trial thread: 3/30/2012

[snoofer]

I gather MR wasn't allowed to leave the courtroom:couch::moo:. I wonder if he will look at the pictures. They should force him to!

it might be too exciting for him IMO to look

 

[robynhood]

..wow great post of the recovery site ....says a lot...IMO ..thanks wondergirl ! ...amazing she remebered all these details....Now that speaks volumes to me personally ....robynhood ...Ya let us see how innocent your client is ???....waiting again for a drama from defense ....I think Crown has only slowly started to unwind a grosesome tail....they got the goods ...we are only beginning chapter 4 folks....Robynhood's honest Opinion!...abusive men hide well !..look at what history has told us about others accused ...IMO..again!

 

[flipflop]

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?

The defence and the crown are not up on charges...MR is!!

 

[Snoopster]

Thank-you, Det.-Sgt. Smyth.

Ontario Provincial Police Det.-Sgt. Jim Smyth, leaves the courthouse in London, Ontario, March 30, 2012 following his testimony at the trial of Michael Rafferty, the accused in the killing of eight year old Victoria Stafford. Smyth was the investigator who discovered Victoria's body in in July 2009.

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

I wholeheartedly agree, Wondergirl! I thought people like this only existed on TV shows. I became a strong fan of Jim Smyth when I watched the videos of his interrogation of Russell Williams. That was a true piece of art. How many people are born with the kind of intuition that he has?? On behalf of society, I thank you Det. Staff-Sgt Jim Smyth!

Here is a link to the updated story from the National Post...with a bit more colour about how Det.-Sgt. Jim Smyth found Tori's body.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/03/30/christie-blatchford-a-sketch-and-a-hunch-led-jim-smyth-to-find-tori-staffords-body/

 

[dilbert]

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!

Funny how he's directing the cops to people who could possibly implicate him, ie; TLM and CM. Why would he do that if he was trying to take the heat off himself?

Just for a second, pretend you believe the defence's suggestion of what happened that day, (I know it will be difficult, lol) if TLM told MR that she took Tori because of a drug debt, and if the woman, Amanda, that he was seeing was telling him the same thing, wouldn't it make sense for MR to tell the cops that info about TM and JG having a drug debt?

MOO

 

[daisy.faithfull]

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?

They don't have the time. If they could skip reporting on the testimony I'm sure they would report more about MTR's facial expressions. If they were able to they probably would have reported more about TLM's facial expressions.

I know there have been people here that have expressed they wished that Canada allowed cameras in court, I think it's because people want to see what is going on and that includes facial expressions.

Facial expressions aren't evidence, but they are interesting.

 

[Delaware]

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:

:seeya:Hi Swedie,
The part I colored in blue up above confused me at first. I think you meant to say that the defense is not denying that MR WAS present right? If I have misunderstood, your post somehow, pls clarify for me. I kinda thought that was the whole premise of their pitiful defense, that he was there and walked away from the car while Tori was murdered then helped clean up the mess and the body.

Incidentally, the defense kinda reminds me of something I once heard a doctor tell his receptionist:
"So this girl came in, and she looked pregnant, so being her doctor, I asked if she was sexually active. The girl looked at me and with a dead straight face said, 'no, I just lie there'!!". I'm sure the doctor was just telling a joke to his staff member, but still, the point seems the same to me when compared to this case. MR didn't do anything, he just stood there. :banghead:
:seeya:

 

[~n/t~]

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

And what does "Brad" have to do with this case? Did I miss something?

 

[dilbert]

Gosh, she really changes her mind a lot. This is quite the switch from the May 19th interview we all saw, and even more of a switch from the testimony she gave.
No mention of the sexual assault during this interview either, I wonder if she recanted and then changed her mind about that too? Imagine what that would have done to the Crown's case.

In January of this year, however, Ms. McClintic drastically revised the most crucial detail of her story, telling a counsellor at the Grand Valley Institution for Women, the federal prison in Kitchener where she is incarcerated, that it was in fact she who wielded the hammer that killed Tori.

The counsellor apprised police, and the next day Ms. McClintic was brought to the Waterloo police station, where she repeated this new version of events to Det. Staff-Sgt. Smyth.

Asked why she was speaking up now, she told him that it was because she didn’t want to testify at Mr. Rafferty’s upcoming trial.

