Suspect #1: Dellen Millard *Charged* 1st Deg Murder 15 May 2013 #2

[nettie_82]

http://whttp://www.websleuths.com/f...euths.com/forums/images/smilies/ffj/seeya.gif

Must not just be me because that link isn't working either. :banghead::banghead:

 

[swedie]

Still didn't work.

Is this the article Nettie? HTH and works. (They are working for me)

No doubt she wept. She lost the love of her life and the father to their precious little girl to murder in the most disturbing way, and now seeing the person suspected of killing him, it's once again in her face. MOO

Also in the courtroom was Tim Bosma's widow, Sharlene. She wept and was comforted by family and friends as Millard entered the courtroom dressed in grey pants and a grey long-sleeved shirt.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/3...-dellen-millard-makes-brief-court-appearance/

Bosma suspect Millard next in court Sept. 12. Dellen Millard, one of the men charged with killing Tim Bosma, will appear in court on Sept. 12 to set a date for a judicial pretrial. That was the result of a brief Hamilton court appearance for Millard Thursday morning.

http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/08/01/hamilton-bosma.html

May 24, 2013
“The devil led the vilest form of evil down my driveway and he smiled at me before taking Tim away,” said Mrs. Bosma.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/0...riends-remember-him-as-attention-seeking-kid/

 

[swedie]

Bless her heart.

Sharlene Bosma is trying to create something good in the wake of tragedy.
“The name 'Tim's Tribute' was chosen because a tribute is an act, statement or gift that is intended to show gratitude, respect and admiration,” Bosma said.
“All these things we had for Tim.”

But the first donation to the fund actually comes from Sharlene Bosma herself.
To acknowledge all that other people have done for me and my daughter, and to say thank you to the community for the outpouring of their love and support, Tim's Tribute has an opening balance from my own contributions,” she said. “It is my desire to be able to personally give back and help someone else.”

http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/08/01/hamilton-tim-bosma-charity.html

 

[Sillybilly]

May 24, 2013
“The devil led the vilest form of evil down my driveway and he smiled at me before taking Tim away,” said Mrs. Bosma.

<rsbm>

For those folks who have any doubt about a killer's ability to smile at Mrs. Bosma ... the killer of our family member visited and "smiled" at our family for 13 years before being charged, convicted, and sentenced to life for the murder of our family member.

Killers don't always look and act like monsters.

 

[Juballee]

<rsbm>

For those folks who have any doubt about a killer's ability to smile at Mrs. Bosma ... the killer of our family member visited and "smiled" at our family for 13 years before being charged, convicted, and sentenced to life for the murder of our family member.

Killers don't always look and act like monsters.

No offence to your family and what they went through, but why were you allowing a killer to visit for 13 years? In my opinion, I would think that this is a different circumstance from the one we are discussing, if the killer continued to taunt your family for 13 years, and DM only looked at SB once. I think it would take a certain kind of killer to want to share in your family's grief for 13 years, and I don't see a correlation to DM in this instance. If DM went to their home intending to kill TB as some claim, then it certainly would have been more natural for him to be nervous or uncomfortable at least, and those emotions are very difficult to hide from an average person, the smile would not have seemed normal or natural. I think it is too quickly discounted that it is possible that he was there for nothing more than a test drive and that could legitimately account for him smiling at her. In my opinion, of course.

 

[Sillybilly]

but why were you allowing a killer to visit for 13 years?

Um ... because nobody even knew he was the killer until 13 years later when LE had a breakthrough in the case. Typically killers do not wear a sign that tells us what they are underneath those suave GQ exteriors.

So no, my family isn't as dumb as you might think.

ETA: To clarify, the person convicted was not the actual killer ... but was the person who arranged it. So, sorry ... while not the killer, still guilty of 1st degree murder.

 

[cansleuther]

&#8220;The devil led the vilest form of evil down my driveway and he smiled at me before taking Tim away,&#8221; said Mrs. Bosma.

SB may have also meant this figuratively rather than literally. JMO.

