Suspect #1: Dellen Millard *Charged* 1st Deg Murder 15 May 2013 #1

[ArianeEmory]

I think the court of public opinion got stacked against him when the burned corpse of an innocent man, Tim Bosma--leaving behind an innocent wife and an innocent baby--was found on his property, and that man's truck was found in his trailer.

I also resent the ongoing implication that we as forum posters have some potential impact on the eventual trial. The "court of public opinion" didn't get Casey Anthony convicted.

 

[Sillybilly]

Well innocent is a big word - it is quite a measure to try and measure up to. It has both legal and moral meanings. That's why lawyers prefer "not guilty", which is not the same thing. You cannot stand by as someone is killed and be innocent. You might be found not guilty of something or another but you could not be described as being innocent.

Even Stephen Truscott, wrongfully convicted, was not granted a "Declaration of Innocence":

On August 28, 2007, Truscott was acquitted of the charges. Truscott's defence team had originally asked for a declaration of factual innocence, which would mean that Truscott would be declared innocent, and not merely unable to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Although they issued the acquittal, the court said it was not in a position to declare Truscott innocent of the crime. "The appellant has not demonstrated his factual innocence," the court wrote. "At this time, and on the totality of the record, we are in no position to make a declaration of innocence

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Truscott"]Steven Truscott - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[SteveP]

I think the court of public opinion got stacked against him when the burned corpse of an innocent man, Tim Bosma--leaving behind an innocent wife and an innocent baby--was found on his property, and that man's truck was found in his trailer.

I also resent the ongoing implication that we as forum posters have some potential impact on the eventual trial. The "court of public opinion" didn't get Casey Anthony convicted.

Amen sister! I am not sure how many times it has to be said here that this is a crime discussion forum and not a courtroom.

 

[skatergirl]

The court of public opinion can and does affect jurors. This is why cases are moved from one jurisdiction to another so that jurors are not polluted by such. Jurors have to come from a position of presumed innocence in fact IMO it is the only way to go. It doesn't mean that there are not guilty parties, just that the guilty party needs to be proven by way of correct and fair procedure., which these days is not easy as we can see !

But we are all here, discussing this case and the details of it, because of the natural human instinct of curiosity, and the obvious effect something so simple as attempting to sell some posession and resulting in the death of a truly INNOCENT person has had on us all. What we discuss here, whether it is right, wrong or indifferent, will not change the outcome when this case eventually comes to trial. In such a high profile case as this, moving the trial to another jurisdiction would be most likely to occur if we were discussing it on WS or not.

 

[bessie]

On the day of his arrest, the court of public opinion or any suggestion of manipulation by the media, etc did NOT factor into his failing to talk. IMO, he could have been singing like a canary and screaming his innocence from the rooftops on Day 1.

Seems to me while SB waited in anguish for word of her husband's whereabouts, DM had several days to talk before the public had even heard his name.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Seems to me while SB waited in anguish for word of her husband's whereabouts, DM had several days to talk before the public had even heard his name.

Basically they gave him 24 hours and that was it:

Dellen Millard, the scion of a noted aviation dynasty who was arrested after a Hamilton father disappeared a week ago after joining two men offering to buy his truck on a test drive, was interrogated by police for almost 24 hours by officers desperately searching to find Tim Bosma.

During the intense questioning overnight Friday and into Saturday afternoon, Mr. Millard, 27, of Toronto, exercised his right to remain silent, said his lawyer, Deepak Paradkar.

[...]

Police did not announce an arrest until Saturday afternoon. By then, Mr. Millard had been in custody since Friday afternoon.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/05/13/dellen-millard-charged-in-case-of-missing-ontario-father-tim-bosma/

 

[serenityss]

I'm curious about the confinement issue. According to SB, TB willingly got into the truck with the other two men for the test drive. DM apparently had TB's permission to drive during the test drive. At what point would LE consider TB to be confined? Let's say DM was driving, TB in the passenger side and MS behind TB. MS could have reached over the seat and strangled TB before TB ever knew it was going to happen. That is TB may not have felt threatened until the moment he was attacked so he, himself would not have considered he was confined. If that were the case, does LE consider it confinement because TB was killed? Or do they consider it confinement because DM and MS went there with intent to do harm?

