Laura Babcock Murder Trial - *GUILTY*

[inbetweendoors]

Does anyone think it is troubling that the jury is out for this long? What does this mean ?, god forbid they don't find DM guilty of M1.
They are taking longer from the Bosma trial that was months long. Is this a sign that they are not going to find DM and MS guilty of M1?

BBM

Weren't the Bosma jurors out for five days? I recall someone saying that in an earlier thread.

I disagree completely that it's "troubling" these jurors are taking "this long".
Lives are at stake here, come on.

 

[paris_paris]

BBM

Weren't the Bosma jurors out for five days? I recall someone saying that in an earlier thread.

I disagree completely that it's "troubling" these jurors are taking "this long".
Lives are at stake here, come on.

They went out on a Monday at 3:00 and came back on the Friday at 4:00.

 

[ab-initio]

BBM

Weren't the Bosma jurors out for five days? I recall someone saying that in an earlier thread.

We'd also be well-served to remember that although the majority of the 'players' are the same, this is a COMPLETELY different case than Bosma on a few levels.

Much as it seems like comparing apples to apples ... it's really not.

 

[inbetweendoors]

We'd also be well-served to remember that although the majority of the 'players' are the same, this is a COMPLETELY different case than Bosma on a few levels.

Much as it seems like comparing apples to apples ... it's really not.

My point was that the Bosma trial seemed to be a little more cut and dry in terms of evidence of guilt. This trial is all circumstantial, and the jurors have not had the benefit of discussing along the way, as we here have, so it's going to (rightfully) take time. In fact, I'd argue moreso than the Bosma deliberations.

ETA: How many (MANY) pages of discussion have we had here on WS, and we're not responsible for anyone's lives.

Eagerness for a quick verdict just comes across as bloodthirsty imo.

 

[ab-initio]

My point was that the Bosma trial seemed to be a little more cut and dry in terms of evidence of guilt. This trial is all circumstantial, and the jurors have not had the benefit of discussing along the way, as we here have, so it's going to (rightfully) take time. In fact, I'd argue moreso than the Bosma deliberations.

I understood your point, and I agree

I was using your post to piggyback my own thoughts with; an addendum to my earlier post on the topic of the length of deliberations. I think we were both answering to a post from earlier in the thread.

 

[inbetweendoors]

I understood your point, and I agree

I was using your post to piggyback my own thoughts with, an addendum to my earlier post on the topic of the length of deliberations; I think we were both answering to a post from earlier in the thread.

Ah yes, very good then I appreciate your contributions.

 

[Just4TB]

I was thinking a bit on the verdicts... here are my thoughts...

IF M1, we all know the result, (2) M1s - zero chance of parole, ever, Life behind bars.
IF M2, being that there is already an M1 conviction, likely never be paroled, Life behind bars..

So, DM gets M1 (I am certain), and whether MS is convicted of either M1 or M2, the difference is rather moot, is it not?

I am very much anticipating DM gets M1, and very much hoping that MS gets either M1 or M2.

 

[Alice Ramnit]

I'm wondering whether DM will be categorized as a Dangerous Offender? If I am not mistaken wouldn't that prevent him from ever being paroled?

 

[Just4TB]

I'm wondering whether DM will be categorized as a Dangerous Offender? If I am not mistaken wouldn't that prevent him from ever being paroled?

Unlikely. If he gets a 2nd M1, he will never be paroled, and the DO status would be irrelevant. Same logic was used for Russell Williams in the Crown not seeking Dangerous Offender status.

 

[JuneBug67]

I was thinking a bit on the verdicts... here are my thoughts...

IF M1, we all know the result, (2) M1s - zero chance of parole, ever, Life behind bars.
IF M2, being that there is already an M1 conviction, likely never be paroled, Life behind bars..

So, DM gets M1 (I am certain), and whether MS is convicted of either M1 or M2, the difference is rather moot, is it not?

I am very much anticipating DM gets M1, and very much hoping that MS gets either M1 or M2.

We can never get inside a jury's collective head, but I would be surprised at M2 because there is literally zero evidence that MS was directly involved in Laura's death. M1 could flow from the planning aspect if the jury accepts that there was a plan to kill Laura that MS was aware of, and in furtherance of that plan he helped source and test incinerators and helped dispose of Laura's remains. I can see manslaughter on the logic that MS may not have been in on a plan to kill Laura but his actions were so negligent with regard to helping with the incinerator beforehand that he should have foreseen that a person might die even without his direct involvement. And of course an acquittal is always possible as well. M2 would be the biggest head scratcher for me of all four possibilities.

