trial thread: 3/30/2012

[Juris_Prudence]

His reactions are interesting yes, but so far, I haven't read much by way of tweets (regarding where / how he looks) that would make me want to convict or acquit him. KWIM? I hope there is more evidence regarding his role in all of this to be put forward to help me make a decision as to whether I believe he is guilty or innocent, or guilty of lesser charges perhaps. JMO.

 

[JayFriend]

Hopefully the jury have the intelligence to realize they are to base their verdict on the evidence, and not how MR looks or what he's looking at.

MOO

Well then, should the jury be just presented with a transcript of the evidence? (That's a rhetorical question.) Of course they'll be influenced by everything they see and hear in court. Even when the judge tells them to disregard an outburst by a witness, for instance, the judge's admonishment merely draws more attention to it and attaches importance to it. As for Rafferty's demeanour in court, even if he's not actually testifying under oath, it says a lot about how he feels and could well be indicative of his guilt or innocence. If the jury should not interpret his facial expression, then why isn't he shielded from the jury's view?

 

[dilbert]

Well then, should the jury be just presented with a transcript of the evidence? (That's a rhetorical question.) Of course they'll be influenced by everything they see and hear in court. Even when the judge tells them to disregard an outburst by a witness, for instance, the judge's admonishment merely draws more attention to it and attaches importance to it. As for Rafferty's demeanour in court, even if he's not actually testifying under oath, it says a lot about how he feels and could well be indicative of his guilt or innocence. If the jury should not interpret his facial expression, then why isn't he shielded from the jury's view?

During deliberations the jury can request to see evidence and transcripts of testimony, so I'm not sure what the point of your rhetorical question is. Sorry.

It is the right of the accused to see the jury of his peers who will decide his fate.

MOO

 

[Kamille]

Here is a link to Genest Youth Detention Centre where TLM was on her probation violation while MR visited her. Doesn't look like a typical controlled jail environment to me so I doubt very much visits were video taped, recorded or were conducted between glass partitions. But I could be wrong as I've never seen the facility.

http://www.anago.on.ca/youthservices_Genest.htm

 

[Confusedashell]

So now that everyone has seen the pictures of where this horrific crime took place do you all think that you could just come upon this place?? JMO.

He has seen all this before he has been shown what evidence they have on him so them showing the video and him not looking isn't saying too much although I do agree that he would look if he didn't have anything to hide. JMO

 

[daisy.faithfull]

Here is a link to Genest Youth Detention Centre where TLM was on her probation violation while MR visited her. Doesn't look like a typical controlled jail environment to me so I doubt very much visits were video taped, recorded or were conducted between glass partitions. But I could be wrong as I've never seen the facility.

http://www.anago.on.ca/youthservices_Genest.htm

It's changed since TLM was there, it now says its a facility for boys.

Maybe they didn't want to include content on the site that doesn't inspire growth and change. At least I hope that's why we aren't seeing pictures of cells (or locked rooms) and visitors behind glass talking to an inmate.

You'd think they would at least tape the phone calls.

 

[dilbert]

Back to the man with the blood shot eyes, it must have been someone CM knew.

Note the name BRAD scratched out in that photo, then note the name BRAD below in MR's interview with LE

JOHNSON: okay um what about Terri-Lynne’s associates you know any of them at all

RAFFERTY: no but funny you ask that one of the guys one of the guys that she knows I was at Canadian Tire buying a light bulb and uh he came up to me outta nowhere and said hey and I turned around this guy with these like red bloodshot eyes he’s like how’s Terri and I I was sketched up by that I had no idea who he was and I was like uh I don’t know and he’s like well don’t you visit her and I’m like I ah yeah but I don’t know anything about you I’m sorry and so I just kinda went about my business he scared the **** outta me and then um when I asked ah Carol who that could possibly be because I said some guy came up to me and how would he know me I think his name was um Brian I think or Brad Brad or Brian she said and that he’s gonna get his *advertiser censored* beaten up for something

http://www.newstalk1010.com/blog/raffertyevidence/blogentry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10363499

MOO

 

[Ardy]

In regards to MR looking up at the ceiling I was thinking that this fella is screwed no matter where he looks! If he looks bored, if he seems to frown, if he seems to smile, if he seems to look tired, or if he seems interested, there will always be someone to criticize his response. Just how should the accused in a prisoner box look anyhow? Is there a right way for him to look? What would be the most appropriate look / thing to look at during his trial? JMO

That's what I have been thinking too.

He has all eyes on him all day...........and he is going to change his expressions, move around a little..........and you are right.........how does an innocent person look in a courtroom as opposed to a guilty person?

As far as I know, the defendant would have already seen all the evidence, perhaps on multiple occasions, as part of the discovery package the defense received from the Crown.............so none of this is new to him, except during live testimony when he doesn't know exactly what will be said.

Unless he jumps up and screams he is guilty..........I don't know what the relevance of the tweets about him would be.

Besides, the reporters seem to have trouble just keeping the facts and testimony straight.

 

[Confusedashell]

That's what I have been thinking too.

