Tim Bosma: Dellen Millard & Mark Smich chgd w/Murder; Christina Noudga, Accessory #3

[Sillybilly]

Reading between the lines it sounds like there could be some issues which need to be resolved between DM and MS defense teams .... ie: Judge told the lawyers to "go and talk"

That would make sense because DM & MS are jointly charged , but may have individual defense strategies that do not harmonize

There are so many tentacles in (these cases) I expect they will have to have everything mapped out clearly before the actual trial starts , and even then it will look like a spider web.

"Crown Leitch says judge has told them to go and talk" ... coming from Leitch, sounds like he was included in those talks?

 

[MsSherlock]

Glithero would not explain why the public was being excluded, only that the issue is "important" and "controversial" and needed to be dealt with immediately.


Outside of court, assistant Crown attorney Tony Leitch said "I have no doubt the matters being considered would be of great public interest."

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5444701-family-press-barred-from-bosma-pretrial-motions/

Could it be that MS wants to plea guilty or something like that? "Great public interest?" Interesting. MOO

 

[Sillybilly]

from the link swedie provided over in the Court Appearances thread:

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5...ed-from-pretrial-motions-for-accused-killers/

Leitch said it was Glithero who called for the appearance, and Glithero who wanted it to take place behind closed doors.

So much for my well thought-out theories :floorlaugh:

 

[Alethea Dice]

Glithero would not explain why the public was being excluded, only that the issue is "important" and "controversial" and needed to be dealt with immediately.


Outside of court, assistant Crown attorney Tony Leitch said "I have no doubt the matters being considered would be of great public interest."

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5444701-family-press-barred-from-bosma-pretrial-motions/

Could it be that MS wants to plea guilty or something like that? "Great public interest?" Interesting. MOO

Honestly, what wouldn't be of "great public interest" in this case?

Or really, what also wouldn't be considered controversial.

Controversial:
: giving rise or likely to give rise to public disagreement
: relating to or causing much discussion, disagreement, or argument : likely to produce controversy

 

[SnooperDuper]

Susan Clairmont on the Bill Kelly radio show about yesterday's events

https://soundcloud.com/am900chml/the-bosma-family-and-press-have-been-barred-from-pretrial-motions

 

[SnooperDuper]

SC says she thinks the trial date will be pushed back: she has a "real strong feeling that it's not going to happen in September"

 

[matou]

Maybe they will push back the Bosma trial and move the babcock one ahead . Jmo

 

[Sillybilly]

Maybe they will push back the Bosma trial and move the babcock one ahead . Jmo

Wondering if they're waiting to find out what comes out in the CN trial. BUT, iirc, when TLM plead guilty, her plea (or just details?) were kept under wraps until MR's trial.

 

[matou]

New blog post about the topic by Ann Brocklehurst: http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/201...ecret-court-sessions-re-tim-bosma-murder.html

 

[Sillybilly]

Wondering if they're waiting to find out what comes out in the CN trial. BUT, iirc, when TLM plead guilty, her plea (or just details?) were kept under wraps until MR's trial.

Sorry for quoting self.

TLM plead guilty Dec 9 2010 and at that time her plea, an edited version of statement of facts, and the reasons for the April 30 2010 ban were released to the public. So, her guilty plea and some details emerged prior to Rafferty's trial:

from:
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/12/08/16485571.html

A Supreme Court of Canada decision today allows the media to report a limited amount of information released in Woodstock court April 30, including:

- The fact that McClintic pleaded guilty to first-degree murder, was convicted and given the mandatory life sentence. She will be ineligible for parole for 25 years.

- Victim impact statements from Tori Stafford's family.

- An edited version of McClintic's statement to court.

- An edited version of what happened April 8, 2009, the day Tori Stafford went missing.

- An edited version of a statement of facts outlining McClintic's dealings with police and the search for Tori's body.

- The reasons for the partial publication ban imposed on the April 30 hearing.

The drama of that day in court can also, finally, be reported.

