Laura Babcock Murder Trial - *GUILTY*

[Kamille]

Ann Brocklehurst@AnnB03
10m10 minutes ago

This consecutive/concurrent issue is relatively new legal territory

"In my submission, you don't have any discretion here," says Cameron re partial consecutive. Points out talk of "totality" only happens in cases where there's a second degree conviction, challenges to legislation have been unsuccessful so far

Code says if statutory language is "less than clear" it could result in legislation being struck

"Mr. Smich has been found by 2 juries to have planned 2 separate murders...There's no path, in my submission that you can take, that he was lesser involved."

Cameron repeats again that the evidence shows Smich was not lesser involved. Code says he was involved in planning, destruction of evidence, less clear re actual murder. "That we know of," says Cameron

"In terms of his actual role, what he did on July 4, that's where there's room to argue..." says Code. "I don't know that there is," says Cameron

"I don't think you can say Mr. Millard pulled the trigger on the evidence we have...I don;t think you can make a finding that one was more involved than the other at the time of her death. We just don't know."

"In my submission they're equally responsible and should be sentenced equally," says Cameron

 

[brightii]

I hope with all my heart that these two craven, convicted killers get consecutive sentences!

If anyone, including Justice Code, might be tempted to think that there is a faint hope that if ever released when they are in their 50’s or later, that DM and MS would not then still be a threat to society, all they need to do is think of 66 year-old Bruce McArthur who allegedly killed six men (and likely many more) and all innocent victims, IMO.

IMO, when someone is proved to be a depraved, cold-blooded and heartless murderer in more than one instance, each and every conviction imposed upon such perpetrators should be sentenced separately and get consecutive sentences, and IMO, DM and MS qualify without any doubt in my mind. They both loved the thrill, the power and control of killing innocent people and incinerating their bodies. There is nothing to date that indicates that their demented motivations can be changed. To feel safe, we need to know that DM and MS will not get out of prison for a very, very long time, if ever.

It is beyond heartbreaking to revisit the horror that DM and MS viciously thrust upon Tim Bosma and Laura Babcock. As Jill Cameron stated, they were each ambushed with no chance of escaping the evil that forcefully faced them and savagely snuffed out their beautiful lives. Ever since they each met their cruel end, the paralyzing pain and crushing grief for their families is unending. There must be some form of justice for Tim and Laura, and for their loved ones left only with memories to console them, all hopes for a bright future shattered by the stark finality of death. Tim and Laura will never realize their wonderful potential to live and love fully in the safety of family and friends. Their communities and ours are forever changed by the actions of DM and MS.

I am hoping and praying that Justice Code hands out consecutive sentences for both DM and MS and delivers the justice that Tim and Laura wholeheartedly deserve! Their loved ones whose broken hearts ask for so very little are hoping at the very least to be protected from the monsters that haunt them in their sorrow, trouble them in their sleep with nightmares, and keep them imprisoned by despair – and they too deserve to see justice delivered. And all those touched by these unspeakably horrifying crimes against Tim Bosma and Laura Babcock - including us – we, too, members of the broader community seek justice. I expect justice will be delivered in this case if there is indeed any real meaning to the word.

All MOO.

 

[Kamille]

I much prefer Lisa Hepfner's tweets over Adam Carters as she goes into much more detail. jmo

Looks like she's having issues with no power in the courtroom and therefore only able to tweet on her phone now. I've picked up some of ABro's last tweets to show the discussion that is happening regarding MS. It's very interesting that Code seems to believe that he likely should not have received a 1st degree conviction on that? Was there even a lesser option?

:waitasec:

MOO

 

[Inspector_North]

Lisa Hepfner@HefCHCHNews
8m8 minutes ago

Judge wonders if he can make part of the #Smich sentence consecutive and part concurrent. Says he’s not sure he needs to decide. #LauraBabcock

I wonder if the Judge can make Millard's, Consecutive squared? MOO

 

[Kamille]

Ann Brocklehurst@AnnB03
1m1 minute ago

"You say this speculation of mine that Millard killed Babcock...is not a finding of fact, that would be speculation?" asks Code. "Yes," says Cameron

 

[Kamille]

I wonder if Judge can make Millard's, Consecutive squared? MOO

:giggle: I bet he'd like to if he could.

 

[brightii]

Thanks so much for the tweets Jasper52 and Kamille and loveisthemovement!!:cupcake::cupcake::cupcake:

 

[Jasper52]

We're now taking a ten-minute recess.
by Adam Carter 12:23 PM

 

[Kamille]

Ann Brocklehurst@AnnB03
5m5 minutes ago
There is some evidence Smich could have killed Laura at Millard's request, says Cameron. Notes Millard "big presence in courtroom, offending jury at times...They probably didn't like him very much" Asks judge to keep context in mind, doesn't mean jury found Smich less involved

Lisa Hepfner@HefCHCHNews
6m6 minutes ago
The jury got to know #Millard really well during the Babcock trial, and they probably got offended by him & disliked him, Cameron says. #Smich had a lawyer, doesn’t mean jury found him less culpable

Lisa Hepfner@HefCHCHNews
5m5 minutes ago
Now the recess. 10 mins.

 

[andreww]

Are the defence lawyers going to argue their cases today?

 

[Wondergirl]

That's crazy. His statement isn't going to impact the jury. He should be allowed to say whatever he wants about these *******s. And likely an opinion on the police investigation too.

Speculating here - likely tossed for something other than foul language. Like you say - his opinion. Which he should be allowed to voice.

 

[andreww]

I really think that Smich made a huge error in not pleading guilty on this one and coming clean about everything. In all likelihood he would have been sentenced to two concurrent 25 year sentences. Even if he had won this case, he'd still be spending 25 years in jail, by losing he's likely never going to see freedom until he's in his 70s. If he had admitted everything he'd likely be out when he was 50.

