Verdict: GUILTY for both Millard and Smich of 1st degree murder #2

[Ontario Mom]

For all you people are making Iisho out to be the biggest, most scary criminal ever, it's time to give his Red Shoes promo video another watch. Smich and Millard are way scarier.

I'm pretty sure I've read almost every (trial) post here and I honestly can't say I've seen folks making this tool out to be the biggest, most scary criminal ever. I'm sure it's possible I've missed posts, though.

ETA: I quit reading the individual threads a long time ago.

 

[SnooperDuper]

I don’t say I believe all of his testimony, but I feel his story is plausible in relation to the evidence. For those who say his testimony is geared to the evidence, what else would it be geared to if not to refute something that someone is using to nail your butt to the wall with a life sentence? Of course an accused will attempt to explain evidence that others feel points to his guilt. Why wouldn’t he?

MM’s original use of the word ‘happy’ in her initial interview that somehow morphed into ‘celebration’ (or celebratory?) just prior to trial makes me think she embellished for whatever reason.

If I was of a criminal bent and knew that my buddy had just killed a guy, recognizing what my lunatic friend was capable of might lead me to act as if what he did didn’t bother me. If my buddy is capable of killing a guy, then he’s capable of killing me if a pee him off. Talk of a wedding suit? Well, there was a wedding coming up. I don’t’ place a lot of credence on BD’s testimony given that he previously lied through his teeth and seemed to gear his answers to whichever lawyer happened to be questioning him.

WRT the sausages … DM previously specified he wanted “bacon” at a barbeque. There is a pic (not in evidence) of AM (I think with MH or BD behind him) barbequing with sausages on the grill. DM seems to get what DM wants. Perhaps he didn’t like sausages, specified bacon, and it was MS's way of teasing that they were going to served. Why else would DM talk about bacon? As for a pic of fireside furniture, I believe it was in evidence (?) that they would scope out locations for desireable items. Can't recall if they shared pics of such items, but could have just been an idea for any upcoming summertime event/barbeque. Gun obsession? I know lots of people who legally possess guns who haven’t killed anyone (LE, personal protection). Change of clothes? This was something that was previously associated with other scoping missions, so not just this particular theft/murder.

As for drawing a blank on the gun burial … yeah, I say probably hogwash on that, but given the gun was acquired illegally through MS’s associates, I can see MS being terrified that if that gun could be traced back, he was in pretty big trouble with the n****s who don’t mess around.

We don’t know what that 50 min meeting with DM consisted of so we have nothing to compare. It could have been discussing any number of things. We don’t know; he doesn’t remember. He referred to his emotions as shock, paranoia, stress, so it is possible that is a segment of the whole event he simply doesn’t recall the specifics.

Other Supreme Court rulings on appeal address benefit of the doubt to the appellant (accused), i.e.:

From:
http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1320/index.do?r=AAAAAQAKUGVyc29ubmUgYgE



I consider some of his testimony plausible, and some of the evidence as having the potential for other explanations. I also know that we can believe all, some, or none of the accused's testimony, and give the benefit of the doubt to the accused according to Supreme Court guidelines.

When the Ghozted video came out, no one could be convinced that MS was not the killer.

I think you have to look at the totality of the evidence and the big picture.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

I agree!

Are there rules about "good character" evidence? Such as finishing high school?

Did some of the evidence of MS's crimes have to be admitted since MS used it as an excuse for not going to police?

Good questions. IMO, I don't recall ever hearing about legal restrictions regarding good character evidence, but there very well might be. It would be interesting to know [emoji4]

Also, IMO, regarding your 2nd question, I believe it is a combination of MS taking the stand to testify in his own defence (which opens the doors for questioning about criminal history and other things, I believe) and what we read in the Morton's Musings article regarding a "cut-throat" defence.

All my own opinion, though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Ontario Mom]

When the Ghozted video came out, no one could be convinced that MS was not the killer.

I think you have to look at the totality of the evidence and the big picture.

