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

[SnooperDuper]

I suppose the devil's advocate in me must about ask the basis on which you presume CN to be guilty as charged. As we know, an "accessory after the fact" allegation, to be proven, requires that the person so charged performed some act "knowing that the accused has committed an offense".
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadian_Criminal_Law/Offences/Accessory_After_the_Fact
Obviously, if she did NOT know that an offense had taken place, what would she go to LE to report?

Frankly, the charge is all the more puzzling to me given your additional information. Assuming she never spoke to LE, then what physical evidence could they possibly have acquired that would prove what she was thinking - not only just thinking, but specifically thinking on May 9. Maybe they have another witness available willing to testify that THEY know what she was thinking? Well, it will all unravel in time, we hope. Meanwhile, whatever she knew, knows, or may come to know in the future is all pretty much conjecture, so far as I can tell. IMO. IMHO. MOO. etc .

I presume that LE had probable cause to lay the charge of accessory after the fact to murder.

The fact that she is not talking is old news:

Noudga had always declined to speak to police about their investigation and lawyered up early on.

According to sources, Noudga did not talk to police last year.

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/tag/christina-noudga

So we are back to the question that you yourself asked:

Assuming she never spoke to LE, then what physical evidence could they possibly have acquired that would prove what she was thinking - not only just thinking, but specifically thinking on May 9.

 

[cansleuther]

Can a person who accepts a monetary bribe in exchange for their silence be charged with being an accessory after the fact?

 

[Carli]

Can a person who accepts a monetary bribe in exchange for their silence be charged with being an accessory after the fact?

I suppose it again comes back to that definition as per the Criminal Code http://yourlaws.ca/criminal-code-canada/23-accessory-after-fact

23. (1) An accessory after the fact to an offence is one who, knowing that a person has been a party to the offence, receives, comforts or assists that person for the purpose of enabling that person to escape.

There are two obvious parts to this. The alleged accessory after the fact must KNOW that the person they're helping has committed a crime AND must not be "receiving, comforting or assisting" that person just because they're friends, but must be doing so FOR THE PURPOSE of helping the person to escape. I've never been clear whether enabling "escape" means to help someone physically pack up and leave, or to escape responsibility, or to escape being charged with a crime, or to facilitate the rapture, or to enable existential disappearance. What exactly is meant by "escape"?

Further, the Code states that it's not just "party to an offence" but "party to THE offence" (the person charged as an accessory must know which or what precise offence took place), to wit the precise offence that is the subject of the primary accused's charges. This brings up the issue posed by her lawyer in which he stated that one can't be guilty of the the criminal act of being an accessory until the criminal act itself has been proven (or words to that effect.)

So I'd assume that if a criminal offers you a bribe, saying "There's a hundred bucks for you, sister, if you'll zip your lip about how I held up the Royal Toronto Bank at 555 Main Street last Tuesday at 3 pm, no matter who comes asking" then that would be "knowing" the person you're assisting had committed a specific offence. But if the person said, "There's a hundred bucks in it for you sister, if you keep your lip zipped about anything whatever to do with me, no matter who comes asking.", then I don't think that would pass the "knowing" or "purpose" tests, even if I accepted the cash. MOO. I could be wrong. IMO.

 

[ABro]

I, for one, don't wish to be caught defending any military vehicle including those tarted up for civilian markets but should point out that Hummers are billed as being capable of taking people deep into the back country where few other wheeled transport vehicles can take you - presumably a capability that would be of interest to a guy who appears to have had years of active participation in nature and naturalist causes including documentary film making. IMO. MOO. (Of course, the downside of using hummers for this purpose is that the only vehicle able to drag a hummer out of trouble in the outback, is another hummer. And hummers are uniquely and extraordinarily subject to breakdown. But that's another story. MOO IMHO MHO etc.) Oh yeah, and the other thing about this hideous vehicle is that used ones are usually quite cheap.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Ed_ylkYhKAc

Since I brought up the Hummer/humble juxtaposition, I feel I should add one thing.

Wayne had a very different image from his son. It's quite a stark contrast.

While Wayne was extremely private and only a handful of people really knew him, several acquaintances have good things to say about him including many business colleagues present and future. Unlike his son, he didn't have to pick up the check to win respect and appreciation.

And much as I'm not a Hummer fan, I do find it hard to begrudge a guy -- who doesn't seem to have been especially materialistic -- his vehicle of choice. Apparently he was quite upset when DM got it stuck in the wilds of southern Ontario. Maybe they did have to send a second Hummer to help out...

