trial thread: 3/30/2012

[flipflop]

I hear you and it makes sense, but why didn't he take away his own clothes and anything else that linked him to her - especially that incriminating journal? Surely he had a right to take his clothes back, at least. He had six weeks to do so. That doesn't sound like someone all that nervous to me.

I wonder if the "nosy neighbours" will be called to the stand. There's been no report of them attending the trial. I did see the two women at Tori's memorial service (in the video; I wasn't there) and they have a stake in this - the reward. I somehow doubt that CM will ... even if she's well enough ... she would not make for a very reliable witness, IMHO.

JMO

Who knows what went through his head, perhaps CM didn't let him into the house. Im sure he is kicking himself now for not gathering his items and anything else that would inciminate him, from that house.

 

[Jezbel]

What actually happens during trial will determine whether or not there is a conviction and a great deal of what happens will actually depend on the accused. It is fair to say that a trial is like a play. The accused is the actor and the jury is the audience. If the accused gives a good performance, the audience applauds and the accused goes home. If the accused gives a bad performance, the audience boo's and that could easily result in the jury voting for a conviction.

Never lose sight of the fact that the prosecutor is well aware of this and, aside from presenting their case, if they can make the jury dislike the accused, that is very beneficial to the State. A jury who dislikes an accused will have no problem convicting them, so a key element is in the demeanor of the accused and how they come across to the jury.

Now, as I said, the demeanor of the accused will have a great deal to do with the entire case and that includes how the accused dresses, how they act sitting at the defense table, and how they testify.

Aside from dress, the most important discussion will be how the accused should act. When you are sitting at the defense table, sit calmly, with your feet on the floor in front of you and your hands on the table. Yes, you can make notes, but do not lean back in your seat with your legs crossed. That could easily send a message to the jury that you just don't seem to care. Never lose sight of the fact that most people sitting on a jury will watch the accused carefully, looking for some hint as to whether they are guilty or not, or even whether they like them or not.

When the jury is seated, look at them occasionally, but all of them. Do not pick one and do not simply sit there staring at them. When someone is on the witness stand, look at them and also either the prosecutor or defense attorney, whoever might be questioning them. Do not sit there with a staring gaze at the witness, especially when they are testifying for the State. That can easily give the appearance that you are trying to intimidate them. Show no reaction whatsoever to any evidence or testimony. In other words, if the child accuser is testifying, regardless of what they say or how ridiculous it may sound, do not make facial expressions of disbelief. Any reaction you make can easily be misinterpreted by they jury.

http://www.allencowling.com/clienttrial.htm

HTH

What I'm saying is their verdict will not be based solely on how he conducts himself and each juror will interrupt his reactions their own way.... I know I have based on seeing him in court with my own eyes.

As always JMO

 

[luvtenniss]

House? what house? The location where they took VS was a field with a rock pile.

The house TLM drew the picture of. The one TLM said she walked Tori near to use the washroom.

 

[paris_paris]

The house TLM drew the picture of. The one TLM said she walked Tori near to use the washroom.

That house was across the road from the laneway. She said she took Tori to use the washroom right in front of the car.

 

[paris_paris]

Who knows what went through his head, perhaps CM didn't let him into the house. Im sure he is kicking himself now for not gathering his items and anything else that would inciminate him, from that house.

I have to go way back and look, but I thought there was a quote from TLM about MTR going to her house and found her Mom with a guy younger than he was (after TLM was in custody).

 

[flipflop]

The house TLM drew the picture of. The one TLM said she walked Tori near to use the washroom.

That house is directly across the road from the laneway. They do not own the land where the crime happened. TLM took VS to go to the washroom in the field/rock pile area...she stated she took her beside the car.

 

[Confusedashell]

I am sorry if this is a repeat question and already discussed in detail. I just couldn't find it. Do we know who owns the house they brought Tori to that night? Just wondering if the owners have said anything, or if a relationship between them and MR or TLM has been established.

It was a old order mennonite they would not have known either TLM or MR

 

[Alethea Dice]

I have to go way back and look, but I thought there was a quote from TLM about MTR going to her house and found her Mom with a guy younger than he was (after TLM was in custody).

The younger guy comment was said when TLM was on the stand testifying.

AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReply
McClintic was worried about her mom when she was arrested on April 12th. Rafferty offered to check in on her.

AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReply
Rafferty told McClintic "I walked in on her with a guy younger than I am." he said he gave McClintic's mom furniture.

 

[Alethea Dice]

I even read that it was an "incoming" call.

It is frustrating that a simple piece of information can't be reported clearly.

The early reports say that MR had called out to check his voice mail at 7:47 on April 8th. My impression of these reports are that it was part of the Crown's opening statement. I'm sure we will hear more about this during Chapter 11 of the trial.