Remember, DM was charged with confinement and theft over $5000 FIRST, before TB's body was found. I believe that is why he was charged with confinement, because there was no proof yet that TB was dead, so presumably, because DM was the last person seen with him, that would have been the reasoning for the confinement charge. Then, after TB's body was found, charges were laid for murder in the 1st, which as we have seen in MSM and from LE is automatic with a forcible confinement charge being laid beforehand. MOO

 

[skatergirl]

A general question which may or may not have already been discussed here somewhere, does anyone know why DM's facebook profile is 'searchable' with the information of Oakville, when he in fact did not reside there, but MS did? Curious isn't it?

 

[Archangel7]

If DM never talks, the only thing we won't know is motive. Everything else will likely be surfaced, but he can hold on to the motive, the why. IMO

 

[Kamille]

Probably because the court of public opinion has been strategically stacked against him and DM by way of MSM both the press, the internet and by LE. I wouldn't talk either if I knew how the situation was being manipulated, and I felt I was innocent.

I don't think there is anything "strategic" by either LE or the media about the public's right to information in regards to this or any other criminal case in this country. What we do have however are court ordered publication bans on certain information that may interfere with witnesses, victims or the integrity of the evidence to ensure a fair trial. That doesn't mean that the court can ban publication of information regarding the crime and the names of the accused.

I don't believe we've been given any information in regards to actual direct or forensic evidence in this case or any potential witnesses. We know the names of the accused, how they tie into potentially being with the victim on the evening in question, where the victim's remains were found, where the victim's vehicle was found and a few other tidbits that were put out during the initial part of the investigation when LE were needing the public's assistance with tips regarding who the accused actually were. And that information is very damning for DM especially but it's not LE's fault that this evidence was found where it was. The media has right to report this information and that's what they did. If it looks bad for the accused, you can't blame LE for that. So in that regard, yes he is going to take some heat in the court of public opinion. But I have total faith in our judicial system that the jury that is chosen for him will be open to any interpretation of that evidence that the defence attorneys present. He also has the right to just tell the truth about what happened that night and not take this case to trial at all but try to plea out to best possible outcome for him. Something tells me that's not going to happen.

Other information that has gotten out was actually leaked by people who live in the vicinity of the different areas in question and they have posted information (incinerator pics come to mind) on social media. This is a different era in regards to instant information and control of such information and rather than LE "strategically" putting out information, I'm sure they would much rather some of the information from social media never gets out there. The only "strategic" information that they would want to get out via the media would be information to help them catch the perpetrator(s). This is usually done in the form of a press conference. Once that has been accomplished, they would likely prefer to remain quiet on all matters of the investigation and would prefer that the media has no rights to any further information IMO.


Here are the guidelines from the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General.

http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/pub_ban.asp

Note the first paragraph...

"The media is constitutionally entitled to publish information about court cases, but there are exceptions to this right. The court may (and frequently must) impose publication bans to protect the fairness and integrity of the case, the privacy or safety of a victim or witness, or the identity of a child or youth."

MOO

 

[Blomquist]

I don't think there is anything "strategic" by either LE or the media about the public's right to information in regards to this or any other criminal case in this country. What we do have however are court ordered publication bans on certain information that may interfere with witnesses, victims or the integrity of the evidence to ensure a fair trial. That doesn't mean that the court can ban publication of information regarding the crime and the names of the accused.

I don't believe we've been given any information in regards to actual direct or forensic evidence in this case or any potential witnesses. We know the names of the accused, how they tie into potentially being with the victim on the evening in question, where the victim's remains were found, where the victim's vehicle was found and a few other tidbits that were put out during the initial part of the investigation when LE were needing the public's assistance with tips regarding who the accused actually were. And that information is very damning for DM especially but it's not LE's fault that this evidence was found where it was. The media has right to report this information and that's what they did. If it looks bad for the accused, you can't blame LE for that. So in that regard, yes he is going to take some heat in the court of public opinion. But I have total faith in our judicial system that the jury that is chosen for him will be open to any interpretation of that evidence that the defence attorneys present. He also has the right to just tell the truth about what happened that night and not take this case to trial at all but try to plea out to best possible outcome for him. Something tells me that's not going to happen.

