Laura Babcock Murder Trial - *GUILTY*

[YYC Lady]

True. He’s a household name now to those who followed the trials.

There was a tweet post verdict that said this was TD's last case, made it sound like he was retiring. I'll have to try and find the link, I believe one of the reporters covering the trial retweeted it.

 

[mimimic]

!Right!

Anyone else curious if AM ever tried texting her? I’m guessing not.

 

[JuneBug67]

Yes! Constrained is a good word to use regarding that. Finding out they made an agreement was disappointing.

It was. But maybe the only alternative was a cutthroat defence with the spectacle of Millard cross examining Smich and the jury throwing up its collective hands and saying *advertiser censored** both of these cretins, I can’t be arsed to figure out who is lying. I suppose an agreement was the only chance to sidestep that, with a weak eventual argument being all that was left.

 

[Maple1]

Maybe he was constrained by the realities of conducting a defence in a co-accused situation, but it really seemed to me like TD phoned it in a bit in this case. Arguing that the incinerator was for garbage and that they burned a deer carcass was just such an obviously doomed approach.

Does anyone know if we will have the rap lyrics released that TD must of gotten suppresed in pre or during the trial. I remember reading there were more "verses" to the MS rap.
Thanks to everyone for all the great information.

 

[CJPRINCESS]

Does anyone know if we will have the rap lyrics released that TD must of gotten suppresed in pre or during the trial. I remember reading there were more "verses" to the MS rap.
Thanks to everyone for all the great information.

Hopefully the rest of it comes out. The crown didn’t use it so it must not have been useful to their case. I’m thinking if it was argued out, we probably would have seen it by now. Well you’d so think anyways.

 

[tommyR]

Appears it is full speed ahead for the WM trial but I wish the Crown would simply let it pass.
For one thing another trial will cost the taxpayers of Ontario at least a couple million dollars.
And like the LB trial, DM would likely be permitted to unfreeze close to a million in family funds for his defence. Money that, if you ask me, would be far better going to the Bosma's in their wrongful death suit.
And even IF the Crown wins the case and DM does do a 50 year consecutive sentence for TB + LB, he would be around 80-years-old when the WM 25 kicks in.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

I knew I shouldn't of clicked on it. :gaah: LOL.

The comment section was riddled with making this political. I hope things settle for our neighbors in the near future.

I shouldn’t have clicked either, LOL. Same as with the Daily Mail article.

And ohhhhhhh my ... I couldn’t agree with you more re your last comment. It has been driving me insane for ages now how the vast majority of comments in U.S. newspaper articles, etc., relate every single non-political occurrence in our world to politics. I see it a fair amount in Canada now too, and I have no idea how anyone can spin everything into political nonsense. It really dismays me. Rant over, lol! [emoji6]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

Why would other criminals want to hire TD? He didn’t seem to do much of anything. He failed to get his client a lesser verdict in both trials, and he even tried to delay the sentencing date due to an issue with legal aid. Money was his primary concern, when all was said and done.

I respectfully disagree. I have a lot of respect for TD and his skills as a lawyer.

How can a lawyer be blamed for failing to get a lesser verdict? Lawyers’ services don’t come with a guarantee. They are there to handle matters of law.

IMO, TD did everything he possibly could for MS, legally speaking. MS committed atrocious acts, and because there was a wealth of evidence to support that, what could TD do about it, other than make sure that MS had a fair trial?

I know that I don’t possess the requisite knowledge or abstract thinking skills to properly conclude feasible possibilities, but I sure can’t think of ANY alternate defence that would have succeeded in the jury NOT finding MS guilty of M1.

Would love to hear any ideas about an alternate defence from you and other WSers.





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

I'm just going to do my mental health solid, and not open this link.

🤣[emoji6] Loved this. You are soooooo wise!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

Shooooot!!! ALL ALONG these trials I have never scrolled down farther than the article it's self, to see a comment section!!!!!! DAMN.

It"s just like when i visited Toronto years ago, on and off. I was to afraid to pop up from the underground shopping path connected to the hotel I stayed at. I guess I felt safer wondering around and trying to remember the way to go. It took soooo long to get to the mall that was connected. After a few years I finally did it and wow what a short walk! DAMN!

This made me laugh so hard!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[jash]

I just read the below article about the letter smuggling. I don't for a moment believe DP's claim that he has "never done anything ethically wrong or been involved" however, my guess is there is no evidence that DP knew the letters were for CN, and it seems DP delivered them to MB. Hypothetically, DM could have told DP the letters were for his mother, or for her to pass on to other people who were not on the no-contact list.

https://www.thespec.com/news-story/8001614-how-did-millard-s-letters-to-girlfriend-get-out-of-jail-/

I thought this was really interesting...