When that video came out, a LOT of people said "yeah, that was kind of twisted but it's just a video". I quit following the discussions here for a long time due to much arguing that I just didn't want to be a part of. Point being, folks here and folks in the general public have always disagreed on how vile MS actually is. I believe when Laura's case comes to trial, the evidence against Smich will make more than a few jaws hit the floor. Or... maybe not. It's hard to say. I for one, am very glad he's not walking the streets of southern Ontario for the next 25 years. I don't care how cool his hair looks or how serious he is about his education.

moo.

 

[XiolaBlueX]

For all you people are making Iisho out to be the biggest, most scary criminal ever, it's time to give his Red Shoes promo video another watch. Smich and Millard are way scarier.

I don't remember anyone saying Isho is the biggest and scariest criminal ever. I think it's pretty clear that if they DM and/or MS got illegal gun(s) from ISHO and then the gun(s) were implicated in a murder it would be pretty foolish to implicate Isho and/or his crew to LE.

We can chalk up this next statement to my own personal experience from some people I knew well when I was younger - there is a whole sub culture out there in our society of a criminal sort, and a violent sort, that most people don't even know exists or notice, or have an inkling of how complex of a network exists. I'm not saying I'm an expert on this, but Regardless your personal speculation on Ishos 'street cred' and his music video, IMO there are people killed all too often in the drug and weapon trafficking world. This is their reality and their life, and as I said, it is as real to the people in the subculture as our day to day life is to us.

 

[Sillybilly]

When the Ghozted video came out, no one could be convinced that MS was not the killer.

I think you have to look at the totality of the evidence and the big picture.

I'm looking at the evidence that was introduced at trial. Ghozted video was not included. Had it been, I suspect Judge Goodman would have included it in the same caveat in his charge that the jury was not to consider Smich's rap music and his playing video games.

 

[SnooperDuper]

I'm looking at the evidence that was introduced at trial. Ghozted video was not included. Had it been, I suspect Judge Goodman would have included it in the same caveat in his charge that the jury was not to consider Smich's rap music and his playing video games.

Evidence at trial was that DM and MS were bros, tight, in love with one another.

It was only after DM was caught that he turned on MS (and MS turned on DM).

Why is it hard to imagine a time when the two were all in it together?

 

[canadiangirl]

We weren't told for 4.5 months that MS was a low life scum of the earth. Many people here complained there wasn't enough evidence against him during the early part of the trial. After the initial cell phone and video evidence we then heard lots of evidence about DM's DNA, DM's finances, DM's relationships with workers etc.

I had sympathies of him as the underdog during the first part of the trial as well....until we got to the bulk of the evidence that did concern him: the premeditation texts, the post crime behaviour evidence from BD and MM, etc. No evidence presented after that (including MS's testimony) weakened that evidence which I felt indicated his guilt. By the end of the trial, my opinion of his guilt was set and it was based on all of the evidence presented in the whole trial.

Being able to weigh evidence is not a habit as you state. I did not lock in my opinion early as a "bias". I listened to all of the evidence to the very end and it built up against both DM and MS.

I am confident the jurors did the same and weighed all of the evidence to the end of the trial. I think it is insulting to them to assume they were not able to do so.

Respectfully, the media and the public referred to Smich as Millard's wanna-be gangster, petty criminal, low life loser druggie sidekick for the entire trial. If you look at news articles and even past WS threads, it's everywhere. Including inside the courtroom. If you did not form a bias, that is great. But I assure you others did. MOO

 

[canadiangirl]

When the Ghozted video came out, no one could be convinced that MS was not the killer.

I think you have to look at the totality of the evidence and the big picture.

That's not how I recall the ghozted video. To my recollection, here at WS we wondered how these two vastly different people crossed paths.

 

[ABro]

I don't remember anyone saying Isho is the biggest and scariest criminal ever. I think it's pretty clear that if they DM and/or MS got illegal gun(s) from ISHO and then the gun(s) were implicated in a murder it would be pretty foolish to implicate Isho and/or his crew to LE.