 

[Carli]

But you know, money and power are both extremely intoxicating to many who have one, the other or both - especially those who acquired them without much effort on their own part. So if I've become very rich, thanks to great uncle moneybag's inheritance, and I say "Let's go to Paris for the weekend. Who wants to come?" it doesn't necessarily dawn on me that all those "me" and "me toos" are from anything other than chums who agree that it's a capital idea. Of course I'm aware that I'll have to pay their costs. They don't have any money. I do. It's all relative. I love it that they think my idea is terrific. We'll have great fun. Let's go.

Quite the same happens with the acquisition of power/influence. I'm pretty sure, ABro that you've had the experience of being suddenly surrounded by fairweather fans when you've won an award for something, for instance. It takes experience and wisdom, (and firmly grounded old friends) to learn that all those wonderful new "yes men" friends are not really there because you deserve to be honoured, but have only materialized to try and get a piece of you and your limelight and the party invitations. They'll disappear faster than greased lightening when the next round of kudos are handed out. It doesn't get easier. When money, power and influence sticks in place for a long time, people may find themselves all but captured and eventually taken down by a group of fiercely capable exploiters. Michael Jackson, Conrad Black, Howard Hughes, for example, and so, so many more.

For some, the expectations and sheer weight of wealth, power and influence appear to have been simply too much to bear. http://listtoptens.com/10-millionaires-who-committed-suicide/

One sentence in (presumably) DM's much maligned WM obituary is "His hope was for a time when cooperation would be the norm and competition was only friendly." What was meant by that? Quite apart from the question of who may have been responsible for WM's sudden death, what unfriendly competition was at issue in mid to late 2012 and how unfriendly was it? Just wondering aloud.

As always, all IMO, MOO, IMHO, etc.

 

[ABro]

But you know, money and power are both extremely intoxicating to many who have one, the other or both - especially those who acquired them without much effort on their own part. So if I've become very rich, thanks to great uncle moneybag's inheritance, and I say "Let's go to Paris for the weekend. Who wants to come?" it doesn't necessarily dawn on me that all those "me" and "me toos" are from anything other than chums who agree that it's a capital idea. Of course I'm aware that I'll have to pay their costs. They don't have any money. I do. It's all relative. I love it that they think my idea is terrific. We'll have great fun. Let's go.

Quite the same happens with the acquisition of power/influence. I'm pretty sure, ABro that you've had the experience of being suddenly surrounded by fairweather fans when you've won an award for something, for instance. It takes experience and wisdom, (and firmly grounded old friends) to learn that all those wonderful new "yes men" friends are not really there because you deserve to be honoured, but have only materialized to try and get a piece of you and your limelight and the party invitations. They'll disappear faster than greased lightening when the next round of kudos are handed out. It doesn't get easier. When money, power and influence sticks in place for a long time, people may find themselves all but captured and eventually taken down by a group of fiercely capable exploiters. Michael Jackson, Conrad Black, Howard Hughes, for example, and so, so many more.

For some, the expectations and sheer weight of wealth, power and influence appear to have been simply too much to bear. http://listtoptens.com/10-millionaires-who-committed-suicide/

One sentence in (presumably) DM's much maligned WM obituary is "His hope was for a time when cooperation would be the norm and competition was only friendly." What was meant by that? Quite apart from the question of who may have been responsible for WM's sudden death, what unfriendly competition was at issue in mid to late 2012 and how unfriendly was it? Just wondering aloud.

As always, all IMO, MOO, IMHO, etc.

I think you're overthinking this, Carli. It's my experience that relationships where one party is paying the bills and the other is benefitting are almost always very clear cut. Both parties know exactly what they're getting.

 

[Carli]

You might be right. :crazy: I was probably thrown off balance by your earlier delightful reference to "the wilds of southern Ontario" LOL.

 

[Carli]

So what's happening in the MWJ tryouts, I mean trial. Anyone paying attention to this sidelight, by any chance?

 

[lclabtech]

Frankly, the charge is all the more puzzling to me given your additional information. Assuming she never spoke to LE, then what physical evidence could they possibly have acquired that would prove what she was thinking - not only just thinking, but specifically thinking on May 9. Maybe they have another witness available willing to testify that THEY know what she was thinking? Well, it will all unravel in time, we hope. Meanwhile, whatever she knew, knows, or may come to know in the future is all pretty much conjecture, so far as I can tell. IMO. IMHO. MOO. etc .

When I read this I immediately think of the words "one of the largest computer seizures in Ontario criminal law history". Facebook chat? Just an idea. That's how they might know what she knew/knows/thought without her telling them. I'm a 20 something female, know I use Facebook chat a ton. Get the messages through my iPhone.