Smich's lawyers wanted the transmission of the letters to be part of the Bosma case to try to show Millard's manipulation ability, court documents say. The judge eventually ruled against that.

It was a good strategy. If DM can convince an officer of the court to act illegally/unethically, then what chance did my poor, impressionable client have.

Amazing - for once DM has nothing to say. I wonder if DP waived some of his fees in exchange for MB's silence.

When asked by The Canadian Press about how he got the letters to Noudga, Millard replied in a written statement that he was not available for comment.

Noudga, who was arrested on April 10, 2014 and charged with accessory after the fact to murder, told police she received Millard's letters "from his mom who got them from Deepak," according to court documents. She later pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of obstructing justice.

Noudga, who now lives in Poland, didn't return requests for comment.

Hamilton police tried to interview Millard's mother, Madeleine Burns, but she refused to talk, court documents say.

 

[clefk27]

Appears it is full speed ahead for the WM trial but I wish the Crown would simply let it pass.
For one thing another trial will cost the taxpayers of Ontario at least a couple million dollars.
And like the LB trial, DM would likely be permitted to unfreeze close to a million in family funds for his defence. Money that, if you ask me, would be far better going to the Bosma's in their wrongful death suit.
And even IF the Crown wins the case and DM does do a 50 year consecutive sentence for TB + LB, he would be around 80-years-old when the WM 25 kicks in.

If it cost him a $million to defend himself in the LB trial, then this guy’s gotta lower his rates...just saying

 

[ABro]

I respectfully disagree. I have a lot of respect for TD and his skills as a lawyer.

How can a lawyer be blamed for failing to get a lesser verdict? Lawyers’ services don’t come with a guarantee. They are there to handle matters of law.

IMO, TD did everything he possibly could for MS, legally speaking. MS committed atrocious acts, and because there was a wealth of evidence to support that, what could TD do about it, other than make sure that MS had a fair trial?

I know that I don’t possess the requisite knowledge or abstract thinking skills to properly conclude feasible possibilities, but I sure can’t think of ANY alternate defence that would have succeeded in the jury NOT finding MS guilty of M1.

Would love to hear any ideas about an alternate defence from you and other WSers.





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Exactly this. TD had the right strategy for this case. Lie low. Don't call attention to yourself and your client.

Any attempt to explain Smich's actions would have just dug the hole deeper. There is no way to explain why your client is smiling in front of the Eliminator. And anyone thinks there is, is seriously not thinking it through. The more you talk the worse it gets.

Given how many days the jury was out and the numbers who didn't recommend a consecutive sentence for Smich, I'd say TD did a pretty good job with a mountain of evidence against his client, whose case could only look "good" next to Millard's.

As for fame, Dungey is coming up on 80. This was his last trial. He said he won't be going near another courthouse after it's done.

 

[ABro]

Anyone else curious if AM ever tried texting her? I’m guessing not.

I'm guessing he did.

 

[ABro]

Appears it is full speed ahead for the WM trial but I wish the Crown would simply let it pass.
For one thing another trial will cost the taxpayers of Ontario at least a couple million dollars.
And like the LB trial, DM would likely be permitted to unfreeze close to a million in family funds for his defence. Money that, if you ask me, would be far better going to the Bosma's in their wrongful death suit.
And even IF the Crown wins the case and DM does do a 50 year consecutive sentence for TB + LB, he would be around 80-years-old when the WM 25 kicks in.

Wayne Millard's money can't just be given to the victims of his son's crimes.

Among other things, the trial is important because Dellen can't inherit if he's found guilty. If Wayne did not designate an heir in the case his son, for some reason, could not inherit, there is a designated line of succession to follow. The money would go to Millard relatives (not to Madeleine Burns as some assume.)

Dellen may still have substantial funds of his own without the inheritance, however.

Also, yes, our taxes do go to pay for courts -- and roads and schools and hospitals. That's how it works.

 

[clefk27]

I'm guessing he did.

I believe that DM told SL in late July, 2012 something to the effect that he wouldn’t likely be able find her so don’t bother. Code for, “she’s gone gone”, I guess. DM was loose with his language, sloppy for the criminal mastermind he made himself out to be.
Guessing that he said something similar to those close to him, AM included. It would be fascinating to see full disclosure on who tried to call or text LB after July 3. It would speak volumes as to who knew what and when.
Is such full disclosure ever revealed?