Told a few days earlier that McClintic was going to plead guilty, the family and friends of Tori filed quietly into the third- floor courtroom of the historic Woodstock courthouse and filled several rows on one side of the courtroom.

So, although DM and MS won't necessarily know all the details from CN's trial, they might at least know the verdict, so it would make sense for them to buy time.

 

[swedie]

Speculation abound. The fact that the judge called this, what appears to be a last minute meeting is peculiar IMO.

* CN is going to plead guilty, asking for a reduced sentence, witness for the Crown
* MS is going to plead guilty
* Judge G brought them in to ask them to reconsider their plea based on direct evidence
* MWJ is going to plead guilty and become a witness for the Crown
* Just an unannounced, last minute pretrial conference, nothing to see here
* Judge reprimanded them for going against court order to do with their "no contacts"
* I considered the judge wanted to advise DM about getting his ***** together regarding a lawyer, but there would be no need for MS to be present. Strike that one, unless it was one of the points brought up by the judge yesterday
* Judge G wanted to discuss moving the trial date up or down
* Advise DM and MS of new evidence

Anyone have speculations to add or eliminate from my list?

All JMO.

 

[cansleuther]

There are some circumstances when the public is barred from the courtroom, including during pre-trial discussions of confidential informants or of potential breaches of lawyer-client privilege.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/02/24/judge-in-tim-bosma-murder-trial-clears-court-of-all-spectators-before-holding-private-session-with-lawyers/

 

[matou]

So one one showed up to support DM (or Smich, but not clear on that)in court. TB's father showed up,as did a family friend, so that tells me that the Crown did NOT know about the in-camera ruling in advance. As for DM's lawyer? Not sure yet. Either he did, or no one bothered to show up to support DM at all. JMO

 

[robynhood]

Can someone explain further....why TB father may have been asked to leave the court....I am assuming possibly new evidence may have been presented to the defence....BUT ...confused as I know when NEW EVIDENCE was produced in Tori Stafford's case ,,,her parents were notified...unless something NOT pretainning to TB case was discussed....Am I correct ???....I know it is on banned but what do others think..getting confused here....( I did read ...posts ^^^ and links...????.....thanks Robynhood.

 

[SnooperDuper]

I imagine one of the things that they do in a preliminary hearing would be establish what parts of the crown's theory the defense accepts, and what they are going to fight over.

Defense could accept that it was DM and MS that showed up at the B's for the test drive (but claim that was completed and DM and MS drove on) for instance.

We all know a foggy version of what happened from the media, and if it was revealed what elements of the story the defense agrees on right now, that could be quite controversial.

?

 

[MsSherlock]

"The hearing Monday in Hamilton’s downtown courthouse was called at short notice Monday and Justice Stephen Glithero first met with lawyers, who wore business attire rather than their judicial robes, witnesses said."
http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/02...-with-lawyers/
IMO, the interesting aspect here is that the Judge called this on short notice and why would a Judge do that? Both of the accused were there in person. Lawyers not in robes. Judge met with the lawyers first. IMHO, there had to be a major development that had to be dealt with immediately and I'm thinking that either DM or MS have decided to plea guilty. Can't think of anything else that would cause the Judge to call everyone into Court on short notice and go in camera. Just can't see how this is good for the defense. MOO

 

[Alethea Dice]

I imagine one of the things that they do in a preliminary hearing would be establish what parts of the crown's theory the defense accepts, and what they are going to fight over.

Defense could accept that it was DM and MS that showed up at the B's for the test drive (but claim that was completed and DM and MS drove on) for instance.

We all know a foggy version of what happened from the media, and if it was revealed what elements of the story the defense agrees on right now, that could be quite controversial.

?

They skipped the preliminary hearing in this trial. These are the pre-trial hearings where the lawyers and the Crown submit motions, such as suppressing certain evidence, what witnesses should or should not appear, change of venue, motion to dismiss or plead. Basically, they settle these motions ahead of time to avoid having to make those decisions during the trial.

http://www.legalinfo.com/content/criminal-law/stages-of-a-criminal-case-pretrial-motions.html

I would be surprised if the defense would give away what they are going to argue against the crown's theory, other than than the types of actual things that they want to have disallowed.

