Laura Babcock Murder Trial - *GUILTY*

[Stumper]

This 3rd trial is very important to me as someone who worked with Wayne many years ago and considered him a personal friend. And, I suspect to it is super important to DM and Rabbit as well, as DM’s inheritance is tied directly to its result. I don’t think that it was by accident that DM put tremendous effort to have that trail ahead of the LB trail, or that he planned to go the LB trail by himself but has always planned to have expensive representation for his dads trail. There is a lot at stake for many party’s in the final chapter of this sick story.

 

[ABro]

This 3rd trial is very important to me as someone who worked with Wayne many years ago and considered him a personal friend. And, I suspect to it is super important to DM and Rabbit as well, as DM’s inheritance is tied directly to its result. I don’t think that it was by accident that DM put tremendous effort to have that trail ahead of the LB trail, or that he planned to go the LB trail by himself but has always planned to have expensive representation for his dads trail. There is a lot at stake for many party’s in the final chapter of this sick story.

I see no way this trial won't go ahead. The Crown wants it. And, as you note, Millard seems to want it -- so much so that he pushed to have the trial for his father's death held before Laura's murder trial.

The reporter who wrote that article does not appear to know this case nor do the lawyers she quoted.

Not to mention that a preliminary hearing has already been held.

 

[Georgeo]

ABro, will you be writing another book? After the third trial? Just curious as so many things were under pub ban after TB trial was over. Thx

 

[winter2017]

I see no way this trial won't go ahead. The Crown wants it. And, as you note, Millard seems to want it -- so much so that he pushed to have the trial for his father's death held before Laura's murder trial.

The reporter who wrote that article does not appear to know this case nor do the lawyers she quoted.eyNot to mention that a preliminary hearing has already been held.

IF they charged him with the murder of the father I doubt they would do it without strong evidence and we have already seen from both trials that there was a mountain of evidence to convict and so I am 99.9% sure it is the same with the father. DM should just plead guilty and spare the taxpayer more big cost, but he would not do that because he is such an ******* , murdering maniac.

 

[winter2017]

I think it should go ahead! The extended family needs closure. There is also the "Will" - if DM is found guilty, he will not inherit his father's estate. In addition, the people need to know that a would allegedly murder his own father. MOO

Do we need to know more about how depraved this animal iis ,putting people in an incinerator is proof of that.

 

[Nov2017]

During the MM cross in the LB trial, she was asked about shooting a gun. Though, I think it was not mentioned what a kind of the gun was used, yeah? Why that information was not used in the TB trial like they had a guns and they were used, not only pictures.

I was in court that day. The gun under discussion was the .32 cal revolver. Millard asked MM if she'd ever seen it before. She said yes, and there was discussion of how he'd shown it to her at the Maplegate house. Then Millard asked her if she'd ever fired it. She said no, then immediately corrected herself and said yes she had, at the farm. They'd taken it out shooting at cans etc.

Picture of gun here: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/babcock-millard-smich-murder-trial-day-19-1.4413299

 

[JPC]

I see no way this trial won't go ahead. The Crown wants it. And, as you note, Millard seems to want it -- so much so that he pushed to have the trial for his father's death held before Laura's murder trial.

The reporter who wrote that article does not appear to know this case nor do the lawyers she quoted.

Not to mention that a preliminary hearing has already been held.

What a strange article. Is the journalist suggesting that as tax payers would be better served by NOT prosecuting DM for murder because he was already convicted of murdering 2 others? Lets just write off WM's civil rights and the laws that govern our society in the spirit of fiscal responsibility?.? Are they suggesting that the law is arbitrary and we can just pick and choose that I even a murder with multiple convictions won't go through the trial process? This is so ridiculous that I can't believe that it was published.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[JPC]

Did SS testify to seeing ash or bone in the incinerator? I don’t recall that :thinking: These reporters need to get things straight or don’t write about something they don’t know about!

The best part of this article was when a commenter referred to DM as 'Sling Blade'. Made sense with that lopsided grin.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[tmar]

As Jury were not unanimous with MS, I am worried Judge Code, may not give MS consecutive sentencing.

