Problem is you guys are writing Dell off based on the TB trial. There is a very strong chace he's innocent. You guys need to detach yourselves from the past. Hopefully the jury is not like the posters here. Every crime needs to be judged separately. Too much prejudice here.
It is hard not to think about the TB trial for those of us who followed that trial closely. Especially since we know the true purpose of the incinerator.
Having said that, I still think there is enough evidence here to convict DM of M1 on the Babcock trial, independent of the TB trial. I think when the Crown closes their case they will tie it together nicely for the jury. And although I agree with you that DM is a smooth talker, he did himself no favours by playing lawyer, as he made himself look like an extreme a-hole, narcissist and a sociopath. I don't think he won any sympathy from the jury. He also slipped up a lot along the way, making mistakes that did not help his case (and in some instances they hurt his defence).
He provided no evidence to suggest that the incinerator was purchased for a legitimate business opportunity. He admitted LB was dead, he implied that LB was in his car when her phone died, he lost credibility in his own witness by showing him a video of LB in which the witness said he didn't think it was LB. He failed to prove that the bones in the incinerator may have been animal bones. He talked about acquiring an illegal firearm and illegal bullets and smuggling them across the border.
As soon as the crown comes out for their closing arguments, they will poke holes in everything DM said today and they will show how some of his claims are ludicrous. Not that he had much to work with. There is overwhelming evidence against him.
He made a good effort to play lawyer, but he would have been much better off with a professional lawyer instead of going up and spending 75% of his time bragging about his past life of cars, girls and drugs.