 

[swedie]

One thing, I've noticed about DM is that he seemed to attract people who viewed him as an ATM. Being friends/lovers with DM meant free vacations, meals, jetskis, spa days, a Vera Wang wedding dress (which went unused) and even an $800,000 house for one lucky recipient.

What's interesting too is that the only people who have had anything positive to say about DM are those who financially benefited from their relationship to him.

Now, some might say, this is just the cost (no pun intended) of being rich, but there are plenty of wealthy people out there who manage to cultivate ordinary relationships without money in the middle of everything.

The fact that money figured so prominently in DM's friendships and relationships suggests this was the way he arranged it. Doling out the dollars to those lining up at the trough put him in control.

I've always thought there was a lot of artifice in the humble Costco shopper image cultivated by DM and his lawyer.

We've all heard about Wayne's beat up pick up trucks, but -- little known fact -- he also had a Hummer. A little out of character for an environmentally conscious, animal rights-advocating family -- isn't it?

BBM - Quite interesting ABro. Which leads me to wonder, how many real friends did DM have? What type of person is he in which he couldn't attract real friendships without a dollar amount attached? He had to basically buy peoples' friendships? MOO.

 

[SnooperDuper]

BBM - Quite interesting ABro. Which leads me to wonder, how many real friends did DM have? What type of person is he in which he couldn't attract real friendships without a dollar amount attached? He had to basically buy peoples' friendships? MOO.

And he blew cash on massive parties that became renowned among his friends.

“I aspired to that image in some ways because people wanted that of me,” he says pulling up his orange sleeves, revealing large tattoos across both arms that read “I am heaven sent” and “Don’t you dare forget.”

“I threw some parties. I tried to make that a reality for my friends.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...didnt_kill_tim_bosma_exclusive_interview.html

 

[Somegirl]

Seems to me that CN was pretty understanding of DM's need for variety. Wonder if she found out about the ex's presence at WM's on the night of his death via AB's article? Then, OTOH, guys with money do seem to attract a much more understanding woman. MOO

"Noudga has been involved with Millard since the summer of 2011 although he continued to see other women. He also remained in touch with his ex-fiancee who was with him and his mother on the night police were called to investigate the death of Wayne Millard."

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/tag/christina-noudga

Let's face it, many men out there continue to see other women, without the girlfriend or wife knowing anything about it...

 

[swedie]

Let's face it, many men out there continue to see other women, without the girlfriend or wife knowing anything about it...

Respectfully AND many men don't. Then we could always say the same about women. Morally...not good in MOO.

 

[Somegirl]

Respectfully AND many men don't. Then we could always say the same about women. Morally...not good in MOO.

I should have written "DM could easily have been seeing other women without CN's knowledge. People do it all of the time". Certainly didn't mean that it only applied to men's behaviour.

 

[swedie]

Interesting article regarding antisocial personality disorder. MOO.

They may have an inflated and arrogant self-appraisal (e.g., feel that ordinary work is beneath them or lack a realistic concern about their current problems or their future) and may be excessively opinionated, self-assured, or cocky. They may display a glib, superficial charm and can be quite voluble and verbally facile (e.g., using technical terms or jargon that might impress someone who is unfamiliar with the topic).

These individuals may also be irresponsible and exploitative in their sexual relationships.

A personality disorder is an enduring pattern of inner experience and behavior that deviates from the norm of the individual’s culture.

http://psychcentral.com/disorders/antisocial-personality-disorder-symptoms/

 

[Juballee]

Since I brought up the Hummer/humble juxtaposition, I feel I should add one thing.

Wayne had a very different image from his son. It's quite a stark contrast.

While Wayne was extremely private and only a handful of people really knew him, several acquaintances have good things to say about him including many business colleagues present and future. Unlike his son, he didn't have to pick up the check to win respect and appreciation.

And much as I'm not a Hummer fan, I do find it hard to begrudge a guy -- who doesn't seem to have been especially materialistic -- his vehicle of choice. Apparently he was quite upset when DM got it stuck in the wilds of southern Ontario. Maybe they did have to send a second Hummer to help out...

Perhaps DM's real friends or the handful of people who really knew him are the loyal ones who haven't spoken to the media. In my opinion, those who were so eager use him and to ride his coattails would likely be the ones eager to speak to the media about him, and would likely be happy jump on the DM bashing bandwagon when it suited them as well. I think it is possible that there were people who respected and admired DM without him having to pick up the cheque at times. Additionally, imagine WM picked up a lot of cheques over the years, possibly even some for some of the people who spoke so highly of him.