 

[musicaljoke]

As Jury were not unanimous with MS, I am worried Judge Code, may not give MS consecutive sentencing.

The jury either supported consecutive sentencing, or had no opinion. No jury member voted for a concurrent sentence.

If the judge sentences MS to a concurrent life sentence, then it would suggest to me that the judge believes MS is innocent, not that the judge felt compelled to issue a concurrent sentence based on the jury's vote.

Because of the predatory and violent nature of the murder, it would surprise me if MS received a concurrent sentence.

 

[Forest_Wood]

The question about recalling times and dates must be a tough one? When you think back to 2012, can you remember where you were on the night of July 3 and what you were doing, who you were with, what so-and-so was doing in the house, and so on. Then add in a bunch of drugs, and alcohol to make a memory even more spacey. I do think she knew more than what came out though.

As someone who followed the trial closely, I cannot help but feel that Smich got screwed being tried in tandem with Millard. There was a mountain of evidence against Millard and I think that there was just enough evidence to tie Smich to the disposal of the body. But I think after seeing the monster that is Dellen Millard, the jury felt comfortable convicting Smich even though his participation in the actual event was not proven. The guy was definitely not innocent, the question was how guilty was he?. Deliberations took 5 days, so one can only assume that there was at least on juror that was on the fence about him. I was disappointed that there were no questions to MM about that night. Did she hear a gunshot? Was Smich with her? Her likely answer would be "I don't remember", but how could you not remember something like that? Either she is protecting Smich or herself. It still astounds me that TD didn't ask her, although since it was never brought up by the crown, I'm not sure if he could? Maybe he could have called her as a witness for the defence?

 

[FastLikeLight]

The question about recalling times and dates must be a tough one? When you think back to 2012, can you remember where you were on the night of July 3 and what you were doing, who you were with, what so-and-so was doing in the house, and so on. Then add in a bunch of drugs, and alcohol to make a memory even more spacey. I do think she knew more than what came out though.

She was questioned after one-two years after the event. They took a lot of pictures at that time and that would refresh her memory if she has seen anything unusual - the girl (LB) seen first time, moving (in and out) a mattress, etc.

 

[FastLikeLight]

I was in court that day. The gun under discussion was the .32 cal revolver. Millard asked MM if she'd ever seen it before. She said yes, and there was discussion of how he'd shown it to her at the Maplegate house. Then Millard asked her if she'd ever fired it. She said no, then immediately corrected herself and said yes she had, at the farm. They'd taken it out shooting at cans etc.

Picture of gun here: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/babcock-millard-smich-murder-trial-day-19-1.4413299

Thnx.

One more thing about the gun. During the sentencing in the TB trial, the crown asked for DNA orders. During this trial it was said that DM DNA was found on the gun.
Does it mean that after finding DM DNA it was destroyed in the database for (maybe) privacy reasons? (As I don't think that LE waited for several years to figure out who left DNA on the gun) Though, getting it with DNA orders that enters forever in the database?

 

[NoodlesMcgee]

As Jury were not unanimous with MS, I am worried Judge Code, may not give MS consecutive sentencing.

Everything I've read makes it seem like irrelevant. People with two separate 1st degree murder convictions don't appear to get parole. I suppose the big benefit is not having victim family members have to go to parole hearings to say they disagree with it.

 

[winter2017]

Everything I've read makes it seem like irrelevant. People with two separate 1st degree murder convictions don't appear to get parole. I suppose the big benefit is not having victim family members have to go to parole hearings to say they disagree with it.

I could be wrong because I have never interacted with MS, but I do believe between DM and MS, MS has shown some remorse
I have read that while in prison he has had remorse. The people saying it could be just doing it because they supported him, or it could be real.
If he has shown remorse I don't have a problem with a concurrent sentence, he will still be in his 50's before he could get parole and both families of victims will be at the parole hearings I am sure so will not mean he would get parole.
DM obviously will get consecutive because all the jurors recommended it.