We can chalk up this next statement to my own personal experience from some people I knew well when I was younger - there is a whole sub culture out there in our society of a criminal sort, and a violent sort, that most people don't even know exists or notice, or have an inkling of how complex of a network exists. I'm not saying I'm an expert on this, but Regardless your personal speculation on Ishos 'street cred' and his music video, IMO there are people killed all too often in the drug and weapon trafficking world. This is their reality and their life, and as I said, it is as real to the people in the subculture as our day to day life is to us.

Read the last few pages of this thread for just a few examples. Someone suggests MS was too scared to go to the police because of Iisho and another poster suggests that Iisho and the Boyz got to MM and made her change her testimony. Yet, a third poster says Iisho makes convicted murderer Mark Smich look like a choir boy.

Get back to me when Iisho's charged with murder.

 

[CJPRINCESS]

I'm pretty sure I've read almost every (trial) post here and I honestly can't say I've seen folks making this tool out to be the biggest, most scary criminal ever. I'm sure it's possible I've missed posts, though.

ETA: I quit reading the individual threads a long time ago.

No, we just think he looks scary! I Wouldn't want to run into him in a dark alley :hills:

 

[Sillybilly]

Evidence at trial was that DM and MS were bros, tight, in love with one another.

It was only after DM was caught that he turned on MS (and MS turned on DM).

Why is it hard to imagine a time when the two were all in it together?

I was addressing your question about Ghozted, but now we're talking togethership? Okay, it's not about imagining anything .. it's about evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. We can imagine lots of things, but that doesn't make it true. Lots of people love each other and do things together. I don't see the evidence about closeness as proof that MS knew what DM had planned or that he participated in the actual killing of TB.

 

[DMB]

Read the last few pages of this thread for just a few examples. Someone suggests MS was too scared to go to the police because of Iisho and another poster suggests that Iisho and the Boyz got to MM and made her change her testimony. Yet, a third poster says Iisho makes convicted murderer Mark Smich look like a choir boy.

Get back to me when Iisho's charged with murder.

That probably wont be happening any time soon, apparently the evidence has been buried.

 

[ABro]

I don’t say I believe all of his testimony, but I feel his story is plausible in relation to the evidence. For those who say his testimony is geared to the evidence, what else would it be geared to if not to refute something that someone is using to nail your butt to the wall with a life sentence? Of course an accused will attempt to explain evidence that others feel points to his guilt. Why wouldn’t he?

MM’s original use of the word ‘happy’ in her initial interview that somehow morphed into ‘celebration’ (or celebratory?) just prior to trial makes me think she embellished for whatever reason.

If I was of a criminal bent and knew that my buddy had just killed a guy, recognizing what my lunatic friend was capable of might lead me to act as if what he did didn’t bother me. If my buddy is capable of killing a guy, then he’s capable of killing me if a pee him off. Talk of a wedding suit? Well, there was a wedding coming up. I don’t’ place a lot of credence on BD’s testimony given that he previously lied through his teeth and seemed to gear his answers to whichever lawyer happened to be questioning him.

WRT the sausages … DM previously specified he wanted “bacon” at a barbeque. There is a pic (not in evidence) of AM (I think with MH or BD behind him) barbequing with sausages on the grill. DM seems to get what DM wants. Perhaps he didn’t like sausages, specified bacon, and it was MS's way of teasing that they were going to served. Why else would DM talk about bacon? As for a pic of fireside furniture, I believe it was in evidence (?) that they would scope out locations for desireable items. Can't recall if they shared pics of such items, but could have just been an idea for any upcoming summertime event/barbeque. Gun obsession? I know lots of people who legally possess guns who haven’t killed anyone (LE, personal protection). Change of clothes? This was something that was previously associated with other scoping missions, so not just this particular theft/murder.