He has all eyes on him all day...........and he is going to change his expressions, move around a little..........and you are right.........how does an innocent person look in a courtroom as opposed to a guilty person?

As far as I know, the defendant would have already seen all the evidence, perhaps on multiple occasions, as part of the discovery package the defense received from the Crown.............so none of this is new to him, except during live testimony when he doesn't know exactly what will be said.

Unless he jumps up and screams he is guilty..........I don't know what the relevance of the tweets about him would be.

Besides, the reporters seem to have trouble just keeping the facts and testimony straight.

Very True good point. JMO

 

[ChaChaCha]

Back to the man with the blood shot eyes, it must have been someone CM knew.

Note the name BRAD scratched out in that photo, then note the name BRAD below in MR's interview with LE



http://www.newstalk1010.com/blog/raffertyevidence/blogentry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10363499

MOO

Wow, Dilbert! I have seen that photo several times and never ever noticed what was scratched out ....

Very coincidental .... what do you read into it?

 

[daisy.faithfull]

Back to the man with the blood shot eyes, it must have been someone CM knew.

Note the name BRAD scratched out on in that photo, then note the name BRAD below in MR's interview with LE



http://www.newstalk1010.com/blog/raffertyevidence/blogentry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10363499

MOO

Do we know who wrote the number down on that sheet of paper?

Good eye! But that could be a coincidence, what would that have to do with Tori's abduction?

 

[JayFriend]

During deliberations the jury can request to see evidence and transcripts of testimony, so I'm not sure what the point of your rhetorical question is. Sorry.

It is the right of the accused to see the jury of his peers who will decide his fate.

MOO

Sorry, I meant that if the jury were to disregard the accused's demeanour, or that of anyone testifying for that matter, and only consider facts in evidence, then they may as well just get a transcript and photos and not even be in the courtroom. In other words, it is my opinion that any reactions or gestures by the accused, even if he is not testifying, are significant.

 

[snoofer]

The defense is not denying MR was not present. I am sure the Crown will have evidence to show MR sexually assaulted Tori. If they don't so be it. The jury has the right to use TLM's testimony as evidence and if they BELIEVE TLM's testimony, she claims this was all MR's plan, he was the mastermind, the "engine", then that is their prerogative. It's called a reasonable doubt.:moo:

I believe TLM has made up her mind to tell the truth now as she wants the jurors to believe her story, as it is the closest they will ever come to finding out the truth, the whole truth. She has nothing to gain now by lying. We know we will never know the truth from MR as he plead not guilty and has left it up to the defense team to concoct some story to fit with the evidence. JMHO I don't think we are going to see MR take the stand, as too much evidence against him. :moo:

I wonder if because TLM is now mostly of the drugs if she is having trouble with experiencing emotions bubbling over and she is dealing with it in counselling. If that were the case to be able to live with herself she may have felt a full purging of events would provide her with relief so she can start fresh in her non drug life in prison. I am guessing drugs are not that available to her in her situation now. JMO Also I think in prison they have step programs for drug withdrawal and making amends and telling the truth is part of that. IMO Just a guess.

 

[flipflop]

Do we know who wrote the number down on that sheet of paper?

Good eye! But that could be a coincidence, what would that have to do with Tori's abduction?

I wonder if MR made up the story of running into Bloodshot Eyed Brad. Perhaps he was trying to turn the heat off of him and onto others that he knew of that were around TLM...just a thought!

 

[snoofer]

Rocks were examined for fingerprints but none were found

Police seized the rocks at the scene.

They searched the rocks for finger prints. None were found. Not unusual, Scoyne says, as rocks were outside

One of the moved rocks weighed 109 pounds. Scoyne points it out in a photo.

boulders IMO

 

[snoofer]

RaffertyLFP: Rafferty appears to be staring at ceiling as the video is played

Rafferty looks away from the monitor as the video is shown.

because the reality is if the hammer didn't kill her the boulders he threw on her sure did IMO

 

[daisy.faithfull]

I wonder if MR made up the story of running into Bloodshot Eye Brad. Perhaps he is trying to turn the heat off of him and onto others that he knew of that were around TLM...just a thought!

That's what went through my mind when I was listening to the interview.

 

[Ardy]

If I remember correctly, MR has been reported as watching intently during the live testimony of TLM and others, which he couldn't have seen before.

If facial expressions and movements are so important..........why not tweet on what the defense team is reacting.........or the Crown?

 

[dilbert]

Wow, Dilbert! I have seen that photo several times and never ever noticed what was scratched out ....

Very coincidental .... what do you read into it?

I don't really know, just thought it was odd.

Do we know who wrote the number down on that sheet of paper?

Good eye! But that could be a coincidence, what would that have to do with Tori's abduction?

I don't think TLM wrote it, it doesn't match her writing, so that leaves 3 others, TM, JG or CM.

It could be a coincidence, just one more to add to the list I guess.

MOO

 

[Ardy]

Good eyes Dilbert,

I noticed the scratched out portion before.....but thought it started with a P and perhaps followed by an e........so I couldn't make a word out of it.

Now that you pointed it out, it definately looks like Brad.