Laura Babcock Murder Trial 11.22.17 - Day 20

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
marianne boucher‏
@CityCourtsTO
1m1 minute ago
More
Millard: You assumed I was having sex w Babcock because of all the other relationships I was having w woman.
Andrew agrees, he didn't know.
But this contradicts what he implied earlier, that if he had killed LB he would have told AM.
 
marianne boucher‏
@CityCourtsTO
5m5 minutes ago
More
Millard showing photo of guys on a jeep.
Millard photoshopped his friend, who took the photo, back into the image.
Says it took just mins.

marianne boucher‏
@CityCourtsTO
16s16 seconds ago
More
Seeing photo of Andrew who appears to have several "realistic" injuries.
A large gash in his side.
Michalski: Millard did the makeup.


Millard shows more photos of him and Michalski, more of them posing next to vehicles.

Now he shows one of Smich, in Millard's basement. Michalski agrees that's Smich.

Now we see Michalski with several injuries, Millard explains it was Halloween make up - we heard earlier he took a course in make up artistry.

A photo of two vehicles in a driveway. "It's a Jeep I bought for Jennifer. I never bought a vehicle for Christina. Do you recall any gifts I bought for Christina?"

Michalski answers, "No."

by Shannon Martin 11:46 AM

Millard asks for the morning recess to review his notes. He thinks he's done.

We're back in 20 minutes.
by Shannon Martin 11:47 AM
 
With respect, thank you for that side of the coin.
I thought, maybe just maybe she would have "grown a little" and turned a new leaf. Had a little more respect for herself and those negatively affected by these events.
I was thinking as a person with a true moral compass. Forgot for a moment that not everyone values human life as most.


Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Hahaha, no no no no.
 
I hope the jury sees DM for the sycophant he is. AM knows darn well what DM wrote about him to CN, but still goes along with the act.

MS was not a loner, but DM's brother he never had. They loved each other according to their texts. AM was still work in progress when the murders took place. He even texted AM about not being sure if AM was ready for the methods DM had in mind for taking things from the source. MOO
 
We will never know but I don't believe CN is the real reason LB is gone. Moo

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

Agreed, just like TB wasn’t killed for the truck. I believe that these people were killed because DM liked the power and control of killing people and the belief that he was untouchable when he didn’t get caught.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Purposely trying to put everyone to sleep to show them there is nothing to see here. imo
 
He's a moron.

A defendant in a murder trial asks his best friend on the stand "If I killed her you would have known right?"

And that's his defense?

Dumbass.
 
Surprised that the judge allowed the picture of WM's gun licence and reference to DM mourning being presented or that the Crown did not object.
 
This was exactly my thoughts as well. He can do whatever he wants. She texts a guy it's a big deal.

I don't believe he killed Laura for CN. I believe he did it for him.
I still wonder if she was pregnant or lied to him or blackmailed in some way and he decided to eliminate her.

We will never know but I don't believe CN is the real reason LB is gone. Moo

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk

Oh, I certainly agree that DM killed LB for himself. Everything he does is for his own personal benefit, it's how narcissists function. They are unable to form any real attachment to others, so this was not for CN. But they also need to elicit control in every situation... LB stated to threaten that control, by talking to CN, and she had to be dealt with.
 
marianne boucher‏
@CityCourtsTO
5m5 minutes ago
More
Millard showing photo of guys on a jeep.
Millard photoshopped his friend, who took the photo, back into the image.
Says it took just mins.



So Millard photoshopped his friend into the picture. Any others photoshopped?
What else did he photoshop or manipulate to suit his own agenda?
I still find it very very interesting that NONE of these pictures include Millard only Smich and he is likely the one taking them. I don't feel MS is innocent but it feels rather "set up" or follows his agenda IMO

He is a manipulator.

So we have the following:
1. The video of the rap. MS and MM are in it
2. Pics of MS with rake in front of the Eliminator
3. Pic of MS welding the trailer
4. Video of dog with slippers and MS talking in the background
5. Pic of MS by the Eliminator

All MOO




Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk
 
Agreed, just like TB wasn’t killed for the truck. I believe that these people were killed because DM liked the power and control of killing people and the belief that he was untouchable when he didn’t get caught.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is why I don't understand why the crown brings up flimsy motives. In both trials they've brought up motives that were questionable and easy enough to reasonably doubt.

I get they don't have to prove motive but why give the defense a chance to disprove something they don't have to provide.
 
I wonder why the letters haven't been presented in court?

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk
 
My thoughts - DM is a Narcissist. His sense of entitlement is beyond comprehension. This leaves him wanting what he wants and believing he deserves it. People hold value as long as they are functioning as he needs them to function- meeting his every want. When someone stops doing this, they become disposable to him and further if someone actually gets in the way of DM's wants, he was going to manage it and take care of it. If someone challenges a true narcissist, it threatens their grandiose sense of self and identity and would risk vulnerability which is intolerable. LB stopped being useful to DM and she wouldn't just go away on her own. JMO

I wonder if DM realises he is helping MS get off with all his 'me, me, me'. Leaving MS to sit unnoticed in the corner like a little mouse. Dungee must be loving it!
 
Surprised that the judge allowed the picture of WM's gun licence and reference to DM mourning being presented or that the Crown did not object.


With DM bringing this up will the Crown be able to recross on issues relating to his Dad now?
 
bbm

I don't know how AM said this without laughing out loud!

And I guess AM didn't laugh out loud as I did at DM's bloated Renaissance man self-description:

Millard says, "I"m a chef, I'm a helicopter pilot. I worked in the video game industry for a short period of time. I took make up artistry - specifically for Halloween, faking injuries. When someone tries to pin down my background story, they will get a number of different answers."
Michalski answers, "yes."

All MOO

Same Here...I was sitting in DR office and Literally LOL when I read this..OMG
 
If I understood the information, the crown has only 2 more witnessses who “won’t take much time”....so I don’t think CN will take the stand. So many loose ends and unanswered questions for me in this trial....i’m Hoping the court reporting has just been selective and the jury has a more clear view of what happened to Laura. MOO
 
Agreed, just like TB wasn’t killed for the truck. I believe that these people were killed because DM liked the power and control of killing people and the belief that he was untouchable when he didn’t get caught.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is so much that is missing from the story. The vegas/disney trip that LB bragged about? Certainly that must have been Millard, but we have no record of any conversation about it. So I would be pretty confident in saying that they had other means of communication, whether it be in person, pay phone, burner or whatever. I feel that it was through this communication method that LB may have been using Millard's criminal involvement as a method of extortion. Possibly for money to get her escort business off the ground? I think Millard couldn't deal with her, lured her with the promise of the trip, and killed her.
 
This is why I don't understand why the crown brings up flimsy motives. In both trials they've brought up motives that were questionable and easy enough to reasonably doubt.

I get they don't have to prove motive but why give the defense a chance to disprove something they don't have to provide.

The Crown is not legally required to prove motive but juries always want to know what the motive was so the Crown has to come up with something.

I agree with you though. Why come up with a flimsy motive? IMO it would have been better to present a number of possible motives and simply admit that you don't know for sure why such a senseless crime was committed, but you can prove who did it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
213
Guests online
2,556
Total visitors
2,769

Forum statistics

Threads
603,945
Messages
18,165,663
Members
231,896
Latest member
localghost
Back
Top