Laura Babcock Murder Trial 12.05.17 - Closing Arguments - Day 1

[NoodlesMcgee]

If Crown has a witness and doesn't call him or her, as they did in the TB case with MB, just to keep her out of the courtroom, does that mean that defense can't call them? Doesn't seem fair.

Defense can call whoever they want.

 

[ab-initio]

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.

I fear you're behaving in the accusatory way you claim other posters to be toward you when you make statements like this.


As someone who was invested in the TB trial, I have tried to look at all of the evidence presented in the LB case as someone who has no knowledge that the two accused are already convicted murderers.

I find the circumstantial evidence to be very compelling -- but one piece of evidence that I feel has not been well-reported for the public via tweets/articles is the phone pings/timeline of texts. If I were sitting on that jury, I'd be taking a long, hard look at that timeline for some clarity.

As another poster has said previously, there is no indication that MS left Maplegate during the evening hours of the 3rd/morning hours of the 4th. If there is in fact a lapse in text communique between the 2 accused during this time, and not just redacted messages/ones we aren't seeing, I feel there is strong reason to believe that MS was at Maplegate on the 3rd/4th, with MM. Especially considering these 2 aren't very mobile without DM, I can't see them having been there to bathe, leaving afterward, and returning at some point before the "Booster Juice" text. If there is a period of time that is unaccounted for with texts, I think it's fair to infer that they were speaking in person.

I'm not entirely convinced that MS had a direct hand in the actual execution of a murder, but I do believe he had knowledge of what was forthcoming.

I found DM's closing to be rather contradictory.
There's been lots of chatter about the "did not have that bag with her when she died" portion of his speech -- could he have misspoke? Sure. Perhaps he did, since the direction he took was to conclude with saying there is no direct evidence supporting she's even actually deceased.
I'm more inclined to believe it was a Freudian slip.
Referencing CN's absence did him no good. Pointing that the Crown didn't call her only emphasized, to me at least, that, hey, you didn't either ... so what's that tell you?
Some of the questions he raised regarding reasonable doubt were valid, however in the context of the case/evidence as a whole (which he urged the jury to consider, multiple times) I feel they hold little weight and merit. Not enough to raise a reasonable doubt of innocence, for me.


Do I think he did well in his representation of himself overall? Not really.

I had planned to go to court last Friday if they were sitting, but as we all know, they weren't.
Thus, basing my opinion solely on the tweets, live blogs, inferences reported on and evidence submitted -- I think he could have done better.
Claiming on a couple of occasions he hadn't enough time to prepare ... the often incorrect verbiage he used in his delivery (I laughed when he said he uses "the biggest words he can" -- no s**t; we noticed; and we also saw them used inappropriately) ... even the delivery of his closing -- you said you had 14 Chapters ... so run with that! Very clearly outline everything for your jury instead of playing Twister with your thoughts.
I don't fault him for not having the knowledge of the judicial system/conventions of the court as well as the seasoned lawyers do, but he should have made up for that in his presentation and delivery, and, I think, he fell short.



I think TD has done well in this case with MS's defense. I don't see him as an innocent party in all this, but TD has not drawn any undue attention to his client.
The incinerator/rake photo is damning, and so is the rap -- juxtaposed the rest of the evidence/timing.
I can see his closing going one of a couple of ways -- an about-face, pinning entirely on DM; feigning ignorance to even knowing her -- I can't see him admitting his client only participated in incineration ... but we won't know until we know.

While I find the judicial process and the minds of those who land themselves in these situations fascinating, I do also so badly want to believe in the goodness of people; I want to see past the flawed human condition and believe that no person among us is capable of such heinous acts against another.
But, I'm also a realist and, circumstantially, this is a strong case.

I feel that DM will be convicted of M1.
My thoughts are still in deliberation over the conviction for MS. I think it strongly depends on what TD and the Crown present as their closings.

We'll likely never know, but I do not believe the gun had any place in this case. I wouldn't be surprised to learn she died by strangulation.

 

[Tricia]

Hey Everyone,

Please remember we do not allow comments from other forums.

Thank you,
Tricia

 

[mozzagirl]

Millard, utterly clueless to the universal moral disgust that would be felt when he went after Laura's parents in that latter part. Literally clueless that any small bit of good will he might have built up would be destroyed in that instant, for a near useless point.

I was thinking that too. It takes a long time to build trust and one action or a few words to destroy it. IMO, he had no reason to bring her relationship with her parents into his closing. DM is so clueless sometimes.

IMO, LB obviously trusted and felt comfortable with her parents even if she didn't want to live at home. She left Lacey with them. That speaks volumes. I don't get along with my father and because of that, I would never trust him even for a minute to look after my animals. LB trusted the care of her beloved Lacey to her parents. That shows that their relationship isn't at all what DM is trying to say it was.

 

[redwing7225]

See? This is a great and mature reply. Thank you.