 

[JuneBug67]

Unlikely. If he gets a 2nd M1, he will never be paroled, and the DO status would be irrelevant. Same logic was used for Russell Williams in the Crown not seeking Dangerous Offender status.

There would be no conviction on which to apply for dangerous offender status for either DM or MS because it doesn't apply to murder. Williams would have been eligible because he had a huge number of charges other than murder. Bernardo was eligible because of the rape charges, and he was designated a dangerous offender in lieu of prosecuting those charges.

 

[Just4TB]

We can never get inside a jury's collective head, but I would be surprised at M2 because there is literally zero evidence that MS was directly involved in Laura's death. M1 could flow from the planning aspect if the jury accepts that there was a plan to kill Laura that MS was aware of, and in furtherance of that plan he helped source and test incinerators and helped dispose of Laura's remains. I can see manslaughter on the logic that MS may not have been in on a plan to kill Laura but his actions were so negligent with regard to helping with the incinerator beforehand that he should have foreseen that a person might die even without his direct involvement. And of course an acquittal is always possible as well. M2 would be the biggest head scratcher for me of all four possibilities.

I understand... the Crown is throwing the dice... M1 or acquittal, it's all or nothing.
IMO, they would have been better off to go for AATF for MS, to lessen the probability of an acquittal.

 

[Just4TB]

There would be no conviction on which to apply for dangerous offender status for either DM or MS because it doesn't apply to murder. Williams would have been eligible because he had a huge number of charges other than murder. Bernardo was eligible because of the rape charges, and he was designated a dangerous offender in lieu of prosecuting those charges.

Thx - I did not realize that DO excludes offence of murder. But I see that below...

[FONT=&quot]Display 2: Criteria for designating a violent offender a dangerous offender[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Offence[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]752. In this Part[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][...]
"serious personal injury offence" means[/FONT]

• an indictable offence, other than high treason, treason, first degree murder or second degree murder, involving
  • the use or attempted use of violence against another person, or
  • conduct endangering or likely to endanger the life or safety of another person or inflicting or likely to inflict severe psychological damage on another person,

and for which the offender may be sentenced to imprisonment for ten years or more[FONT=&quot],[/FONT]

Source:https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2009-pcmg/index-en.aspx#a2.1.2

 

[DeaconBrodie]

We can never get inside a jury's collective head, but I would be surprised at M2 because there is literally zero evidence that MS was directly involved in Laura's death. M1 could flow from the planning aspect if the jury accepts that there was a plan to kill Laura that MS was aware of, and in furtherance of that plan he helped source and test incinerators and helped dispose of Laura's remains. I can see manslaughter on the logic that MS may not have been in on a plan to kill Laura but his actions were so negligent with regard to helping with the incinerator beforehand that he should have foreseen that a person might die even without his direct involvement. And of course an acquittal is always possible as well. M2 would be the biggest head scratcher for me of all four possibilities.

While obviously an acquittal is a possibility I just can't imagine all 12 jurors agreeing to acquit MS unless they somehow conclude that LB is still live in which case DM would have to be cited as well.

I think the best MS can realistically hope for is a hung jury.

 

[mimimic]

I understand... the Crown is throwing the dice... M1 or acquittal, it's all or nothing.
IMO, they would have been better off to go for AATF for MS, to lessen the probability of an acquittal.

OH boy...seems like such a huge gamble. sigh

 

[XFP]

I understood your point, and I agree

I was using your post to piggyback my own thoughts with; an addendum to my earlier post on the topic of the length of deliberations. I think we were both answering to a post from earlier in the thread.

Ah yes, very good then I appreciate your contributions.

Such civility. Nice!

 

[MsSherlock]

While obviously an acquittal is a possibility I just can't imagine all 12 jurors agreeing to acquit MS unless they somehow conclude that LB is still live in which case DM would have to be cited as well.

I think the best MS can realistically hope for is a hung jury.

Does anyone know if it's possible to come back with M1 for DM and a hung jury for MS?

 

[DeaconBrodie]

Does anyone know if it's possible to come back with M1 for DM and a hung jury for MS?

Definitely.

 

[JuneBug67]

While obviously an acquittal is a possibility I just can't imagine all 12 jurors agreeing to acquit MS unless they somehow conclude that LB is still live in which case DM would have to be cited as well.
I think the best MS can realistically hope for is a hung jury.

Yes - a hung jury, or the possibility of a creative compromise verdict like manslaughter.

 

[banting]

I understand... the Crown is throwing the dice... M1 or acquittal, it's all or nothing.
IMO, they would have been better off to go for AATF for MS, to lessen the probability of an acquittal.

I think that the Crown thought they had enough evidence for M1 but they could not have envisioned some of the most incriminating pieces being disallowed.