 

[andreww]

Speculating here - likely tossed for something other than foul language. Like you say - his opinion. Which he should be allowed to voice.

Not sure exactly what he said, but being the businessman that he is, I doubt that foul language was the issue. The rules for a victim impact statement seem pretty well defined in that you can only express how the crime affected you. I'm guessing that SL stepped way outside those parameters.

 

[Kamille]

Lisa Hepfner@HefCHCHNews
3m3 minutes ago

Got a better look at #Smich as I was leaving for the break... he is also unshaven & hangs head & slouches.... as if all he knew about life turned out to be wrong & he is just starting to realize this.

 

[Jasper52]

Millard's lawyer Ravin Pillay is now giving his submissions on sentencing.
by Adam Carter 12:43 PM

Pillay is arguing that Millard should serve his sentences concurrently, as opposed to the consecutive sentences the Crown is seeking. "Such a sentence is unduly harsh, and is not necessary in this case," Pillay says.
by Adam Carter 12:44 PM

Pillay says "It is in society's interest to not definitively close the door on that possibility [of parole after 25 years], and to not crush whatever hope an offender may have to one day be released."
by Adam Carter 12:46 PM

Pillay is now arguing that the facts of the Bosma case should not be considered in sentencing here.
by Adam Carter 12:47 PM

To clarify -- Pillay is arguing that an offender's hope of release shouldn't be "crushed," because that possibility is an incentive for rehabilitation.
by Adam Carter 12:49 PM

 

[Kamille]

Lisa Hepfner@HefCHCHNews
4m4 minutes ago

Pillay now up for #Millard. Client may never get out of prison, but taking away any hope he may ever be released... “unduly harsh and not necessary,” Pillay says. #Bosma #Babcock

Lisa Hepfner@HefCHCHNews
3m3 minutes ago
It’s in society’s interest to not crush the hope of a prisoner about ever getting released, Pillay argues. #Millard

Ann Brocklehurst@AnnB03
3m3 minutes ago
He's arguing that Millard is not the worst possible criminal, who should be sentenced consecutively. "It is in society's interest not to definitively close the door on him." Says this court can't consider Bosma case

Ann Brocklehurst@AnnB03
2m2 minutes ago
First up, he's noting that in other consecutive sentences (except for one in which sentence not yet been handed down) the cases were tried together. This is a legal argument

 

[Inspector_North]

To clarify -- Pillay is arguing that an offender's hope of release shouldn't be "crushed," because that possibility is an incentive for rehabilitation.
by Adam Carter 12:49 PM

Ah! But that's the point of consecutive sentence. There is no plan to rehabilitate Millard. Just house and feed the animal. MOO

 

[Wondergirl]

Lisa Hepfner@HefCHCHNews
4m4 minutes ago

Millard's incinerator was part of the plan to burn bodies, and we know this from the text messages from #Millard and #Smich, crown says. "No point going until its ready and we gotta have something with bones in it," Smich says as they're testing the incinerator. #LauraBabcock

Five days after #LauraBabcock's murder, as she lie rolled in a tarp in the barn and the incinerator was arriving, #Millard sends this text: "BBQ is the last piece of the 3500 puzzle." Plan to kill man who ended up being Tim #Bosma began then, crown says.

I am so furious at these .

The planning that went into purchasing an incinerator for their heinous plans.

HOW does 1 human - let alone 2 - get to such a despicable place in their heads?

 

[chaines]

Ann Brocklehurst@AnnB03
10m10 minutes ago

This consecutive/concurrent issue is relatively new legal territory

"In my submission, you don't have any discretion here," says Cameron re partial consecutive. Points out talk of "totality" only happens in cases where there's a second degree conviction, challenges to legislation have been unsuccessful so far

Code says if statutory language is "less than clear" it could result in legislation being struck

"Mr. Smich has been found by 2 juries to have planned 2 separate murders...There's no path, in my submission that you can take, that he was lesser involved."

Cameron repeats again that the evidence shows Smich was not lesser involved. Code says he was involved in planning, destruction of evidence, less clear re actual murder. "That we know of," says Cameron

"In terms of his actual role, what he did on July 4, that's where there's room to argue..." says Code. "I don't know that there is," says Cameron

"I don't think you can say Mr. Millard pulled the trigger on the evidence we have...I don;t think you can make a finding that one was more involved than the other at the time of her death. We just don't know."

"In my submission they're equally responsible and should be sentenced equally," says Cameron

100% with Cameron here. How is this even an issue? It's too bad the legislation doesn't make the sentence automatic consecutive with the finding of 1st degree murder. Then maybe let them (Smich and Millard) argue about why they shouldn't. It does almost seem as though Code has some disagreement with what the jury found. Wasn't this relatively new legislation brought in because public was sick of the do one murder, get one free result of concurrent sentencing? Why is Justice Code trying to circumvent this?

 

[canadiangirl]

It's always been a fine line with Victim Impact Statements. Most people would like to see them used as a vehicle for the victims to tell the convicted person just what they think of them and what they did. To release the anger that they feel towards the person who hurt them so badly. The law does not allow for this however, it only allows for the victim to express how the crime affected them and to express their extreme sadness and loss.

Personally, while I don't think they should be used to hurl insults and abuse at a convicted person who has no choice but to sit and listen, they should allow for some measure of anger towards the convicted criminal to be expressed, within reason. In some cases, the VIS as they stand now just give the convicted criminal more pleasure IMO.

MOO

I watched the Larry Nassar victim impact statements. They are much different in the US. Lots of hatred there. And rightfully so. MOO

Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk