wow!! Perhaps DM & MS feel so solid about their case that they're "all in" at this point and willing to gamble that the "glove" won't fit or something. For some reason, I've always believed that one of them would talk, perhaps work out a deal or something-always hedging my bet that one of them didn't want to spend the rest of their life behind bars because of something the other one did. MWJ? CN? Kind of dumbfounds me to think that with all the disclosure that they must have by now, that they're not gravely concerned about the potential outcomes, especially if the evidence involves them. MOO

Extremely concerning considering their ages. What would happen if one of them entered a plea of guilty before the trial date?

Perhaps with all the disclosure they have received to date, they feel that they have a good chance of being acquitted? After all, they have seen the evidence that we're only guessing at.

Maybe that's why the crown doesn't want to have a preliminary trial, because they know it could get a lot, if not everything, thrown out if their case still is not strong enough. But surely in 3 years they will either be able to come up with a solid case, or one of the defendants will go crazy sitting in solitary and confess to something, whether they did it or not, in my opinion.

 

[Juballee]

..hmmm Just thinking as I READ the last few posts( above mine )....JMHO..EVEN IF ANYONE WAS talking ...Do you really think we would hear about it?...
IMO we would not hear about them TALKING...unless anyone ADMITTED they were GUILTY...hmmm and I still feel.. IMO ..it still may not be reported as it would affect the CASE...and with these HUGE trials happening in 2015...I believe the CROWN would definitely NOT want evidence spilled out...I would be REALLY interested in to what you all feel about this ONE??????...Robynhood

Why would the crown not want evidence spilled out? Are we holding secret trials now? What evidence could the crown have that they should have to guard, and who would they be guarding it from? According to our laws, the crown must disclose all relevant evidence to the defendants in a timely manner so that they may assist in their own defence. So the crown can't be hiding any evidence from the defendants, legally.

Are they hiding evidence from the public instead, is this what you are referring to? Because we live in a country that has public trials for a reason, to make sure that things are being done fairly and that justice is being served. Secrecy does nothing to instil confidence in the system, except perhaps to those who blindly follow whatever the government says, like lost sheep. It just makes the rest of us wonder what they have to hide, and why, in my opinion.

 

[Arnie M]

..hmmm Just thinking as I READ the last few posts( above mine )....JMHO..EVEN IF ANYONE WAS talking ...Do you really think we would hear about it?...
IMO we would not hear about them TALKING...unless anyone ADMITTED they were GUILTY...hmmm and I still feel.. IMO ..it still may not be reported as it would affect the CASE...and with these HUGE trials happening in 2015...I believe the CROWN would definitely NOT want evidence spilled out...I would be REALLY interested in to what you all feel about this ONE??????...Robynhood

I think the same ... I am sure plenty of people are "talking" .... they may not be directly involved in the crimes but have information. I find it interesting the silence from anyone who knew those guys.

 

[Juballee]

I think the same ... I am sure plenty of people are "talking" .... they may not be directly involved in the crimes but have information. I find it interesting the dead silence from anyone who knew those guys.

Do you have some sort of 'in' with the crown that you know things that we don't know? How do you know if anyone has talked or if people are remaining silent? Or are you just talking about the fact that none of DM's friends ran to the media with their stories?

 

[redheart]

So, by the time it's finished, DM & MS will have spent almost 3 years in jail? Wow!! Perhaps DM & MS feel so solid about their case that they're "all in" at this point and willing to gamble that the "glove" won't fit or something. For some reason, I've always believed that one of them would talk, perhaps work out a deal or something-always hedging my bet that one of them didn't want to spend the rest of their life behind bars because of something the other one did. MWJ? CN? Kind of dumbfounds me to think that with all the disclosure that they must have by now, that they're not gravely concerned about the potential outcomes, especially if the evidence involves them. MOO

Extremely concerning considering their ages. What would happen if one of them entered a plea of guilty before the trial date?

Maybe there's so much solid evidence to prove they both were completely involved there are no deals needed and no way to try to pin the blame on the other person.

 

[Sillybilly]

Why would the crown not want evidence spilled out? Are we holding secret trials now? What evidence could the crown have that they should have to guard, and who would they be guarding it from? According to our laws, the crown must disclose all relevant evidence to the defendants in a timely manner so that they may assist in their own defence. So the crown can't be hiding any evidence from the defendants, legally.

Are they hiding evidence from the public instead, is this what you are referring to? Because we live in a country that has public trials for a reason, to make sure that things are being done fairly and that justice is being served. Secrecy does nothing to instil confidence in the system, except perhaps to those who blindly follow whatever the government says, like lost sheep. It just makes the rest of us wonder what they have to hide, and why, in my opinion.

<bbm>

It will be a public trial ... until then, a publication ban on witness names and evidence exists for a reason (whether requested by the Crown or the defence).

Begs the question ... would you be equally concerned, have a lack of confidence in the system, if the PB had been requested by the defence?

 

[Alethea Dice]

So, by the time it's finished, DM & MS will have spent almost 3 years in jail? Wow!! Perhaps DM & MS feel so solid about their case that they're "all in" at this point and willing to gamble that the "glove" won't fit or something. For some reason, I've always believed that one of them would talk, perhaps work out a deal or something-always hedging my bet that one of them didn't want to spend the rest of their life behind bars because of something the other one did. MWJ? CN? Kind of dumbfounds me to think that with all the disclosure that they must have by now, that they're not gravely concerned about the potential outcomes, especially if the evidence involves them. MOO

Extremely concerning considering their ages. What would happen if one of them entered a plea of guilty before the trial date?

So far, it sounds like they're being tried together. If one was talking or blaming the other, I would have thought they would have requested separate trials. If one pleads guilty before the trial date, I guess only one would have a trial.

JMO