GUILTY - Wayne Millard Murder Trial - Dellen Millard Charged With Murder - #4

[Factoria]

10b?

Section 10(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention …
b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right;
Section 10(b): Right to Counsel | Charter Cases

 

[banting]

Also, the 3.7 M was a Line of Credit and would have been interest only- with interest rates at that time, WM would have been looking at approx. 14K-16K a month carrying cost. IMHO, that's pretty minor considering the size of the operation. IMO, a couple sizeable contracts would have paid that down pretty fast. The Distillery Condo would have equated to 4+ years carrying cost. MOO

The biggest cost would probably be payroll. They had 16 employees and including salary and employer EI and CPP, etc that must have run at around $1m a year. There would also be property taxes, insurance and other running costs.
There was presumably a mortgage on the condo because DM was desperately trying to get funds so that he could sell it.

 

[mimimic]

Guess Pillay thought it better to concede and look voluntary. Probably a wise choice.

 

[FastLikeLight]

Guess Pillay thought it better to concede and look voluntary. Probably a wise choice.

They probably realized that it was not a detention or an arrest. DM just came to give statements.

 

[andreww]

As far as I'm concerned the case comes down to this;

- MMs testimony, backed by receipts and phone records
- DMs Interview and his apparent lack of knowledge about the gun
- Millards DNA being found on the gun.

Millard had motive, he had opportunity, and the DNA ties him to the weapon.

However, Millard could testify that the revolver was in fact his gun and that he lied to police as he had purchased it illegally. He's still have to get over the hurdle of MM's testimony, but she wasn't exactly a solid witness and I don't know if the judge would convict based solely on what she said.

 

[paris_paris]

As far as I'm concerned the case comes down to this;

- MMs testimony, backed by receipts and phone records
- DMs Interview and his apparent lack of knowledge about the gun
- Millards DNA being found on the gun.

Millard had motive, he had opportunity, and the DNA ties him to the weapon.

However, Millard could testify that the revolver was in fact his gun and that he lied to police as he had purchased it illegally. He's still have to get over the hurdle of MM's testimony, but she wasn't exactly a solid witness and I don't know if the judge would convict based solely on what she said.

I didn't get to see the whole video. DM said in the interview he wasn't aware of the gun?
I thought I read here that he said he purchased it as a gift for WM. When did he tell LE that?

The phone number we've never seen before... I wonder how many calls/texts were on it relating to TB and LB that were kept out of those trials.

 

[Jasper52]

Heading back to the courthouse this morning as Dellen Millard’s first-degree murder trial continues. Follow along for updates.
by Adam Carter 9:16 AM

The defence spent hours yesterday fighting to have a key portion of the evidence removed from the judge’s consideration — and they’ll be doing the same today. Millard’s lawyer will be fighting to have Millard’s taped police statement kept out.
by Adam Carter 9:18 AM

We're inside the courtroom now -- just waiting for the judge for things to get underway at 10 a.m. In the meantime, you can catch up with yesterday's story:
DNA tests link Dellen Millard to alleged murder weapon in father's death

Court is now in session.
by Adam Carter 10:01 AM

Crown Ken Lockhart starting off here, saying Pillay is abandoning his 10b application. Pillay says he's conceding the voluntariness with respect to the video statement. Looks like this legal argument won't happen after all.
by Adam Carter 10:03 AM

Now there's one more agreed statement of fact -- it's about phone numbers. One is about a taxi service, another is about a pizza pizza. That will likely tie in to the testimony of Marlena Meneses.
by Adam Carter 10:03 AM

The judge says she's going to try to have a decision on yesterday's legal arguments about Det. Const. Sutherland's evidence by Friday of this week.
by Adam Carter 10:04 AM

That's it from court today. We'll be back on Friday at 10 a.m. for the judge's decision on Sutherland's evidence, if it's ready by then. I'll have more once I look at those agreed statements of fact from today.
by Adam Carter 10:10 AM

 

[Forest_Wood]

Actually what is even more telling is that there is no text from Millard to Smich telling him his dad was dead. When Millard texted Smich, how would Smich know why Millard was being interviewed by police?

Exactly! I think he must have called him earlier to let him know it was a “success” (while he was pacing outside waiting for AM?). MOO

 

[LN33]

Actually what is even more telling is that there is no text from Millard to Smich telling him his dad was dead. When Millard texted Smich, how would Smich know why Millard was being interviewed by police?

