Laura Babcock: Dellen Millard & Mark Smich charged w/Murder in the First Degree #1

[Woodland]

Hamilton Police were on TB's missing person case within hours - which belongs on another thread for discussion of what they knew and when they knew it.

 

[Archangel7]

TB's missing person report seems very different though. LE seems to have been on the case within hours. A good thing, if you ask me, but is it possible they already had wind off something in advance?

<rsbm>

Context is everything in an investigation.

If you are an adult, and disappear mysteriously, uncharacteristically, are disabled(mentally)a peg leg won't bump you up any on the priority, criminally or under any suspicious conditions, LE will get on it quickly as a rule.(with a few exceptions mostly centering around erratic drug induced past missing behaviors.)

If a child disappears at all, the wheels turn quickly.

Adults that make their own choices(good or bad) can disappear at will, frequently do, and it isn't against the law.

Anyone can file a MPR with any LE agency, usually the local one(lowest in hierarchy) is best suited, ie local PD vs OPP if a PD is available.

TB's "missing" was very suspicious in the context of a businessman, family man, auto test drive, nothing else was seen or heard from anyone on the test ride.

LB's "disappearance" is somewhat debatable depending on the info coming from 1) the parents, 2) the boyfriend, 3) LB's friends, 4) DM's comments reported by the xbf.

Being "gone" this long sounds ominous, yet some believe the odds of life expectancy(being found alive in the future) improves with "missing" adults as time passes.

I expect much more could have been done in LB's case but apparently at the least, cursory inquiries that were made, initially turned up nothing suspicious.

Or possibly LE has their answer about LB from this current DM investigation and it's not anyone else's business, including her parents where she is.
Or yet possibly worse, with LE having satisfactory knowledge of LB's condition but no direct evidence yet to claim closure of the case.

Anyway, some possible things for consideration........

 

[Carli]

<rsbm>

Context is everything in an investigation.

If you are an adult, and disappear mysteriously, uncharacteristically, are disabled(mentally)a peg leg won't bump you up any on the priority, criminally or under any suspicious conditions, LE will get on it quickly as a rule.(with a few exceptions mostly centering around erratic drug induced past missing behaviors.)

If a child disappears at all, the wheels turn quickly.

Adults that make their own choices(good or bad) can disappear at will, frequently do, and it isn't against the law.

Anyone can file a MPR with any LE agency, usually the local one(lowest in hierarchy) is best suited, ie local PD vs OPP if a PD is available.

TB's "missing" was very suspicious in the context of a businessman, family man, auto test drive, nothing else was seen or heard from anyone on the test ride.

SBM

Excellent point regarding context. It does seem, in most instances, that context requires some time to accurately assemble. For instance, using TB as an example here, "business man", "family man" etc are titles associated with responsible adulthood. Be that as it may, I assume LE would require significant corroboration of such character traits together with something of an understanding of the status of his relationships with others, etc. before determining whether to allocate resources to a search. It's remarkable that this could be carried out within hours rather than the days, weeks, even months we've seen in other missing persons cases. I hope we can expect this kind of full and prompt response to missing persons reports in future. Many families would be saved much grief were that the case.

 

[swedie]

I've hardly read on this thread of LB and do not have time right now. But what I was wondering, has anyone touched on the theory of the possibility DM may have sold her to a sex trade industry? Maybe she is being held somewhere against her will and used as a sex slave. It wouldn't actually have to be DM, but being as there were so many calls to him, so close together, it almost seems like someone was "finalizing or setting up plans" kwim. How does someone have so much suspicious and questionable things surrounding them in the past year as DM does?! I say it's not just a coincidence in MOO.

 

[Snoofo]

I've hardly read on this thread of LB and do not have time right now. But what I was wondering, has anyone touched on the theory of the possibility DM may have sold her to a sex trade industry? Maybe she is being held somewhere against her will and used as a sex slave. It wouldn't actually have to be DM, but being as there were so many calls to him, so close together, it almost seems like someone was "finalizing or setting up plans" kwim. How does someone have so much suspicious and questionable things surrounding them in the past year as DM does?! I say it's not just a coincidence in MOO.