 

[Archangel7]

Thanks Nettie, the link doesn't seem to be working for me (not sure why). I found this one just in case anyone else is having problems with it (hope it works!)

http://www.610cktb.com/news/local/story.aspx?ID=2017152

I was also wondering if anyone knows why there still no talk of bail? I thought before DP mentioned waiting for disclosure first. Since they are talking of the judicial pretrial now, are they not going to try for bail? I don't know a lot about court procedures, but was just wondering if anyone knew. TIA

Appears that the question of bail has come and gone along with the Crown and Deepak's pretrial meeting (so apparently disclosure from Crown to Accused has already occurred and ongoing.) Hmmm....and still no bail?

Looks like it's down to whether the judge decides to allow trial or not and if DM pleads guilty or not.
It will get real interesting then, depending on who cops a plea and who throws who under the bus.

 

[MsSherlock]

No offence to your family and what they went through, but why were you allowing a killer to visit for 13 years? In my opinion, I would think that this is a different circumstance from the one we are discussing, if the killer continued to taunt your family for 13 years, and DM only looked at SB once. I think it would take a certain kind of killer to want to share in your family's grief for 13 years, and I don't see a correlation to DM in this instance. If DM went to their home intending to kill TB as some claim, then it certainly would have been more natural for him to be nervous or uncomfortable at least, and those emotions are very difficult to hide from an average person, the smile would not have seemed normal or natural. I think it is too quickly discounted that it is possible that he was there for nothing more than a test drive and that could legitimately account for him smiling at her. In my opinion, of course.

Juballee, IMO, anytime that a member of the public insinuates that the family is somehow responsible for being duped by the murderer, or somehow responsible for the murder of a loved one, it smacks of a lack of empathy. IMHO, absolutely no sane human being would knowingly entertain the murderer of a loved one. JMHO, the family of the murdered beat themselves up enough.."should have, would have, could haves". When someone chooses to murder someone, they and only they are responsible and should be the only ones that bear the burden of guilt, unfortunately, this isn't the case. MOO

 

[Archangel7]

Juballee, IMO, anytime that a member of the public insinuates that the family is somehow responsible for being duped by the murderer, or somehow responsible for the murder of a loved one, it smacks of a lack of empathy. IMHO, absolutely no sane human being would knowingly entertain the murderer of a loved one. JMHO, the family of the murdered beat themselves up enough.."should have, would have, could haves". When someone chooses to murder someone, they and only they are responsible and should be the only ones that bear the burden of guilt, unfortunately, this isn't the case. MOO

Correct on all points. Some folks will never understand a murderer or the mind of one.

Murderer Ted Bundy used to say it was all about power and possession.......

“You feel the last bit of breath leaving their body. You’re looking into their eyes. A person in that situation is God!” Ted Bundy

“Murder is not about lust and it’s not about violence. It’s about possession.”
Ted Bundy

 

[Juballee]

Correct on all points. Some folks will never understand a murderer or the mind of one.

Murderer Ted Bundy used to say it was all about power and possession.......

“You feel the last bit of breath leaving their body. You’re looking into their eyes. A person in that situation is God!” Ted Bundy

“Murder is not about lust and it’s not about violence. It’s about possession.”
Ted Bundy

My point is that people are making comparisons to all kinds of other murderers and crimes where there is no actual comparison. DM did not cajole the family of TB for years, nor did he sexually assault a child or go on a killing spree. All of these comparisons are, in my opinion, just showing the clinical bias that people tend to have towards associating guilt onto people as soon as they are accused. And especially if they have had a traumatic incident in their lives that they draw comparisons to.


And I apologize if my manner seems cold or callous, we have seen both sides in my family; I have known people who were kidnapped, raped and murdered on their way home from school, and I have also known people who have been accused of and done time for crimes that they did not commit, so I try to weight things from both sides and come out on the side of logic and sense. It is not my intention to offend anyone, but to try to get at the truth.

 

[Blomquist]

Do you think they will be required to enter a plea today and that is why the request to appear in person?

I wouldn't make any plea....not without full disclosure. JMO

 

[Blomquist]

BBM Care to share? I am very interested in yours and others opinions and would love to see the indications also. TIA.