 

[winter2017]

The jury either supported consecutive sentencing, or had no opinion. No jury member voted for a concurrent sentence.

If the judge sentences MS to a concurrent life sentence, then it would suggest to me that the judge believes MS is innocent, not that the judge felt compelled to issue a concurrent sentence based on the jury's vote.

I Because of the predatory and violent nature of the murder, it would surprise me if MS received a concurrent sentence.

I agree that due to the violent and predatory nature of crimes that he willl get consecutive sentence.
They I think ambushed Laura, that she was very unsuspecting when she arrived at the house and MS was there ready to help DM kill her.
They also did the same with Tim, once they got him into the truck they either shot him right away or at least had a gun held to him while they drove for MS to get into the car and then he was shot very soon after.

 

[Grey-St]

I could be wrong because I have never interacted with MS, but I do believe between DM and MS, MS has shown some remorse
I have read that while in prison he has had remorse. The people saying it could be just doing it because they supported him, or it could be real.
If he has shown remorse I don't have a problem with a concurrent sentence, he will still be in his 50's before he could get parole and both families of victims will be at the parole hearings I am sure so will not mean he would get parole.
DM obviously will get consecutive because all the jurors recommended it.

I whole heartedly disagree. We have not heard one iota of evidence to suggest MS is remorseful. He has flat out denied having any ounce of involvement in LB's murder or incineration. He has stated through TD that they were burning a deer. He refutes that LB is even dead. He couldn't be further from remorse.

Care to elaborate on why you feel this way?

 

[winter2017]

I whole heartedly disagree. We have not heard one iota of evidence to suggest MS is remorseful. He has flat out denied having any once of involvement in LB's murder or incineration. He has stated through TD that they were burning a deer. He refutes that LB is even dead. He couldn't be further from remorse.
asCare to elaborate on why you feel this way?

I was going by things I have read , and that he is doing very badly in prison.
It is true that is not proof of his remorse.
Maybe with more time he spends in prison and free from drugs he will recognize his part of the crimes. I think he is more capable to come to the realization of his responsibility in the murderers.
The judge did say to DM that his involvement was a lot more serious from MS. The bad part of MS is that he is a follower and so if he associates with the wrong people he can be persuaded to commit crimes.

 

[CJPRINCESS]

I could be wrong because I have never interacted with MS, but I do believe between DM and MS, MS has shown some remorse
I have read that while in prison he has had remorse. The people saying it could be just doing it because they supported him, or it could be real.
If he has shown remorse I don't have a problem with a concurrent sentence, he will still be in his 50's before he could get parole and both families of victims will be at the parole hearings I am sure so will not mean he would get parole.
DM obviously will get consecutive because all the jurors recommended it.

I whole heartedly disagree. We have not heard one iota of evidence to suggest MS is remorseful. He has flat out denied having any once of involvement in LB's murder or incineration. He has stated through TD that they were burning a deer. He refutes that LB is even dead. He couldn't be further from remorse.

Care to elaborate on why you feel this way?

I agree with Grey_st, you have to ADMIT guilt before you can show remorse. So until he/MS admits to LB and TB deaths and or the truth to what really happened...My opinion is that, he’s only showing remorse because he got CAUGHT!!

 

[Inspector_North]

I could be wrong because I have never interacted with MS, but I do believe between DM and MS, MS has shown some remorse
I have read that while in prison he has had remorse. The people saying it could be just doing it because they supported him, or it could be real.
If he has shown remorse I don't have a problem with a concurrent sentence, he will still be in his 50's before he could get parole and both families of victims will be at the parole hearings I am sure so will not mean he would get parole.
DM obviously will get consecutive because all the jurors recommended it.

Good for MS! He will have at least 21 more years to prove his remorse to a parole board. Although he can expect the Bosma's to be providing an impact statement.

From what I have observed, MS is remorseful for being caught. His performance on the stand during the TB trial was that of someone who put on a good act about not wanting to go near the Eliminator. Yeah sure! MOO