I dont know swedie, by SL's and others' accounts she was indeed looking for a place to stay... if she'd known DM for years and knew he had the means to help, she probably kept calling him for a reason. Did the phone records indicate how often he called LB back?

Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[swedie]

IMO that fact DM denied to SL of having no contact with LB from the get go shows he was hiding something. I understand the whole part of drugs and him not wanting to admit that, but for pity sake, if he cared at all about LB wouldn't you think he would have cooperated? Personally I myself would have gone to LE telling them what I knew about this missing young woman and cleared myself of any wrong doing. If LB was my friend I would want to help locate her. Obviously DM didn't care or was hiding something.

Lerner told 680News that he obtained Babcock’s phone records, which showed several calls between her and Millard, including the last one before she went missing.

“He finally relented and admitted that okay, it was eight calls,” Lerner said. “Then he said that Laura contacted him asking for a place to stay and asked him about drugs and he denied both of those requests.”

After Millard had been connected to the Bosma murder investigation, Lerner said the police have started to take the missing person case seriously.

http://www.680news.com/2013/05/18/u...lysis-of-two-locations-in-the-tim-bosma-case/

The original investigators tasked with finding Ms. Babcock were never aware of any relationship with Dellen Millard, Sgt. Woodhouse said.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/0...pect-dellen-millard-before-her-disappearance/

Babcock’s phone record, which revealed that she had called Millard 13 times between June 30 and July 3 of last year. The phone records show that her very last call was made to Millard on July 3.
Lerner said he immediately took Babcock’s phone records to police. He said he texted and called Millard a number of times to ask him about Babcock’s calls.

Read more: http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/police-pr...suspect-missing-woman-1.1286814#ixzz2c9zVo9W7

 

[swedie]

In this video @ 1:16, you can see part of LB's phone records from July 1st to the 3rd. What I can see from it, she made 9 calls to DM and had 7 incoming calls. It does not show who the incoming calls were from but 3 were right in between numerous calls to DM. Does anyone know how to read the three columns on the right? Would that be duration reading left to right? I am believing it would be in minutes would it not? Just from this portion then, July 1st she called DM and spoke to him for 23 minutes, which is the longest duration in those three days. HTH.

Also, in the video I found something interested stated but will take it to the Dellen Millard thread.

http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/police-probe-link-between-bosma-suspect-missing-woman-1.1286814

 

[Sillybilly]

It seems DM likes to "buy time" with avoidance or controlling techniques when confronted with uncomfortable situations.

The convo at the hangar between DM and AS in November when "As the situation grew heated, Dellen suggested that they discuss their differences in private over dinner that evening." Granted, it's not professional to have heated discussions that can possibly be overheard by others, but surely there is an office or some other area at the hangar where they could have continued that same conversation in private.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/0...bosma-murder-suspect-started-to-dismantle-it/

Then we have DM apparently telling SL that he didn't wish to discuss the situation with LB in text messages, when what he subsequently told SL in person (that LB asked him for drugs and a place to stay, which requests he denied), could just as easily been said in text. IMO, smacks of DM not wanting his words in writing (i.e. the suggestion that he may have been her drug source), but preferred a conversation that could ultimately be denied.

Could be nothing, but considering the circumstances of his father's death a very short time later, combined with his contact with LB and her subsequent disappearance, seems a little hinky.

 

[swedie]

It seems DM likes to "buy time" with avoidance or controlling techniques when confronted with uncomfortable situations.

The convo at the hangar between DM and AS in November when "As the situation grew heated, Dellen suggested that they discuss their differences in private over dinner that evening." Granted, it's not professional to have heated discussions that can possibly be overheard by others, but surely there is an office or some other area at the hangar where they could have continued that same conversation in private.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/0...bosma-murder-suspect-started-to-dismantle-it/

Then we have DM apparently telling SL that he didn't wish to discuss the situation with LB in text messages, when what he subsequently told SL in person (that LB asked him for drugs and a place to stay, which requests he denied), could just as easily been said in text. IMO, smacks of DM not wanting his words in writing (i.e. the suggestion that he may have been her drug source), but preferred a conversation that could ultimately be denied.