It was not by accident or even a veteran investigator’s hunch, as originally reported by the media. Police had obtained a court order to retrieve phone records from Rafferty’s BlackBerry, court heard. OPP discovered that Rafferty had used his BlackBerry to check voice mail at 7.47 p.m., April 8, with that call pinging off a cellphone tower near Mount Forest.

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1141555--tori-stafford-murder-trial-horrific-details-of-slaying-revealed-as-case-opens

The car then headed out of sight down the country roads Rafferty knew well, Gowdey said. At 7:47 p.m., phone records would show Rafferty had checked his voicemail near Mount Forest.

http://www.simcoereformer.ca/2012/03/05/tori-staffords-innocence-no-match-for-her-hunters

 

[snoofer]

I think he agreed to hang out with CM for the drugs. JMO but otherwise I can't see why he would put himself out.....

Salem

drugs possible and also to "appease" TLM.IMO

 

[snoofer]

House? what house? The location where they took VS was a field with a rock pile.

yes, it was mennonite land (field)

 

[Macright]

I won't be surprised to hear that the LE officers who paid MR a visit at his mother's house, looked in the car before or after the recorded interview and that is why they are so adamant the seat was in the car, at least up until May 15th. :moo: Funny how his car went "poof" right after that interview. At least for the weekend. MR probably went back to a car wash again and disposed of the seat ASAP. :moo:

April 8th - May 15th is a long time to go around with that back seat which could hold DNA from Tori so I would doubt that the seat was in the car when they did their interview on the 15th of May. If he was throwing things out from the start and if what TLM says is somewhat the truth, about cutting out pieces of it why would he have not have got rid of the seat after the deed was done.. ( if as I have posted, the seat was actually in the car on April 8th. also if what TLM has said to have any truth to it.. he also "took" little Tori in the front seat so that should hold some DNA.

 

[swedie]

I found this article which states when the officers showed up at MR's mother's house on May 15/09 to question him, LE did notice his car had no back seat. So he must have gotten rid of it before May 15th. After this visit he got paranoid LE were onto his and so IMO he was calling auto wreckers looking for another back seat. I'm really curious as to why he was calling rental agencies. Was he planning on taking off, was he planning on hiding his car, abandoning it. Maybe he wanted to use a rental car to take and dispose of his car seat, thinking he couldn't use his own as the police would be tracking his car? Or LE tracking him period. (just a guess he may have hid his car seat in a shed or dumped it in an obvious place, apartment or business dumpster) We'll have to wait until Chapter 10: The May 15 weekend and Rafferty's actions. MOO

Police questioned Rafferty May 15 and noticed his Honda Civic seemed similar to the one in the video, but had no back seat. After the interview, police later learned, Rafferty spent the weekend contacting auto wreckers and rental agencies about getting another car. He also went to Masonville Place in London to get a new BlackBerry.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/03/05/tori-stafford-murder-trial-gets-underway

Of particular interest to cops is the cloth, grey colored back seat of a blue 2003 Honda Civic that belonged to Michael Rafferty. Police believe that the car was used in Tori's abduction.

http://www.amw.com/missing_children/case.cfm?id=64826

May 26/09
The car has been recovered, but investigators are still hunting for the discarded back seat. A similar grey, cloth-covered part has been found near Kitchener and officers are examining it to see if it is the vital clue they're looking for.


http://www.citytv.com/toronto/cityn...-tape-the-same-day-tori-stafford-was-abducted

May 28/09
Maitland said police are also still hoping the public will help them find the back seat that is missing from a blue 2003 Honda sedan, which police allege was involved in the kidnapping and murder of the little girl. The car seat is described as being a grey-coloured cloth rear seat.

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20090528/court_Stafford_090528?hub=EdmontonHome

May 24/09
On Sunday, investigators issued another news release, asking people in and around Woodstock and the Guelph area, 80 kilometres away, to check their properties for a grey-coloured cloth seat. They said anyone who thinks they've located the discarded seat should report it to police immediately without touching it.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2009/05/24/stafford-search.html

 

[Alethea Dice]

I'm not sure if this has been posted before, but there are some interesting comments in this episode of Connect with Mark Kelley. The episode is about TLM's testimony recanting her previous statements. About 10 minutes into the show, he talks to a forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Michael Wellner, about the impossibility of determining when TLM is telling the truth and when she's not. In the interview, Dr. Wellner states:

What distinguishes a female psychopath is a shallow emotion that can be very dramatic. So as I sit and watch an interrogating officer question her in a very leading way, in a very guiding way, to create a mood in which she can comfortably assume the role of a victim, she’s certainly smart and canny enough to fall into that and to start weeping and to adopt a certain posture, which could be completely contrived. So I wouldn’t assume that has any more resemblance of fact than if we were watching Meryl Streep play her in some sort of an adaptation. I think it’s all a mirage and that’s the nature of the person that we’re dealing with.

http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/TV_Shows/Connect_with_Mark_Kelley/1305591601/ID=2213516870

 

[flipflop]