Why not, Det. Staff-Sgt. Smyth asked, adding that whether she wanted to testify in court or not, she would have to do so.

Ms. McClintic replied that Mr. Rafferty was not guilty of murder and should not be imprisoned for something he did not do.

But in her trial evidence this month, she seemed to change tack yet again, asserting that although she inflicted the fatal blows, both she and Mr. Rafferty were both responsible for Tori’s dreadful death.

“I’m not the only guilty person here,” she testified.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ords-body-rafferty-trial-told/article2387154/

 

[daisy.faithfull]

Funny how he's directing the cops to people who could possibly implicate him, ie; TLM and CM. Why would he do that if he was trying to take the heat off himself?

Just for a second, pretend you believe the defence's suggestion of what happened that day, (I know it will be difficult, lol) if TLM told MR that she took Tori because of a drug debt, and if the woman, Amanda, that he was seeing was telling him the same thing, wouldn't it make sense for MR to tell the cops that info about TM and JG having a drug debt?

MOO

Okay, so he points to TLM/CM. That is not necessarily pointing to himself if he thinks that once LE talks to TLM she tells them that it was all her.

 

[Jezbel]

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?

Because you can't see the faces of the defence team or the crown or the witness who is testifying where the reporters are tweeting from. No Internet is allowed in the courtroom so all reporters who are tweeting are in the overflow room. The one camera is faced right at MTR and you can see his expressions and movements clearly.

I do find it interesting to see how MTR reacts to certain things, not saying that he is acting in a wrong or right way because who knows what that is but I think it says a lot how he behaves during different parts of testimony.

Jmo

 

[matou]

And what does "Brad" have to do with this case? Did I miss something?

MR throws this name `Brad` into his interview with police on May 15th. The name dropping essentially comes out of nowhere and I find it very suspicious.

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 hecame up to me outta nowhere and said hey and I turned around this guy with these like red bloodshot eyes he’s like how’sTerri and I I was sketched up by that I had no idea who he wasand I was like uh I don’t know and he’s like well don’t youvisit 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 tome 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

p. 38

http://www.scribd.com/doc/86510694/TRANSCRIPT-Michael-Rafferty-interview-with-OPP-2009-05-15

 

[dilbert]

Okay, so he points to TLM/CM. That is not necessarily pointing to himself if he thinks that once LE talks to TLM she tells them that it was all her.

If the cops are being told that Tori was taken because of a drug debt, wouldn't you think they would bring that up with TM and JG to find out who they owed? Find out who they are in debt to, find the kidnapper/killer. If TM and JG owed the debt to TLM, that would lead the cops to her, and in turn, lead the cops to MR.

Yes, I think he was trying to cover his *advertiser censored* in that interview, but I believe he was also trying to lead the cops to TLM without having to implicate himself.
That's my opinion and interpretation, only time will tell.

MOO

 

[nursebeeme]

peeps, please do not name call... thanks so much (I don't want to have to get out my nurse tools :nurse:

 

[Snoopster]

While I'm not totally up to speed on everything posted on Tori's threads, I'm guessing that some of these video scenes from when her body was found were in the media earlier. In any case, here is today's CTV story (including video from when her body was found) on the case.
Somehow these scenes have more relvance now that we've seen the photos from the crime scene.


http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20120330/tori-stafford-murder-trial-rafferty-120330/

 

[daisy.faithfull]

If the cops are being told that Tori was taken because of a drug debt, wouldn't you think they would bring that up with TM and JG to find out who they owed? Find out who they are in debt to, find the kidnapper/killer. If TM and JG owed the debt to TLM, that would lead the cops to her, and in turn, lead the cops to MR.

Yes, I think he was trying to cover his *advertiser censored* in that interview, but I believe he was also trying to lead the cops to TLM without having to implicate himself.
That's my opinion and interpretation, only time will tell.

MOO

Well, that could be possible, but then why wouldn't he just tell LE what happened to begin with? Because he was afraid of TLM?

 

[Ardy]

They don't have the time. If they could skip reporting on the testimony I'm sure they would report more about MTR's facial expressions. If they were able to they probably would have reported more about TLM's facial expressions.

I know there have been people here that have expressed they wished that Canada allowed cameras in court, I think it's because people want to see what is going on and that includes facial expressions.