Could be nothing, but considering the circumstances of his father's death a very short time later, combined with his contact with LB and her subsequent disappearance, seems a little hinky.

I agree SB. I thought that also some time ago. DM seemed to want to avoid anything which could be brought forward as possible evidence in his involvement in questionable circumstances. Like he was covering his hiney and his trail. Avoided texts which could be traced back to him, avoided other employees at Millardair from overhearing at least one confrontation/discussion between SA, who was trying to help get contracts. Suggesting they go out to a restaurant, suggesting a get together with SL to discuss LB as opposed to texting and maybe phone calls which could be traced. The more I think about these things, the more suspicious I get of DM. I don't think it has anything to do with professionalism on DM's part either, it all about traceable evidence. "If you have nothing to hide, hide nothing." To think these are only a couple of instances we know of. It will be quite a complex case, with a lot of witnesses, when it finally goes to trial in MOO.

 

[Snoofo]

I agree SB. I thought that also some time ago. DM seemed to want to avoid anything which could be brought forward as possible evidence in his involvement in questionable circumstances. Like he was covering his hiney and his trail. Avoided texts which could be traced back to him, avoided other employees at Millardair from overhearing at least one confrontation/discussion between SA, who was trying to help get contracts. Suggesting they go out to a restaurant, suggesting a get together with SL to discuss LB as opposed to texting and maybe phone calls which could be traced. The more I think about these things, the more suspicious I get of DM. I don't think it has anything to do with professionalism on DM's part either, it all about traceable evidence. "If you have nothing to hide, hide nothing." To think these are only a couple of instances we know of. It will be quite a complex case, with a lot of witnesses, when it finally goes to trial in MOO.

A restaurant is as much, and more so, a public place as a hangar so how could that be less incriminating?
So far as meeting SL. For sure if the topic of drugs came up he wouldnt want that in a text message if the girl is missing, whether he supplied it or not. Even if it was something as harmless as weed, why would he text about a missing girl calling him for some? I wouldnt!! Would you?
If he supplied, doesnt make him her drug dealer. People often call in a favour from a friend who can get something. If MS had been trafficking in the past chances are DM could "get some".


Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[Juballee]

I agree SB. I thought that also some time ago. DM seemed to want to avoid anything which could be brought forward as possible evidence in his involvement in questionable circumstances. Like he was covering his hiney and his trail. Avoided texts which could be traced back to him, avoided other employees at Millardair from overhearing at least one confrontation/discussion between SA, who was trying to help get contracts. Suggesting they go out to a restaurant, suggesting a get together with SL to discuss LB as opposed to texting and maybe phone calls which could be traced. The more I think about these things, the more suspicious I get of DM. I don't think it has anything to do with professionalism on DM's part either, it all about traceable evidence. "If you have nothing to hide, hide nothing." To think these are only a couple of instances we know of. It will be quite a complex case, with a lot of witnesses, when it finally goes to trial in MOO.

If, as you say, he was covering his tracks for something as simple as a request for drugs, doesn't that make it all the more likely that he would try to cover his track even a little bit if he actually committed the murder of TB?

I think some posters may be forgetting that it was cleared up that DM was NOT the last person to have contact with her as SL stated. It honestly makes me wonder, if he was lying, or at the very least wrong, when he told the world that DM was the last to contact her, who are we to believe when he says he told the police about DM almost a year before, and yet the police have no record of it? Do we trust his word more than LE in this instance?