Also, I am curious how a dead man can have future business colleagues?

 

[ABro]

Perhaps DM's real friends or the handful of people who really knew him are the loyal ones who haven't spoken to the media. In my opinion, those who were so eager use him and to ride his coattails would likely be the ones eager to speak to the media about him, and would likely be happy jump on the DM bashing bandwagon when it suited them as well. I think it is possible that there were people who respected and admired DM without him having to pick up the cheque at times. Additionally, imagine WM picked up a lot of cheques over the years, possibly even some for some of the people who spoke so highly of him.

Also, I am curious how a dead man can have future business colleagues?

I've made the point on a number of occasions that people choose to talk or not to talk to the media for a variety of complex reasons. There is not one simple explanation.

One excellent source said to me, for example, "I really hope he's not guilty." And this person meant exactly that.

It seemed like a very human reaction to me -- in contrast to the outright denial and inability to even contemplate the possibility of guilt displayed by others who know Millard.

Another source didn't like DM at all, but could never have imagined him committing murder -- until the news broke and it became a possibility to consider.

And then there's you, Juballee. You seem to be among those who can't even contemplate the possibility he might be guilty. I'd love to understand the psychology behind the complete denial reaction. Perhaps you could explain why exactly you feel as you do.

Or correct me if I'm wrong, do you consider it possible that DM might be guilty of three murders?

Re a dead man's future colleagues, gah!, too late to fix, alas.

 

[swedie]

So did DM believe although he was ordered not to have contact those on his no contact list, he could do it indirectly via visitors? Apparently the instruction on May 15th, 2013, came with conditions which he claimed he understood, but either he didn't understand those conditions, forgot the conditions, felt he was above the law, forgot who was on his no contact list (this one I find hard to sallow), desperate, indirect communications wasn't a condition (that one I find hard to fathom), or maybe all or a combination of the above. And with that we now know he had visitors...rarely but... I wonder if he still does? MOO.

Dellen Millard consistently tried to send Noudga messages through the people who visited him in jail despite the fact that she was on a list of people with whom he was ordered to have no contact.

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/

From May 15, 2013

When asked if he understood conditions of a non-communication order, he spoke clearly, indicating he did.

http://www.torontosun.com/2013/05/15/tim-bosma-murder-suspect-dellen-millard-in-hamilton-court

The accused man, who marked his birthday in jail on Aug. 30, said that “getting a visit is so rare” and called this visit from a reporter “precious.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...y_they_want_to_tell_their_story_but_cant.html

 

[Carli]

I've made the point on a number of occasions that people choose to talk or not to talk to the media for a variety of complex reasons. There is not one simple explanation.

One excellent source said to me, for example, "I really hope he's not guilty." And this person meant exactly that.

It seemed like a very human reaction to me -- in contrast to the outright denial and inability to even contemplate the possibility of guilt displayed by others who know Millard.

Another source didn't like DM at all, but could never have imagined him committing murder -- until the news broke and it became a possibility to consider.

And then there's you, Juballee. You seem to be among those who can't even contemplate the possibility he might be guilty. I'd love to understand the psychology behind the complete denial reaction. Perhaps you could explain why exactly you feel as you do.

Or correct me if I'm wrong, do you consider it possible that DM might be guilty of three murders?

Re a dead man's future colleagues, gah!, too late to fix, alas.

Respectfully, I feel there's no need for Juballee to defend her point of view. I consider her opinions to be as viable, sincere and as interesting as yours and those of most everyone else posting here. Neither she or anyone else should feel bound to supply either motivation or explanation for their thoughts about this case. IMO. MOO. IMHO.

 

[Carli]

You might be right. :crazy: I was probably thrown off balance by your earlier delightful reference to "the wilds of southern Ontario" LOL.

Actually, on second thought, I don't, in fact think you're right.

But then, on third thought, it doesn't matter anyway. Who can tell who benefits most when someone pays for a friends fun. I throw the occasional dinner party for my friends and I hope they'll like me a little better because we all had fun together. I know a fellow with exactly the same motivation but when he throws a dinner party, it's on his yacht. I know another couple who are awfully wealthy who also enjoy throwing dinner parties with friends but when they do it, it's part of a weekend group trip to Paris at their expense. I suppose you could say we're all so desperate for friends that we have to spend money to acquire them. NOTE TO SELF: At next weekend's barbecue, collect minimum 25 bux each from guests to pay for steaks, condiments, veggies, gas and labour. Hmmmm. I'm likin' this idea. MOO, IMO, etc.