Apparently, there isn't a way to know if a message was indeed sent, and then deleted if it was overwritten.

Pillay is asking about the backups for cellphones we've been dealing with here. He's asking if the backups include messages that were deleted and then overwritten. Falconer says it's impossible to recover data that is overwritten.
by Adam Carter 10:45 AM


Falconer says he can't say how many deleted messages have been overwritten from this data.
by Adam Carter 10:47 AM

 

[CJPRINCESS]

I didn't get to see the whole video. DM said in the interview he wasn't aware of the gun?
I thought I read here that he said he purchased it as a gift for WM. When did he tell LE that?

The phone number we've never seen before... I wonder how many calls/texts were on it relating to TB and LB that were kept out of those trials.

I think that was in a news article or a previous trial? I don’t recall anything said at this trial about DM buying the gun for a gift. But I do recall that mentioned before.

In his video statement he didn’t admit to any guns belonging to himself. Just that “his dad had guns but thinks he gave them away. But there may be one downstairs in a bag” He also said “there may be a gun in the safe” LE tried to open the safe.

 

[Kamille]

Well at least that answers one of our questions. The judge WILL make a ruling on Sunderland's testimony before RP decides if he's putting on a defence.

Still can't believe he was trying to get a voluntary witness statement thrown out as a 10b violation but it appears MB was successful in making sure that hers wouldn't be entered into evidence. Unless it shows up as part of the defence. Would she be willing to get into the witness box and stand by her son knowing that would likely expose her police interview to the public as well?

MOO

 

[raffielle]

okay, just going off of memory so not completely positive but in the interview they did a pretty thorough job of informing DM all about all his rights I believe they even stated he could have legal counsel present at the very start of it. Obviously Pillay didn't want to look like a complete fool challenging this. IMO

 

[EspressoBean]

Well at least that answers one of our questions. The judge WILL make a ruling on Sunderland's testimony before RP decides if he's putting on a defence.

Still can't believe he was trying to get a voluntary witness statement thrown out as a 10b violation but it appears MB was successful in making sure that hers wouldn't be entered into evidence. Unless it shows up as part of the defence. Would she be willing to get into the witness box and stand by her son knowing that would likely expose her police interview to the public as well?

MOO

MB's willingness wouldn't matter if they needed her as a witness.

 

[EspressoBean]

My thoughts are that RP didn't have anything to contest the admissibility of the statement to police except for DM saying he was detained there. That would mean that DM would need to be called as a witness and there is no way they want that. jmo

 

[winter2017]

It is going to take 4 days for the judge to make a decision about some evidence? How long will they take to reach a verdict. I read someone say that if the evidence is not allowed DM could get acquitted.

 

[Kamille]

okay, just going off of memory so not completely positive but in the interview they did a pretty thorough job of informing DM all about all his rights I believe they even stated he could have legal counsel present at the very start of it. Obviously Pillay didn't want to look like a complete fool challenging this. IMO

Yes, they did clarify that this was a witness statement that would be recorded and that it was under oath. It wasn't the same as a statement after an arrest. It was a witness statement. They also asked him if he agreed to give the statement and he said "sure, let's do it".

Here's the video if anyone wants to rewatch it.

 

[JuneBug67]

okay, just going off of memory so not completely positive but in the interview they did a pretty thorough job of informing DM all about all his rights I believe they even stated he could have legal counsel present at the very start of it. Obviously Pillay didn't want to look like a complete fool challenging this. IMO

It may have been strategic in the sense that he felt that his challenge of the Sutherland testimony went well and he didn't want to dilute those arguments by pairing them with an obviously weak and almost certainly doomed argument about the voluntary nature of DM's statement.

 

[swedie]

They have evidence that WM was holding a business meeting and sending a business email within hours of his death. Therefore he was still actively involved in MillardAir. He also spent a number of hours on the phone talking to his new love interest and making plans for her upcoming birthday. He had already booked the day off, purchased a gift for her and seemed excited for her to receive it.

While he did like to drink in the evenings, perhaps more than he should have, he had a scare when his back went out thinking it was his liver and stopped drinking while he was laid up and taking prescription painkillers. He must have been relieved to find out it was a skeletal or muscular issue and not a problem with his organs. Seems that other than his bad back, he was pretty healthy for an overweight man of his age. Not sure why the Crown didn't try to enter his medical records...or did they? Also seems like once his back was feeling better, he went back to his nighttime drinking habit and stopped taking the prescription painkillers, at least in the evening before bed. It appears there was only alcohol in his system at the time of his death.