And offering to take someone out to a nice meal when they are getting heated in a discussion you want honest, concise answers from, isn't sneaky or controlling, in my opinion. I would classify that as diffusing the situation. It is a technique used in negotiations, mediations and good leadership in general, in fact I think LE use it regularly, although theirs doesn't come with a free dinner, in my recollections. It actually makes him sound like someone who can difuse potentially volatile situations, which again, makes me wonder if there was a situation that occurred that got out of hand on the test drive, I would assume he would have been the kind of person to try to difuse that situation too, in my opinion.

 

[Sillybilly]

A restaurant is as much, and more so, a public place as a hangar so how could that be less incriminating?
So far as meeting SL. For sure if the topic of drugs came up he wouldnt want that in a text message if the girl is missing, whether he supplied it or not. Even if it was something as harmless as weed, why would he text about a missing girl calling him for some? I wouldnt!! Would you?
If he supplied, doesnt make him her drug dealer. People often call in a favour from a friend who can get something. If MS had been trafficking in the past chances are DM could "get some".


Sent using Tapatalk 2

I was implying that DM's suggestion about the restaurant was NOT about privacy, but moreso about him having time to collect his thoughts and have the conversation under his control. I don't think it was about privacy at all (as I thought was clear in my post).

Dealer / supplier ... IMO, that's splitting hairs. Had he put in text exactly what he said to SL in person, there was nothing to implicate him in a crime ... paraphrased "she called looking for drugs and a place to stay, and I denied those requests". Nothing criminal to hide in that convo that couldn't have been said in a text. IMO, he was again buying time to think what to say.

 

[Snoofo]

I was implying that DM's suggestion about the restaurant was NOT about privacy, but moreso about him having time to collect his thoughts and have the conversation under his control. I don't think it was about privacy at all (as I thought was clear in my post).

Dealer / supplier ... IMO, that's splitting hairs. Had he put in text exactly what he said to SL in person, there was nothing to implicate him in a crime ... paraphrased "she called looking for drugs and a place to stay, and I denied those requests". Nothing criminal to hide in that convo that couldn't have been said in a text. IMO, he was again buying time to think what to say.

1. I had actually quoted swedie's post not yours. So I didnt misunderstand your post; you were clear IMO.

2. First MSM account from SL was that DM told her he'd veen supplying her with drugs for months. The story quickly changed so I dont know what to believe. Read the end of link. If this is what he really told him, its because he didnt want to put it in writing to incriminate himself. Why SL changed the story, who knows, but I suspect there was some good reason. And if he was supplying her for months, that might just be why she kept calling.

http://www.cp24.com/police-probe-link-between-bosma-suspect-missing-woman-1.1286890

Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[swedie]

A restaurant is as much, and more so, a public place as a hangar so how could that be less incriminating?
So far as meeting SL. For sure if the topic of drugs came up he wouldnt want that in a text message if the girl is missing, whether he supplied it or not. Even if it was something as harmless as weed, why would he text about a missing girl calling him for some? I wouldnt!! Would you?
If he supplied, doesnt make him her drug dealer. People often call in a favour from a friend who can get something. If MS had been trafficking in the past chances are DM could "get some".


Sent using Tapatalk 2

UBM Respectfully and again, read my post<modsnip>. Snipped for you to clarify. HTH.

avoided other employees at Millardair from overhearing at least one confrontation/discussion between SA,

To be technical here, employees were privy to more information and issues going on at the hangar. As the one article said, As far as Mr. Sharif and other executives at the company were concerned, Dellen and his red mohawk spelled trouble. It would be more direct and helpful in their investigation for LE to talk to Millardair employees. As opposed to figuring out restaurants DM visited to hash out issues with others. Of course unless he flew off the handle in front of patrons at a restaurant or coffee house, and started a scene, which I believe was the scenario at the hangar with AS. :moo:

BBM - Yes I would if I cared about the missing person. Matter of fact even if I didn't like the missing person I would still try to help out and not evade and lie about something as serious as a disappearance of ANYONE whether it be child, teen, adult, elderly, black, white, green, pimp or prostitue. You can be certain he was well aware LE were looking for information regarding LB. If he is innocent, why not go to LE and discuss with them what he knew? He had nothing to hide. He denied her drugs. He didn't because he knows something about her disappearance. IMHO and HTH.

