Trial Thread 4/19/2012

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
According to the Crown's opening statement, jurors will also learn who Rafferty was calling or messaging. The trial continues Friday.

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/19/19652791.html

Maybe CS will take the stand since he was bbm her that day a lot. I am sure that will be interesting.

I am curious as to who else will take the stand. Who do you guys think they will call, his mother? Or do you think his mother will be a witness for the defense?
 
I was thinking Millhaven, too. But, its not that old! I'm pretty sure it was built to replace Kingston in the late 60s or early 70s. But yeah, it sounds pretty hard core.

Yeah it is very hard core, not really that old but it has a reputation for being a very scary place. I don't know if they have a segregation area for guys like MR, RW and PB. I don't think so. I've driven by Millhaven lots and it gives me the creeps just looking at it!!
 
Maybe CS will take the stand since he was bbm her that day a lot. I am sure that will be interesting.

I am curious as to who else will take the stand. Who do you guys think they will call, his mother? Or do you think his mother will be a witness for the defense?

I can see his Mom being a hostile witness for the crown :)
 
I'm all caught up! Woohoo!

I want to add my thanks to Hello Kitty for all the help understanding this cell phone stuff, it is very confusing to me.

And thank you Kamille for that wonderful timeline of that horrible day, that really helped as well.

And of course, thanks to tweeters and to everyone who is posting! Tori will forever remain in all of our memories and no matter how horrible the crime was, how difficult it is to sit through it pales in comparison to the love, sparkle and joy this little brought into the world. She will never be forgotten, never.

Its good that the worst of the Crown's case is over, I fear the defence will bring some of difficult stuff up, but maybe it won't take long, and then we'll be on verdict watch. I hate waiting for verdicts, I need more patience, but I have to say that I appreciate each and everyone here, because it's good to see that she is as important to all of you as she is to me.

I know that life will never be the same for her family. I can't imagine anything will ever fill the whole in their heart that came when they knew Tori was gone. I am so grateful especially to Rodney because I think it is important that we learn whatever we can abut the things that will keep our children safer.

And hopefully this will all bring light to the fact that their is always more we can do to help teens going thigh the system as TLM did. Perhaps there really was nothing to be done for her that would have prevented her from taking the path she did, but I think it is important for our society to look for ways that we can improve the system. I wish the tragedies of years earlier experienced by one child didn't propel that child as grown up to bring so much pain to another little one, but that seems to be the way it is many times, and I think there are things we can do to decrease the chances of that happening because it just doesn't need to end up that way.

Thanks again everyone!
 
What does "hostile witness" mean

A hostile witness is a witness in a trial who testifies for the opposing party or a witness who offers adverse testimony to the calling party during direct examination.
A witness called by the opposing party is presumed hostile. A witness called by the direct examiner can be declared hostile by a judge, at the request of the examiner, when the witness' testimony is openly antagonistic or clearly prejudiced to the opposing party.
A party examining a hostile witness may question the witness as if in cross-examination, thus permitting the use of leading questions. A hostile witness is sometimes known as an adverse witness or an unfavorable witness.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_witness"]Hostile witness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
I was thinking Millhaven, too. But, its not that old! I'm pretty sure it was built to replace Kingston in the late 60s or early 70s. But yeah, it sounds pretty hard core.

That's all!
 
I've been working on a timeline for April 8th from the information that we've been getting. It's still a work in progress but perhaps it will help with some of the phone time confusion from today. If there is anything wrong or missing please let me know.


April 8: MR car caught on CASS surveillance video driving north on Fyfe at 9:04:05am.

April 8: MR makes post on Facebook “good things are comming my way” at 10:01am.

April 8: MR stays on AL’s Facebook for approx. 20 minutes after updating his status. Makes no post or comment on her page. Logs off at 10:22am.

April 8: MR caught on Bank of Montreal video surveillance in Woodstock at 11:13am making cash withdrawal of $400 and texting on his cell phone.

April 8: MR phone call logged at 11:37am.

April 8: Last phone call or data on MR cell phone out of Woodstock logged at 12:06pm.