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.thestar.com/amp/news/gta/2017/10/24/a-good-guy-emerges-at-grim-trial-into-laura-babcocks-murder-dimanno.html

“He implied she’s gone,” said Lerner. “She got mixed up with the wrong people. And I should have no reasonable expectation of finding her.”

 

[JuneBug67]

I respectfully disagree. I have a lot of respect for TD and his skills as a lawyer.

How can a lawyer be blamed for failing to get a lesser verdict? Lawyers’ services don’t come with a guarantee. They are there to handle matters of law.

IMO, TD did everything he possibly could for MS, legally speaking. MS committed atrocious acts, and because there was a wealth of evidence to support that, what could TD do about it, other than make sure that MS had a fair trial?

I know that I don’t possess the requisite knowledge or abstract thinking skills to properly conclude feasible possibilities, but I sure can’t think of ANY alternate defence that would have succeeded in the jury NOT finding MS guilty of M1.

Would love to hear any ideas about an alternate defence from you and other WSers.





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I have said previously that it was remarkable to me how absent Smich was from the evidence on a July 3/4. If I were a juror I think I would have been more inclined to perceive reasonable doubt if Dungey had only hammered on that, over and over, in as many ways as he could. The weak, obvious mistruths about garbage and deer carcasses can only have served to make the jury think he must then be guilty if that’s what Smich’s team was asking them to believe.

Who knows what might have happened if he tacitly acknowledged Laura’s death and incineration, but hammed on the idea that his client did not know of a specific plan for Laura and only learned about her death after it happened, at which time he helped Millard cover it up.

 

[Inspector_North]

Most local folks I discuss this case with believe that an M1 conviction in Canada is 25 years. And articles like the link below help spread that assumption.

http://www.chch.com/situations-dellen-millard-mark-smich/


M1 is a life sentence, with an eligibility for parole only starting after serving 25 years. I believe they can apply for a "faint hope clause", a statutory provision that if approved would allow them a parole hearing after 15 years. It's difficult to get approval, especially in an M1 conviction from what I understand.

I have no idea how a parole hearing weighs the crime to the behavour, redemption, etc., exhibited during incarceration, but IMO, these two will not win approval for parole after 25 years, even if the Judge chooses concurrent.

Not sure about MS, but I don't see DM ever taking responsibility for his actions in these crimes, and I believe that is something that is evaluated at a parole hearing. But there is always the danger of him putting on an "act" to tell the board what they want to hear. MOO

The lawyer in the article also mentions the "dangerous offender" designation as a possible move to ensure DM remains behind bars. That may have been true before Canada changed the sentencing. We now have "consecutive" sentencing to deal with serial horrendous crimes. Dangerous offender is more suited for crimes that have relatively short sentence, but the offender most likely will still be a menace to society after serving, like Shayne Lund .

 

[JuneBug67]

Most local folks I discuss this case with believe that an M1 conviction in Canada is 25 years. And articles like the link below help spread that assumption.

http://www.chch.com/situations-dellen-millard-mark-smich/


M1 is a life sentence, with an eligibility for parole only starting after serving 25 years. I believe they can apply for a "faint hope clause", a statutory provision that if approved would allow them a parole hearing after 15 years. It's difficult to get approval, especially in an M1 conviction from what I understand.

I have no idea how a parole hearing weighs the crime to the behavour, redemption, etc., exhibited during incarceration, but IMO, these two will not win approval for parole after 25 years, even if the Judge chooses concurrent.

Not sure about MS, but I don't see DM ever taking responsibility for his actions in these crimes, and I believe that is something that is evaluated at a parole hearing. But there is always the danger of him putting on an "act" to tell the board what they want to hear. MOO

The Faint Hope clause is now gone courtesy of the Stephen Harper government. I think that’s regrettable because it was there to encourage good behaviour and efforts towards rehabilitation, which was good for the safety of both inmates and prison staff.

With these new guidelines I suppose a concurrent sentence is the new Faint Hope clause in a relative sense.

 

[Inspector_North]

The Faint Hope clause is now gone courtesy of the Stephen Harper government. I think that’s regrettable because it was there to encourage good behaviour and efforts towards rehabilitation, which was good for the safety of both inmates and prison staff.

With these new guidelines I suppose a concurrent sentence is the new Faint Hope clause in a relative sense.

Intersting!

That is good news when applied to these two.

Thanks.