I'm not sure if this has been posted before, but there are some interesting comments in this episode of Connect with Mark Kelley. The episode is about TLM's testimony recanting her previous statements. About 10 minutes into the show, he talks to a forensic psychiatrist, Dr. Michael Wellner, about the impossibility of determining when TLM is telling the truth and when she's not. In the interview, Dr. Wellner states:



http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/TV_Shows/Connect_with_Mark_Kelley/1305591601/ID=2213516870

interesting...thanks for posting

 

[swedie]

We know what TLM has confessed to and we know MR was present through this whole horrible ordeal. We know they acted together regardless of who did what. MR carries an additional charge of sexual assault. IMHO it would be of very little comfort now taking into account what Tori went through period, whether she was sexually assaulted or not. At this point it seems irrelevant in a sense, because it does not change the final outcome. Tori was terrified, tortured and murdered.

What is very important to know is whether MR did sexually assault Tori, as this would show motive for Tori's abduction. From what we have heard from the past MSM and some present MSM reports, I believe MR was a sexual deviant and the driving forces behind Tori's demise. From Det. Smyth's testimony on Friday, he stated he touch the bag with his finger and found it to be soft. I hope the location, under a tree, large rocks upon Tori and in garbage bags, her body was pretty well preserved and the anthropologist was able to prove sexual assault such as MR's semen or DNA, or better yet the anthropologist found MR's pubic hairs on Tori's lower remains or on her remains period. I don't know if any semen from the front seats would be taken into account as MR was reported to have masturbated in the laneway at the murder site, and taking into account TLM's claim, the two of them, TLM and MR had sex in MR's car the first evening they met. But it's quite possible forensics found Tori's blood on one of the front seats. You would think if they did find blood on one of the front seats, the Crown would have mentioned that also during theie open statement. Let's hope the Crown held back a lot of damaging evidence which will come out as we go along. They have already brought so much valuable information forward in such a short amount of time IMHO.

As he walked up to the rock pile, he told the court he noticed “a slight odour which I believed to be decomposition.”

That was when he spotted a green garbage bag.

“I touched it with my finger. It wasn’t hard. It wasn’t a rock. It was soft,” said Smyth after a long pause.

“I knew that we had finally found Victoria Stafford.” :tears:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/0...ding-tori-staffords-remains-in-a-garbage-bag/

 

[dilbert]

We know what TLM has confessed to and we know MR was present through this whole horrible ordeal. We know they acted together regardless of who did what. MR carries an additional charge of sexual assault. IMHO it would be of very little comfort now taking into account what Tori went through period, whether she was sexually assaulted or not. At this point it seems irrelevant in a sense, because it does not change the final outcome. Tori was terrified, tortured and murdered.

I'm sorry, but it would be of GREAT comfort to me to know that a sexual assault HADN'T occurred if it were my child.
Likewise, it would make a WORLD of difference to the accused if we find out a sexual assault never took place. Imagine yourself being accused of such a horrible crime if it didn't happen, being labelled a sexual deviant. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't take comfort in the fact that the majority of the public wanted to see you dead because of the false accusation of a vengeful, psychotic teenager. :notgood:

MOO

 

[KMouse]

Exactly Matou!! I can see now why the Crown feels it is so important for the jury to see the crime scene. I can't get over how many details she remembered especially since she was high. I feel even more sure now that she was wandering around while Rafferty was sexually assaulting Tori. And I don't believe for a minute that she was the one who killed Tori. Not for one minute.:moo:

ITA with you.

TLM was:
a) high
b) upset over MR's sexual assault of Tori
c) in a rage when she lost it and killed Tori
d) would have excited delerium of such a shocking event after brutally killing a child and covering her body with rocks.

TLM certainly has a fantastic memory for details of the crime scene.

 

[Alethea Dice]

I'm sorry, but it would be of GREAT comfort to me to know that a sexual assault HADN'T occurred if it were my child.
Likewise, it would make a WORLD of difference to the accused if we find out a sexual assault never took place. Imagine yourself being accused of such a horrible crime if it didn't happen, being labelled a sexual deviant. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't take comfort in the fact that the majority of the public wanted to see you dead because of the false accusation of a vengeful, psychotic teenager. :notgood:

MOO

Speaking as a mother, I have to agree. It would be a great comfort to me as well, to know that my daughter wasn't subjected to such a horrible ordeal before she was so viciously murdered.

There have been other motives suggested. And, unfortunately, sometimes we have to accept that there may not always be a motive, other than one deranged individual's desire to experience the act itself.

 

[OhSoCurious]

:goodpost:

Speaking as a mother, I have to agree. It would be a great comfort to me as well, to know that my daughter wasn't subjected to such a horrible ordeal before she was so viciously murdered.

There have been other motives suggested. And, unfortunately, sometimes we have to accept that there may not always be a motive, other than one deranged individual's desire to experience the act itself.