 

[swedie]

If, as you say, he was covering his tracks for something as simple as a request for drugs, doesn't that make it all the more likely that he would try to cover his track even a little bit if he actually committed the murder of TB?

I think some posters may be forgetting that it was cleared up that DM was NOT the last person to have contact with her as SL stated. It honestly makes me wonder, if he was lying, or at the very least wrong, when he told the world that DM was the last to contact her, who are we to believe when he says he told the police about DM almost a year before, and yet the police have no record of it? Do we trust his word more than LE in this instance?

And offering to take someone out to a nice meal when they are getting heated in a discussion you want honest, concise answers from, isn't sneaky or controlling, in my opinion. I would classify that as diffusing the situation. It is a technique used in negotiations, mediations and good leadership in general, in fact I think LE use it regularly, although theirs doesn't come with a free dinner, in my recollections. It actually makes him sound like someone who can difuse potentially volatile situations, which again, makes me wonder if there was a situation that occurred that got out of hand on the test drive, I would assume he would have been the kind of person to try to difuse that situation too, in my opinion.

BBM Can you provide the link DM took AS out for a meal. I find it odd and amusing how everyone else is assumed to have a temper except DM himself. DM the problem solver/diffuser, who ends up being arrested for murder, claims he's innocent but cannot help LE one iota to find the perps who framed him. DM the guy who evades the investigation of a female friend. DM who had to rely on AS to drum up business for him because he's that intelligent and logical, but somehow managed to get into heated discussions with people. DM definitely does sound like he carries the spoiled brat complex along with other issues. :moo:

 

[Variant]

It seems DM likes to "buy time" with avoidance or controlling techniques when confronted with uncomfortable situations.

The convo at the hangar between DM and AS in November when "As the situation grew heated, Dellen suggested that they discuss their differences in private over dinner that evening." Granted, it's not professional to have heated discussions that can possibly be overheard by others, but surely there is an office or some other area at the hangar where they could have continued that same conversation in private.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/0...bosma-murder-suspect-started-to-dismantle-it/

Then we have DM apparently telling SL that he didn't wish to discuss the situation with LB in text messages, when what he subsequently told SL in person (that LB asked him for drugs and a place to stay, which requests he denied), could just as easily been said in text. IMO, smacks of DM not wanting his words in writing (i.e. the suggestion that he may have been her drug source), but preferred a conversation that could ultimately be denied.

Could be nothing, but considering the circumstances of his father's death a very short time later, combined with his contact with LB and her subsequent disappearance, seems a little hinky.

When I first read about the two meetings I thought they were highly indicative of a controlling personality too. I think the meetings were more about exerting control over actual or perceived adversaries than about avoiding evidence. One on one, face to face meeting allows the controlling personality to size up the adversary and work on his weaknesses without the adversary's friends or associates there to observe behaviour or diffuse control.

Why meet in a restaurant (which DM suggested/picked IMO)? If you are not sure of how powerful your adversary is or how they will react, a restaurant provides a public place with potential witnesses to control any reaction of the other against you. It also allows for diversion, conviviality as a defence, or a quick exit, again with witnesses, if need be. One on one alone in a room with the unknown other is scary to a controlling personality, unless they have already decided that the other is a controllable victim.

I work in industrial development and frequently come across controlling personalities who are valued because they can close deals. Carving an adversary out of a group meeting with a dinner invitation is a classic negotiating strategy, used by controlling personalities. I was taught to watch for this. Successful one on one negotiators are born with traits that put them on Hare's psychopathic scale well beyond "innocent dupe" or "follower". I'm not aware that any of these controlling personalities I have met are murderers but they are the ones that control others to do what they want whenever they get the chance.

DM may have learned to be a negotiator, but I think he is a natural. All of the forgoing IMO.