Facial expressions aren't evidence, but they are interesting.

I totally agree........cameras in the courtroom would allow people to consider the reactions and body language of all the parties involved, but tweets based solely on a reporter's interpretation of the accused.......isn't of much value.

As to the notion that the expressions of prosecutors or defense lawyers don't matter because they aren't the accused...................

I would point to the OJ Simpson trial............where millions of television viewers got to see the expression on Prosecutor Chris Darden's face when he demanded OJ try on the gloves...........and they didn't fit.

Or the facial expression of co-Prosecutor Marcia Clarke........who had argued vigorously against Darden having OJ try on the gloves.......and having to sit there and watch OJ struggle to put on the gloves.

Some of the best defense lawyers in the world, use their "kindly manner", "folksy way of speaking" or "facial expressions" to try to bring the jury into their confidence and trust.........so they can open up an avenue of belief in their client's innocence.

OJ's lawyer, Johnny Cochrane was good at this.........but the real expert is defense lawyer Jerry Spence, whose folksy charm enabled him to never lose a case.

Here is a link here from Youtube for anyone who wants to view a short clip of Jerry Spence displaying how he questions a witness. There are other clips of him on Youtube.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EK9SLLlObk"]Gerry Spence opens a can of whup *advertiser censored* - YouTube[/ame]

 

[snoofer]

And what does "Brad" have to do with this case? Did I miss something?

I wonder if the IMO guy he ran into that said "hey don't you know TLM, the guy he described in audio tape with police that he found creepy...was JG...as he said Brad or Brian or something....THEN on the note...again...BRAD...maybe MTR wrote the cig package number for TM and JG but he remembered oh yea his name isnt Brad it is J_____. IMO MTR mixes the two names up but talking about same person...JG. IMO

Not sure of the significance.

The police in audio asked him if he knew JG, MR said no. But then he brought up the story about some red eyed creepy guy. I think he brought it up in case someone said he did know JG. Seems MR might have written that number on cig pack because someone mixed up the name Brad for J___ ??? Point being if he wrote the number on cig pack he DID know JG ...why not admit he knew him? It would make it seem that he DID know who Tori was possibly.

 

[~n/t~]

MR throws this name `Brad` into his interview with police on May 15th. The name dropping essentially comes out of nowhere and I find it very suspicious.


p. 38

http://www.scribd.com/doc/86510694/TRANSCRIPT-Michael-Rafferty-interview-with-OPP-2009-05-15

Right but I don't get what he has to do with this case except he is someone who the accused killer mentioned in the interview claimed scared the **** out of him. Are some speculating this Brad was James? Was James onto MR, perhaps? It would make sense with the question this alleged Brad asked.

By May 15th., I think the word was out (in Woodstock) that TLM was the woman seen with Tori. IMO

Can't wait to hear what the accused killer did following that interview. Chapter 10.

 

[daisy.faithfull]

I totally agree........cameras in the courtroom would allow people to consider the reactions and body language of all the parties involved, but tweets based solely on a reporter's interpretation of the accused.......isn't of much value.

As to the notion that the expressions of prosecutors or defense lawyers don't matter because they aren't the accused...................

I would point to the OJ Simpson trial............where millions of television viewers got to see the expression on Prosecutor Chris Darden's face when he demanded OJ try on the gloves...........and they didn't fit.

Or the facial expression of co-Prosecutor Marcia Clarke........who had argued vigorously against Darden having OJ try on the gloves.......and having to sit there and watch OJ struggle to put on the gloves.

Some of the best defense lawyers in the world, use their "kindly manner", "folksy way of speaking" or "facial expressions" to try to bring the jury into their confidence and trust.........so they can open up an avenue of belief in their client's innocence.

OJ's lawyer, Johnny Cochrane was good at this.........but the real expert is defense lawyer Jerry Spence, whose folksy charm enabled him to never lose a case.

Here is a link here from Youtube for anyone who wants to view a short clip of Jerry Spence displaying how he questions a witness. There are other clips of him on Youtube.

Gerry Spence opens a can of whup *advertiser censored* - YouTube

Reporters tweeted interpretations might not tell us a whole bunch, but they do tell us a bit, and it is interesting.

And don't even gt me started about the glove.....

ETA: that vid isn't in a real court, its on stage.