MSM plays a fairly big role in how people perceive and process information but common sense and an open mind speaks otherwise. It is how people use their common sense and being open minded that will lead them to a realistic, viable conclusion. Then there is not only the media, but information coming from other sources such as social media, a friend of a friend, or just a friend, to name a few, which could play a huge part in peoples'

UBM Then there are the umpteen charges which do stick because there is sufficient, solid evidence to prove someones guilty. In a case as serious as this, you can mark my word there won't be a need to do any juggling act to make anything stick. Why people assume it's all smoke and mirrors and a circus affair is beyond me. It's all about justice. These people involved are paid very well by the system and their clients, but in MHO they earned it rightfully. The years they spent in school, paying valuable dollars for their chosen career and then the time they spend on these trial is a serious matter not a comedy act. The ones who seem to think our court system is a farce, and I am not naming names, do not know or realized how the real system works. It is there to serve justice and in a case such as this, remove threats from society, not throw innocent people in jail for years just because they want to have a trial to make money off of it. I can understand some being jealous of the income these hard working, mostly reputable people in our system make, but that is their problem and their jealousy should not convince their logic otherwise. All MOO, JMHO.

And to make reference to a recent trial in which justice was well served here in Canada was the M. Rafferty case. There were no smoke and mirrors, no crooked Crown, no dishonest LE officers or witnesses. A big disappointment many people felt was the fact the judge would not allow certain evidence to enter the trial because he ruled it was against the accused rights.

One may say the defense was crooked because he represented his guilty client instead of convincing him to plead guilty or plea bargain. Was his defense attorney crooked? It gave him recognition, experience and more than likely, more business. Think of all the money the system could have saved if only the guilty would have been honest enough to admit to abducting, raping/torturing and murdering a precious, little, eight year old girl. It's not the system who abuse money, it's the criminals, and all because they have rights. JMHO again.

Yes DM and MS's day will come. I believe justice will be served for Tim. May he RIP. May his family find some sort of comfort knowing our system did not fail them. They have a long and very difficult road ahead of them and all because at least two sick, evil minded, individuals decided their pleasure or greed was worth someones precious life. And once again JMHO.

I think it would be difficult to ascertain that people use their common sense in a totally neutral fashion after reading certain articles , comments and posts that are circulated in the press and online. JMO.

<modsnip>

I have spoken with numerous lawyers over the years and I can vouch that many are disheartened at the corruption within the 'system'. Many are leaving their professions or choosing a specialty of law that avoids dealing with courtrooms and court personnel. (ie Real Estate Law). Some lawyers refuse to be a part of a system that does not follow its own rules. The ones who think that the court system is the epitome of justice and that all accused are self serving mentally incompetent psychopaths (not naming names or pointing fingers) simply fail to grasp reality and prefer to cling to the ideology that justice means justice, in a court environment that is dominated by the mighty dollar...and chastise all who have had the misfortune to be arrested and charged regardless of whether or not they are innocent. If this is common-sense then we are in a sad world IMO. I for one do know how the real system works and IMO most people do not have a clue. JMO To say that people who do not see the justice system as a holier than thou fair and just establishment, are jealous of the pay of judges and lawyers is quite judgmental and insulting to the intelligence of people who have the foresight to realize that we are not living in a Utopian society that has altruism as it's guide. Far from it IMO.

(I attended the Rafferty trial . IMO Rafferty was instrumental in making the murder happen by his actions that day...without his involvement the murder IMO would not have happened.)

No-one is saying that justice is never served.....but imo we have to make sure that we learn to detach ourselves from the urge to blame blame blame because we need to find a killer and have justice for a victim. There is no justice for a victim if the one held is not the one responsible JMO

Lets hope justice is served in this case (TB) and that it is not turned into a media extravaganza and witch hunt simply because some people may have a bloodlust for any charged individual, without giving any thought to anything other than the 'we must have someone to blame' mentality. JMO MOO

 

[Archangel7]

I wouldn't make any plea....not without full disclosure. JMO

Full disclosure isn't an accurate term. Disclosure has apparently already happened since we are now into Judicial pretrial.

Disclosure(full?) is an ongoing, continuing process up to and thru trial.

DM won't be at Judicial pretrial unless Deepak makes a jr lawyer mistake.
You'd never put your client in a position, especially at this pretrial, in a position to blurt out evidence stupidly.

This should be the Judge, Crown and the Defence only, in order to decide a a)trial, b)dropping of all charges or c)Deepak will plea bargain.