He gave away old guns, that he had accumulated for a specific purpose in his younger years, during a police sponsored amnesty program 2 years prior because he no longer felt he needed them or wanted them in his home. Seems like he was devoted to his cats, even building them an outdoor enclosure outside his bedroom, and didn't consider rehoming them if he was depressed and knew he might not be around much longer to take care of them.

All of this evidence does not make me believe that this man was depressed and suicidal and made a snap decision, after firing off an email and saying goodnight to his girlfriend, to get into bed, pull up the covers, get comfortable on his side with his hand tucked under his chin and then shoot himself in the eye with an illegal gun that he would have had to have found amongst his son's possessions, in the room where 2 lululemon bags were seen on the floor 6 months later. Not a place where WM would shop. And the evidence that DM sent LE to the basement of the house looking for a gun in a bag. And he asked if it was a revolver. Sounds like he had a story all prepared for that gun at the time but was never asked. So he didn't offer up any explanation for its presence in the home. Well other than to tell LE that WM had guns, which he no longer did.

They also have evidence that the gun was purchased illegally by his son 4 months prior. The same son who made a random, one time decision to spend the night on the floor of his drug dealer friend's bedroom. During this slumber party, he left for a number of hours claiming he had a date. He was carrying two phones with him and was driving his SUV when he arrived at the friend's house. He left one of the phones, his credit card for a pizza purchase and the SUV at his friend's house while the other phone called two separate cab companies to take him to the vicinity of the home where his father was found deceased, during the time frame that his father died, and then back to the home of his friend.

Add in the fact that when no one discovered his Dad's dead body and he had to go home to do so, he called his mother to come over and help him deal with responding emergency personnel after she finally called 911 over an hour after he was "found". And that as the sole heir, who just found out about his father spending the previous weekend "romantically" with his new love interest, he stood to gain everything and actively suggested to emergency responders that his father was a depressed, crippled and sad old man who probably killed himself. "He carried a great sadness with him throughout his life."

That's a LOT of circumstantial and some direct evidence. I'm sure we can come up with more and that does not include Sutherland's expert opinion that it's unlikely that WM shot himself.

MOO

Exactly! Great post Kamille.
Not to forget, and yes, I will still drive home the fact, had a thorough investigation been done at the crime scene, LE would have come to the conclusion that it was a very awkward, a nearly impossible position for someone to commit suicide, that WM was found in. No GSR found on his left hand. There are 101 other positions WM could have laid that would have been less awkward. MOO.

 

[clefk27]

It may have been strategic in the sense that he felt that his challenge of the Sutherland testimony went well and he didn't want to dilute those arguments by pairing them with an obviously weak and almost certainly doomed argument about the voluntary nature of DM's statement.

Does anyone know why it will take 3 days for the judge to determine the admissibility of the Sutherland testimony? Can the judge consult with other experts? Other judges? What are the criteria? Or does she simply research the precedents for such a challenge?
IMHO, it does not appear that Sutherland was biased. He was systematic in his analysis and admitted the shortcomings of a reconstruction done from photographs almost 2 years after the crime.
The pattern of GSR from different positions relative to the pillow seems valid enough to me MOO. It seems irrelevant whether it was a foam or down pillow. The cylinder gap analysis he provided was helpful in ascertaining the gun's position. I can't see why this testimony would be excluded. It will be interesting to hear what she says.

 

[JuneBug67]

As far as I'm concerned the case comes down to this;

- MMs testimony, backed by receipts and phone records
- DMs Interview and his apparent lack of knowledge about the gun
- Millards DNA being found on the gun.

Millard had motive, he had opportunity, and the DNA ties him to the weapon.

However, Millard could testify that the revolver was in fact his gun and that he lied to police as he had purchased it illegally. He's still have to get over the hurdle of MM's testimony, but she wasn't exactly a solid witness and I don't know if the judge would convict based solely on what she said.

DM's interview is just as important for what he didn't say about being in the home in the overnight hours. He claimed he last saw his Dad in the afternoon of the previous day and that he spent the night at Mark's. There are some pretty glaring omissions for a guy who went into significant detail about his movements between rooms, dog beds, snacks, more than five minutes and less than ten, etc.