Other information that has gotten out was actually leaked by people who live in the vicinity of the different areas in question and they have posted information (incinerator pics come to mind) on social media. This is a different era in regards to instant information and control of such information and rather than LE "strategically" putting out information, I'm sure they would much rather some of the information from social media never gets out there. The only "strategic" information that they would want to get out via the media would be information to help them catch the perpetrator(s). This is usually done in the form of a press conference. Once that has been accomplished, they would likely prefer to remain quiet on all matters of the investigation and would prefer that the media has no rights to any further information IMO.


Here are the guidelines from the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General.

http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/pub_ban.asp

Note the first paragraph...

"The media is constitutionally entitled to publish information about court cases, but there are exceptions to this right. The court may (and frequently must) impose publication bans to protect the fairness and integrity of the case, the privacy or safety of a victim or witness, or the identity of a child or youth."

MOO

I wish I could agree with you....but I can't....fftobed:

 

[skatergirl]

I wish I could agree with you....but I can't....fftobed:

What can you not agree with, the rules that govern our society?

 

[Pink Panther]

I wish I could agree with you....but I can't....fftobed:

Nightie Night!

 

[canadiangirl]

MS has not had his whole life and family business raked over the coals as DM has...maybe this is what is evoking concern for someone who should be presumed innocent JMO

Not because someone can't but because people haven't. We all know MS sister is in the media but the focus here seems to be DM.

 

[skatergirl]

From Twitter_I am so sorry I don't know how to post a twitter link, or whatever it is on here, but...friends and neighbors of Tim Bosma are hosting a fundraising party for his family http://pic.twitter.com/EDrmJt4CRP hope that works?! For any of you Ws'ers who might be from that area!

 

[finder108]

I don't think there is anything "strategic" by either LE or the media about the public's right to information in regards to this or any other criminal case in this country. What we do have however are court ordered publication bans on certain information that may interfere with witnesses, victims or the integrity of the evidence to ensure a fair trial. That doesn't mean that the court can ban publication of information regarding the crime and the names of the accused.

I don't believe we've been given any information in regards to actual direct or forensic evidence in this case or any potential witnesses. We know the names of the accused, how they tie into potentially being with the victim on the evening in question, where the victim's remains were found, where the victim's vehicle was found and a few other tidbits that were put out during the initial part of the investigation when LE were needing the public's assistance with tips regarding who the accused actually were. And that information is very damning for DM especially but it's not LE's fault that this evidence was found where it was. The media has right to report this information and that's what they did. If it looks bad for the accused, you can't blame LE for that. So in that regard, yes he is going to take some heat in the court of public opinion. But I have total faith in our judicial system that the jury that is chosen for him will be open to any interpretation of that evidence that the defence attorneys present. He also has the right to just tell the truth about what happened that night and not take this case to trial at all but try to plea out to best possible outcome for him. Something tells me that's not going to happen.

Other information that has gotten out was actually leaked by people who live in the vicinity of the different areas in question and they have posted information (incinerator pics come to mind) on social media. This is a different era in regards to instant information and control of such information and rather than LE "strategically" putting out information, I'm sure they would much rather some of the information from social media never gets out there. The only "strategic" information that they would want to get out via the media would be information to help them catch the perpetrator(s). This is usually done in the form of a press conference. Once that has been accomplished, they would likely prefer to remain quiet on all matters of the investigation and would prefer that the media has no rights to any further information IMO.


Here are the guidelines from the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General.

http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/pub_ban.asp

Note the first paragraph...

"The media is constitutionally entitled to publish information about court cases, but there are exceptions to this right. The court may (and frequently must) impose publication bans to protect the fairness and integrity of the case, the privacy or safety of a victim or witness, or the identity of a child or youth."

MOO

What you're saying makes sense to me. But I'm in no rush to pass judgment on DM. I must admit that it's hard not to, especially since the incinerator revelation. Relatively speaking, we have few facts to go on. At the same time, in this digital age, it gets harder for people to hide things.

"The public" is always going to talk, guess, snoop, speculate, and look for answers and yes, even pass judgment, it has always been this way.

Does MSM play a role? Definitely yes. Are both sides always reported? Definitely no.

This is probably one reason why people follow trials. It's to try and get at the truth of the matter.