 

[Blomquist]

Full disclosure isn't an accurate term. Disclosure has apparently already happened since we are now into Judicial pretrial.

Disclosure(full?) is an ongoing, continuing process up to and thru trial.

DM won't be at Judicial pretrial unless Deepak makes a jr lawyer mistake.
You'd never put your client in a position, especially at this pretrial, in a position to blurt out evidence stupidly.

This should be the Judge, Crown and the Defence only, in order to decide a a)trial, b)dropping of all charges or c)Deepak will plea bargain.

Actually full disclosure is supposed to be upfront before a trial starts. Of course there is the 'disclosure' of evidence by way of witness testimony on the stand but that is not the disclosure that is required upfront obviously.

I havent said that DM would be at the pretrial, so I am not sure where you got that idea. But IMO no plea or plea bargain would make sense until all cards are on the table (obviously minus witness testimony on the stand) JMO

By the way...nice to see you back...I thought you had flown the nest !

 

[Sillybilly]

I wouldn't make any plea....not without full disclosure. JMO

If one is truly innocent, what harm could they suffer from entering their "Not Guilty" plea at the earliest possible opportunity?

 

[Archangel7]

Actually full disclosure is supposed to be upfront before a trial starts. Of course there is the 'disclosure' of evidence by way of witness testimony on the stand but that is not the disclosure that is required upfront obviously.

I havent said that DM would be at the pretrial, so I am not sure where you got that idea. But IMO no plea or plea bargain would make sense until all cards are on the table (obviously minus witness testimony on the stand) JMO

By the way...nice to see you back...I thought you had flown the nest !

Thank you, I've been briefly in and out of the forum and trying to keep up.

If the Crown finds new evidence even during the trial proceedings, they are obligated to disclose it to the Defense, generally.

This Judicial Pretrial should be quite candid and both sides of council should get a real sense of the strength of the case especially with the input from the Bench.

Which would give Deepak an opportunity to speak on behalf of DM on any possibility of a plea bargain if the Crown offered.
With of course, the usual and customary wording of "per the accused's approval of the conditions."

Here is where DM, if uninvolved and or innocent, will be set free. If not, his fate rests with the Jury or Judge, whomever he picks.

 

[Blomquist]

If one is truly innocent, what harm could they suffer from entering their "Not Guilty" plea at the earliest possible opportunity?

Didn't DP say that his client would be pleading NOT GUILTY ????

The reason he hasn't put in a plea IMO is that an arraignment has not yet occurred JMO

 

[Snoofo]

Thank you, I've been briefly in and out of the forum and trying to keep up.

If the Crown finds new evidence even during the trial proceedings, they are obligated to disclose it to the Defense, generally.

This Judicial Pretrial should be quite candid and both sides of council should get a real sense of the strength of the case especially with the input from the Bench.

Which would give Deepak an opportunity to speak on behalf of DM on any possibility of a plea bargain if the Crown offered.
With of course, the usual and customary wording of "per the accused's approval of the conditions."

Here is where DM, if uninvolved and or innocent, will be set free. If not, his fate rests with the Jury or Judge, whomever he picks.

I cant read and visualize this without hearing that scene-change sound effect from Law & Order. Meetings in the judge's office were always flanked by this sound.:floorlaugh:

Thanks for the insight as usual (you too Blomquist!). I get a better sense of the next step.

 

[Blomquist]

Thank you, I've been briefly in and out of the forum and trying to keep up.

If the Crown finds new evidence even during the trial proceedings, they are obligated to disclose it to the Defense, generally.

Yes agreed ... IF

This Judicial Pretrial should be quite candid and both sides of council should get a real sense of the strength of the case especially with the input from the Bench.

Which would give Deepak an opportunity to speak on behalf of DM on any possibility of a plea bargain if the Crown offered.
With of course, the usual and customary wording of "per the accused's approval of the conditions."

Here is where DM, if uninvolved and or innocent, will be set free. If not, his fate rests with the Jury or Judge, whomever he picks.

Well not necessarily ...as we have discussed before, sometimes the innocent get caught up in the lack of evidence or the failure of LE in investigating the case etc... see Stephen Truscott and Guy Paul Morin to name but two...

green