I have to admit, your posts at the beginning of the day made me question if I was to enter a tone of sarcasm.
By the end of the day (and I'm not done reading yet), my thoughts wandered to...if I had a drink for every hint of innocence regarding DM, I would've been drunk by early afternoon.
We are all entitled to our opinion and that's what makes this a great place for discussion. MOO

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

 

[mozzagirl]

I wish you guys put the bias aside and gave Dell credit. He did GREAT. First time ever acting as a lawyer? At your own murder trial nevertheless? I wish you guys had the privilege to see him in person. He was outstanding! But giving Dell any credit here is like discussing how great your new mink fur is at a PETA forum...

I, in fact, did see DM in person when I spent one morning sitting in on this trial. I listened to almost a two hour cross by DM. I left feeling like I had lost brain cells. I was not impressed by him and his "lawyer skills" in the slightest.

You aren't the only one here who has formed their opinion from seeing DM in person. There is actually quite a few WS members who have sat in on this trial.

 

[mimimic]

I enjoy how DM's trying to convey that SS testifying its possible he switched cars some day is a truth. He was driving the van the entire time.

I can't clearly follow the alleged vehicles. Sometimes it 's by names other times by colors. I don't even try on this point.

 

[Spartygirl]

Video section of the DMDTC Facebook group.

He sounds exactly like I thought he would sound.. OMG..
Thank you all for providing the trial tweets and blogs as I was stuck at work and just now tryng to catch up
And Kamille--Thank you for the ad-libs and remarks as I LOL , your words were exactly what I was thinking as I read each post

 

[ab-initio]

One thing I was hoping to get clarification on ...

DM said in closing re: the texts "about that girl/to that girl" had spanned over years ... yet we only saw the one referring to what MS said the night of the alleged incineration where they left MM in the car and "went out back."

Are there more texts we aren't seeing?
Was DM referencing something different than I thought he was?

 

[JPC]

Thanks to everyone who took the time to post tweets today. Welcome to new Sleuthers who have lurked for a while but have felt comfortable to startt to share your viewpoints. It is always nice to read new perspectives and opinions. Although we don't always see eye to eye I am interested In all POV's and respect the level of research, detail and analysis that has happened here from when I first joined back in 2013 prior to the TB trial. Like a lot of public forums (and I participate in a few) there can be some posts that are less about viewpoints and research and more about 'click bait' types of comments. At the end of the day I think that the majority of us are here to seek justice for the Babcock family and to ensure that the justice system is kept in check.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Georgeo]

His closing did him more harm than good. He should have had his sidekick lawyer do the closing for him, with what limited resources she would have to work with. This is an unwinnable case for him. The letters did him in.

Dungey ought to be interesting tomorrow. My client had no idea who was in the incinerator. He was forced to help. The grin on his face holding the rake is actually terror and fear. Lunatic Dell at it again.

 

[Oreck]

Why wouldn't it make sense if it were just a carpet??

It was said that Pedo would relieve himself on Dellen's bed.
Could it have been soiled blankets?

 

[Grey-St]

It was said that Pedo would relieve himself on Dellen's bed.
Could it have been soiled blankets?

Why would he take a picture of that?

I don't understand why anyone would take a picture of a deceased woman rolled in a tarp either, but when you consider DM psychopathy, it makes more sense than a soiled blanket. JMO.

 

[matou]

It was said that Pedo would relieve himself on Dellen's bed.
Could it have been soiled blankets?

Why would he roll them up in a cylindrical shape? To roll a spliff of soiled blankets? Soiled blankets would be placed in garbage bags, IMO. Why not use a washing machine?

 

[ab-initio]

It was said that Pedo would relieve himself on Dellen's bed.
Could it have been soiled blankets?

It could have been a number of things, surely.
But if that was the case, why not say as much?

He provided no plausible alternative for what it was.
He had his chance, and fell short.

All he did was outline what he suspected the Crown wanted the Jury to believe, and said it didn't make sense.

He needed to tell them why it didn't make sense -- the best way to do that would have been to provide a reasonable explanation to what it was.
He tried to explain away the narrative in the letters, among other things ... but not this.

 

[Oreck]

I enjoy how DM's trying to convey that SS testifying its possible he switched cars some day is a truth. He was driving the van the entire time.

I think it was in evidence that he had his Caddy at home and his dad's van was at his hanger.

 

[ABro]

It was said that Pedo would relieve himself on Dellen's bed.
Could it have been soiled blankets?

Maybe. That could definitely explain the need for a barn smell check.

Personally, I prefer a simple pet stain remover.

 

[ab-initio]

[FONT=&quot]"I believe the Crown is going to ask you to make an inference that I bought the incinerator for personal use, all part of some nefarious plan to dispose of a human body."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]"The important part of that is plan. However the incinerator ends up being used down the road is one thing. But what was its intended purpose when it was purchased?" ... from Shannon Martin's live blog

Poorly, poorly phrased. [/FONT]

 

[Obes99]

Should've used the wookie defence!
http://youtu.be/clKi92j6eLE

 

[mimimic]

It was said that Pedo would relieve himself on Dellen's bed.
Could it have been soiled blankets?

Like he said it could have been anything. I meant my my comment to go towards the other part of this post. DM's comment about how odd the order of his day was with a blue tarp along. I think if it were a normal everyday tarp with garbage in it - what would he even remember thinking about as far as order of the trip etc.?