Hare's book Snakes In Suits: When Psychopaths Go To Work (available at Amazon) is an interesting read. One of the traits of the office psychopath pointed out in the book is avoidance of group meetings (fear of their controlling behaviour or their weaknesses being observed/revealed) and a strong preference for one on one encounters because it is much easier to work their charm.

Here is the Macleans review of the book (to keep it Canadian):

http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20060529_127516_127516

 

[Alethea Dice]

You can be certain he was well aware LE were looking for information regarding LB. If he is innocent, why not go to LE and discuss with them what he knew? He had nothing to hide. He denied her drugs. He didn't because he knows something about her disappearance. IMHO and HTH.

rsbm

How was he well aware that LE was looking for information about LB? It doesn't sound like LE did much searching or talking to people at all at the time. Or that it was widely announced that she was even missing.

JMO

 

[Alethea Dice]

BBM Can you provide the link DM took AS out for a meal. I find it odd and amusing how everyone else is assumed to have a temper except DM himself. DM the problem solver/diffuser, who ends up being arrested for murder, claims he's innocent but cannot help LE one iota to find the perps who framed him. DM the guy who evades the investigation of a female friend. DM who had to rely on AS to drum up business for him because he's that intelligent and logical, but somehow managed to get into heated discussions with people. DM definitely does sound like he carries the spoiled brat complex along with other issues. :moo:

As the situation grew heated, Dellen suggested that they discuss their differences in private over dinner that evening.

When the pair met up at a steakhouse near Toronto’s Pearson Airport, things were more relaxed.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/05/31/millard-aviation-business-in-decline-long-before-tim-bosma-murder-suspect-started-to-dismantle-it/

 

[Alethea Dice]

When I first read about the two meetings I thought they were highly indicative of a controlling personality too. I think the meetings were more about exerting control over actual or perceived adversaries than about avoiding evidence. One on one, face to face meeting allows the controlling personality to size up the adversary and work on his weaknesses without the adversary's friends or associates there to observe behaviour or diffuse control.

Why meet in a restaurant (which DM suggested/picked IMO)? If you are not sure of how powerful your adversary is or how they will react, a restaurant provides a public place with potential witnesses to control any reaction of the other against you. It also allows for diversion, conviviality as a defence, or a quick exit, again with witnesses, if need be. One on one alone in a room with the unknown other is scary to a controlling personality, unless they have already decided that the other is a controllable victim.

I work in industrial development and frequently come across controlling personalities who are valued because they can close deals. Carving an adversary out of a group meeting with a dinner invitation is a classic negotiating strategy, used by controlling personalities. I was taught to watch for this. Successful one on one negotiators are born with traits that put them on Hare's psychopathic scale well beyond "innocent dupe" or "follower". I'm not aware that any of these controlling personalities I have met are murderers but they are the ones that control others to do what they want whenever they get the chance.

DM may have learned to be a negotiator, but I think he is a natural. All of the forgoing IMO.

Hare's book Snakes In Suits: When Psychopaths Go To Work (available at Amazon) is an interesting read. One of the traits of the office psychopath pointed out in the book is avoidance of group meetings (fear of their controlling behaviour or their weaknesses being observed/revealed) and a strong preference for one on one encounters because it is much easier to work their charm.

Here is the Macleans review of the book (to keep it Canadian):

http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20060529_127516_127516

I could only wish my boss would take someone somewhere private if that someone disrespected him in front of all the other employees. It only makes the other employees uncomfortable and embarrassed.

JMO

 

[swedie]

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/05/31/millard-aviation-business-in-decline-long-before-tim-bosma-murder-suspect-started-to-dismantle-it/

Oh I read that. Probably a million time now during this forum. Nowhere does it say AS got a free meal out of DM as suggested in the post I was referring to. Very well could have been dutch treat, maybe AS paid. Nothing to indicate DM paid for AS or SL's meal or coffee your article AD. Thanks for trying though. :seeya: In one article someone claimed DM was generous with gifts and picking up their tab at restaurants, but SA does not say DM paid his way. Unless I missed that article...that is why I am asking for a link/verification. HTH and MOO