:rollercoaster:

 

[Shaky pi]

There's a wild speculation...they tossed him out of the truck and he died....if they had actually done so, how did his burned beyond recognition body then end up on DM's property:banghead:

Skatergirl , you dont really believe that do you ,, We ve seen some wild spectulation here , thats pretty out there , ( not pickin on you )

Heres what we here on websleuths really know . or so we think .

D M and M S walk up tims driveway may 6 , aprox 930 pm ( give/take )
the 2 suspects and tim go for a testdrive .....
gets foggy here people .
Dont know exact time but tims truck seen on security tape ,
also on tape a truck simular to D Ms truck seen behind tims truck ( hell guy next to me owns a truck like that , did a stranger on the way to wendys for a baconator happen to be behind Tims truck ) If indeed it was Tims truck , unless licence plate seen ,,its just another black dodge pick up , I live around case and can tell you thats a crap load of black dodge pickups around here ....
and 1 more thing to remember , most security footage is Black/White footage ,
and most footage is foggy at best , even if better system , its 930 pm in may , its dark ....

So next day or so , tims cell found in dead end street in west brantford industral area .

Ok cops get tip on tatoo , put to public . D M arrested , he aint sayin squat ,

search D M s property , find tims charred remains , thats all theyve said ..

On a tip they search D M s moms home , wham Tims truck found ....

M S arrested , he not sayin squat ,,......

3 or 4 th suspect still remains at large ,, over a month now , more time that goes by , more chance might not ever be caught ..

if not all suspects in custody by time of trial , theres no use going to trial .. if you were crown or defence , theres no way...

More or less thats where we stand really ....

what we dont know ....

when and how and where Tim Died .
Who killed Tim .
was that tims truck in brantford ?????
its spectulated Tim put in insinarator--no proof to us anyway
its spectualated Tim died in truck -- unless Brain matter , no proof really
No seat in truck ,, so what , who took out and when , nothing there

D Ms father killed self , who knows , highly doubt anymore will come of that..
x girlfriend disappeared , no body , she was a hooker, liked drugs, high risk life style ,, unless body found doubt anymore will come of this as well .
( people on this forum ( me included ) help stoke the the fire on these 2 items .

gamimg crap ( i play xbox and watch dexter ) so what , let it go ..

This is just my opinion , but i don think there shouldnt be alot in this post u could really argue with ..

 

[Kamille]

What you're saying makes sense to me. But I'm in no rush to pass judgment on DM. I must admit that it's hard not to, especially since the incinerator revelation. Relatively speaking, we have few facts to go on. At the same time, in this digital age, it gets harder for people to hide things.

"The public" is always going to talk, guess, snoop, speculate, and look for answers and yes, even pass judgment, it has always been this way.

Does MSM play a role? Definitely yes. Are both sides always reported? Definitely no.

This is probably one reason why people follow trials. It's to try and get at the truth of the matter.

:rollercoaster:

The accused can say anything they want to the media, either via their lawyers or by requesting an interview with a member of the media themselves. That's not likely to happen but they can do it if they want to get their "story" out there.

I'm not in any rush to judgment of DM either. I find it interesting however, that there are only 4 pages on MS and no one seems concerned that he may not get a fair trial. Or that he may have been set up. He's practically non existent in this. Not sure why? :waitasec:

MOO

 

[bessie]

snipped for focus

x girlfriend disappeared , no body , she was a hooker, liked drugs, high risk life style ,, unless body found doubt anymore will come of this as well .
( people on this forum ( me included ) help stoke the the fire on these 2 items

Then I say we need to keep stokin'.

ETA: BTW, you forgot to mention that two eyewitnesses gave matching descriptions, and that the phone used to contact TB, the Etobicoke man, and a third seller was traced to DM.

http://www.torontosun.com/2013/05/10/missing-hamilton-man-tim-bosnas-cell-phone-found-in-brantford

http://www.cp24.com/news/bosma-s-cellphone-found-police-release-new-details-on-suspects-1.1275631

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/0...ive-with-two-strange-men-and-never-came-back/

 

[THXGuru]

if they want to get their "story" out there.

There is no benefit for that. The only people who need to hear "their" story is the jury and the judge.