April 8: MR dropped off TLM at employment centre at approx. 2:20pm. This was after she had returned home from the Foodland, shot up some Oxy and then he had shown up asking for some. So they “went to get some” and then he dropped her off at employment centre. Told her he was going out of town. No times recorded for these events but they would have taken place sometime between 11:13am and 2:20pm. He was in her driveway when she returned from employment centre, time unknown.

April 8: MR car caught on CASS surveillance video driving north on Fyfe at 3:05:15pm. According to TLM testimony, she should have been in the car at this time. This was supposedly the drive by past the school after he had picked up TLM from her home and when he “dared” her.

April 8: MR car caught on Esso surveillance video at 3:20:22pm. Video seems to show him alone in car at this time.

April 8: MR car caught on Esso surveillance video leaving station and turning onto Norwich Ave at 3:25:24pm.

April 8: MR car caught on CASS surveillance at 3:30:56pm driving north on Fyfe and turning into nursing home.

April 8: Tori and TLM caught on CASS surveillance at 3:32:20pm walking north on Fyfe and crossing street towards nursing home at 3:32:31pm.

April 8: MR car caught on CASS surveillance exiting nursing home and turning north on Fyfe at 3:33pm.

April 8: MR phone accessed data for the first time since 12:06pm at 4:18pm. That data connection lasted 44 minutes. Phone call placed from MR phone at 4:19pm in the Guelph area.

April 8: MR arrived at BA’s home in Guelph and placed call to her at 4:28pm because she wasn’t home yet.

April 8: BA came home a few minutes later, around 4:30pm and MR went into her house for about 10 minutes.

April 8: MR caught on video at Petro Canada station ATM, next to Home Depot, withdrawing $80 cash at approx. 5pm.

April 8: MR car caught on HD surveillance video in parking lot at 5:04pm. TLM exited car in back of lot and crossed parking lot to enter store.

April 8: TLM caught on HD surveillance video purchasing garbage bags and hammer from 5:05pm – 5:12pm.

April 8: TLM caught on HD surveillance video exiting store while Rafferty car drives across parking lot, trunk opens automatically and TLM puts purchase in the trunk before getting into car and driving off at 5:13pm.

April 8: Phone records show phone call made by MR at 7:47pm that pinged off the Mt Forest cell tower.

April 8: Phone records show a call in Arthur area at 8:05pm and another 3 calls in the Guelph/Cambridge area at 8:41pm, 8:45pm and 8:49pm.

April 8: Data calls on MR’s phone in the Woodstock/Drumbo area at 11:21pm and 11:37pm.

April 8: A police officer spots Rafferty car on Hwy 59 south of Woodstock just before midnight.


Wasn't there a deposit made into MR account at 14:58 of 100.00 dollars
 
I wonder who Rafferty was calling? Any guesses?
 
And I would really like to address the POF issue as it has been pointed out that it is not uncommon for people to abuse that site.

I think there is a big difference between someone who has a chart with woman he is pursuing and MTR. I can't say for sure but I'm assuming that it is not common for men who are playing the field to talk about the little girl they, at the very least, helped in concealing her murder. They did not talk about the woman that killed that little girl as someone they wanted to help, someone they were concerned about.

I'm also guessing that other men who are flow chart dating don't have a list a mile long of fake jobs to cover for the fact that they are unemployed. And then all of the lies and manipulation those women proved that MTR was capable of, even if it is something that other people do, that doesn't take away from the fact that his behavior showed that he is skilled in deception, that to many people in his life he lied to more than he told the truth.
 
For those interested in what the jury will have to decide at the end of this trial......I think this article gives an easy to understand account.

**NOA means name of accused.

The article talks about all aspects of a trial.....from jury selection to sentencing.

One question often brought up on the forum is the taking of notes by jurors. They are allowed to take notes during the trial, but cannot leave the courtroom with them. The jurors are expected to pay attention to the witnesses and note taking would be a distraction. Notes are not allowed during deliberations.

Jurors may discuss the case ONLY when they are all together in the jury room and MUST NOT form an opinion of guilt or innocence until after the trail is completed and they have received the Judge's instructions.