JMO

 

[swedie]

Does anyone suspect this meeting yesterday was to inform the two accused that CN will be pleading guilty? If she pleads guilty, she will not have to go through a trial other then to be a witness. I assume this case hanging over her head is very taxing on her and her family. I bet she's been doing some real soul searching and seeking much legal advice and knows what she stands to lose and it's not pretty....twenty five years.

I can see this being a huge plus for her to plead guilty. She may get off or a reduced sentence offer from the Crown if she takes the stand, to become their witness. IF this was proposed to her, I can see her jumping at that offer. Otherwise she is possibly looking at 25 years behind bars.

I cannot see MS or DM pleading guilty though. Both if found guilty are facing very long terms in prison. It wouldn't do them any favours to plead guilty IMHO.

This meeting was too private and last minute to be a pretrial conference, not to forget, it was called by the judge. There is something big brewing. But this is all JMO though.

Reason for edit, after thought: The trial is tentatively still almost eight months away. Doesn't that seem pretty early to start pretrial conferences/hearings? Just taking into consideration how MR's case went:
Tori abducted April 8, 2009
MR denied a preliminary hearing
Pretrial hearing started January 16, 2012
Jury selection started on Feb. 27, 2012
Trial started March 5, 2012
Verdict May 11, 2012
Sentencing May 15, 2012

http://www.ctvnews.ca/pre-trial-hearing-in-tori-stafford-murder-to-resume-tuesday-1.754448

 

[MsSherlock]

Does anyone suspect this meeting yesterday was to inform the two accused that CN will be pleading guilty? If she pleads guilty, she will not have to go through a trial other then to be a witness. I assume this case hanging over her head is very taxing on her and her family. I bet she's been doing some real soul searching and seeking much legal advice and knows what she stands to lose and it's not pretty....twenty five years.

I can see this being a huge plus for her to plead guilty. She may get off or a reduced sentence offer from the Crown if she takes the stand, to become their witness. IF this was proposed to her, I can see her jumping at that offer. Otherwise she is possibly looking at 25 years behind bars.

I cannot see MS or DM pleading guilty though. Both if found guilty are facing very long terms in prison. It wouldn't do them any favours to plead guilty IMHO.

This meeting was too private and last minute to be a pretrial conference, not to forget, it was called by the judge. There is something big brewing. But this is all JMO though.

Reason for edit, after thought: The trial is tentatively still almost eight months away. Doesn't that seem pretty early to start pretrial conferences/hearings? Just taking into consideration how MR's case went:
Tori abducted April 8, 2009
MR denied a preliminary hearing
Pretrial hearing started January 16, 2012
Jury selection started on Feb. 27, 2012
Trial started March 5, 2012
Verdict May 11, 2012
Sentencing May 15, 2012

http://www.ctvnews.ca/pre-trial-hearing-in-tori-stafford-murder-to-resume-tuesday-1.754448

I thought of CN Swedie. The problem I had was that her guilty plea would simply mean that she helped DM escape from something that day. Her charges are so specific. They don't address the day TB was abducted or murdered, and since they appeared in Hamilton, we know it has nothing to do with the LB case because that would be in Toronto. IMO, it would be different if her charges covered the day of the murder- then her testimony and/or plea could shake the DM/MS defense. Also, she's only been charged with assisting DM escape, not MS, that's why I'm leaning towards a change in the MS camp. On another note- DP seems to have lost his love for the jail house steps interviews. MOO

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Only some questions:

The judge G knew, why suddenly to call this hearing on Monday.
Therefore judge G knew, whether to allow father Bosma participation or not. Why had Hank Bosma to leave?

If DM or MS decided to plead guilty, the judge G would have known. Would they both have sat side to side on the bank yet?

Why did the judge G ask the lawyers to communicate through the 15 min-break??