I think that (7) bolded may be the most difficult for the jury to consider.

I will post a link at the bottom of the page for the full version.

5. Fundamental Principles

5.1 Presumption of Innocence, Burden of Proof and Reasonable Doubt
(Last revised March 2011)


[1] The first and most important principle of law applicable to every criminal case is the presumption of innocence. NOA enters the proceedings presumed to be innocent, and the presumption of innocence remains throughout the case unless the Crown, on the evidence put before you, satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that s/he is guilty.

[2] Two rules flow from the presumption of innocence. One is that the Crown bears the burden of proving guilt. The other is that guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. These rules are inextricably linked with the presumption of innocence to ensure that no innocent person is convicted.

[3] The burden of proof rests with the Crown and never shifts. There is no burden on NOA to prove that s/he is innocent. S/he does not have to prove anything.[22]

[4] Now what does the expression “beyond a reasonable doubt” mean? A reasonable doubt is not an imaginary or frivolous doubt. It is not based on sympathy for or prejudice against anyone involved in the proceedings. Rather, it is based on reason and common sense. It is a doubt that arises logically from the evidence or from an absence of evidence.

[5] It is virtually impossible to prove anything to an absolute certainty, and the Crown is not required to do so. Such a standard would be impossibly high. However, the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt falls much closer to absolute certainty than to probable guilt. You must not find NOA guilty unless you are sure s/he is guilty. Even if you believe that NOA is probably guilty or likely guilty, that is not sufficient. In those circumstances, you must give the benefit of the doubt to NOA and find him/her not guilty because the Crown has failed to satisfy you of his/her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

[6] I will explain to you the essential elements that the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt to establish NOA’s guilt. For the moment, the important point for you to understand is that the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt applies to each of those essential elements. It does not apply to individual items of evidence. You must decide, looking at the evidence as a whole, whether the Crown has proved NOA’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

[7] If you have a reasonable doubt about NOA’s guilt arising from the evidence, the absence of evidence, or the credibility or the reliability of one or more of the witnesses, then you must find him/her not guilty.

[8] In short:

· The presumption of innocence applies at the beginning and continues throughout the trial, unless you are satisfied, after considering the whole of the evidence, that the Crown has displaced the presumption of innocence by proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

· If, based upon the evidence, you are sure that NOA is guilty of the offence(s) with which s/he is charged, you must convict him/her of that offence since that demonstrates that you are satisfied of his/her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

· If you have a reasonable doubt whether NOA is guilty of the offence(s) with which s/he is charged, you must give him/her the benefit of that doubt and find him/her not guilty.

http://www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca/english/la...I-Jury-Instruction-Preliminary-2011-03_en.asp
 
Wasn't there a deposit made into MR account at 14:58 of 100.00 dollars

I think there might have been but it was not done by him or LE would have shown video of that too. So it was probably a transfer or direct deposit done via electronic banking. Don't think it has much bearing on what the two of them were doing that day.

MOO
 
I wonder if the $400.00 withdrawal was to do with the drugs or did he make a deal with TLM if she got him a child, he would pay her?

Food for thought.

Just MOO
 
Wow!

The Nose Knows

Can cadaver dogs really sniff out 30-year-old remains?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_..._cadaver_dogs_smell_30_year_old_corpses_.html


I was refering to Etan Patz's story but included the wrong link.

Here is the correct one:
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/19/f-b-i-renews-search-for-etan-patz-in-soho-basement/


OMG. Thanks for posting, I can't believe that.

O/T For those who are not familiar with Etan's case, he was the first missing child to be put on the side of a milk carton, and his case raised awareness for stranger danger.
 
Rafferty Blackberry Evidence
31 Pages
Courtesy of London Free Press

12 Key Cell Events, Data and Voice, April 8, 2009

dynamic_resize


http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/19/19655401.html#next
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
182
Guests online
3,631
Total visitors
3,813

Forum statistics

Threads
604,543
Messages
18,173,302
Members
232,658
Latest member
CinderFricknElla
Back
Top