As for drawing a blank on the gun burial … yeah, I say probably hogwash on that, but given the gun was acquired illegally through MS’s associates, I can see MS being terrified that if that gun could be traced back, he was in pretty big trouble with the n****s who don’t mess around.

We don’t know what that 50 min meeting with DM consisted of so we have nothing to compare. It could have been discussing any number of things. We don’t know; he doesn’t remember. He referred to his emotions as shock, paranoia, stress, so it is possible that is a segment of the whole event he simply doesn’t recall the specifics.

Other Supreme Court rulings on appeal address benefit of the doubt to the appellant (accused), i.e.:

From:
http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1320/index.do?r=AAAAAQAKUGVyc29ubmUgYgE



I consider some of his testimony plausible, and some of the evidence as having the potential for other explanations. I also know that we can believe all, some, or none of the accused's testimony, and give the benefit of the doubt to the accused according to Supreme Court guidelines.

You are having to reach and explain away every piece of evidence individually. If you were on a jury you would be instructed not to do this, but rather to look as the evidence as a whole.

I don't find it reasonable to say Marlena's embellishing, the guns mean nothing, nor does the memory loss, the BBQ was about bacon even though, it was the wrong week, etc.

One or two of those things might be reasonable, but when you go through a long list coming up with the type of explanation you've provided, then it's not IMO reasonable doubt. It's unreasonable doubt.

In any case, as someone else said, the jury has decided and they found him guilty.

I'm not sure why you're quoting that ruling either. Are you suggesting the judge didn't instruct the jury correctly on reasonable doubt? If so, where in your opinion did he err?

 

[Sillybilly]

Read the last few pages of this thread for just a few examples. Someone suggests MS was too scared to go to the police because of Iisho and another poster suggests that Iisho and the Boyz got to MM and made her change her testimony. Yet, a third poster says Iisho makes convicted murderer Mark Smich look like a choir boy.

Get back to me when Iisho's charged with murder.

Oh, I dunno ... I'd be more scared of a guy with an AK47 than some dude whose history was graffiti and (iirc) driving without a licence:

from:
http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/tag/matthew-ward-jackson

Those charges were: Possess Prohibited Firearm with Readily Accessible Ammunition, Possess Firearm Without a License and Registration, Possess Firearm Knowing that He Did Not Have a License or Registration, three counts of Possess Prohibited Device, Possess Prohibited Weapon in Breach of Prohibition Order, four counts of Fail to Comply with Recognizance, Possess Cocaine for the Purpose of Trafficking, and Possess Proceeds of Crime.

The firearm in question was a headline-making AK-47.

 

[Claroon]

to echo another poster, I am confident the jurors weighed all of the evidence to the end of the trial. I think it is insulting to them to assume they were not able to do so. And that is even without them hearing what wasn't allowed. SB is moving on, so should we. IMO.

 

[canadiangirl]

Oh, I dunno ... I'd be more scared of a guy with an AK47 than some dude who's history was graffiti and (iirc) driving without a licence:

from:
http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/tag/matthew-ward-jackson

Not to mention when it was seized it was loaded. And as it's been mentioned over and over again, why have a loaded gun?


police seized a loaded AK-47 assault rifle, among other items, during a drug raid in Mississauga.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...seized-police/article16222661/?service=mobile

 

[Inspector_North]

I was addressing your question about Ghozted, but now we're talking togethership? Okay, it's not about imagining anything .. it's about evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. We can imagine lots of things, but that doesn't make it true. Lots of people love each other and do things together. I don't see the evidence about closeness as proof that MS knew what DM had planned or that he participated in the actual killing of TB.

MS surprised folks with his clever testimony. He stuck to his story, even though he had to claim amnesia one moment and strongly suggest multiple witnesses were mistaken the next. Many WSers and journalists have indicated that MS came across as intelligent. He went toe to toe with DM's defense team for many days, even correcting them several times.

This guy was clever, manipulating and street smart. He had no interest in burning garbage and knew what the Eliminator was for.

He sounded disappointed when DM delayed the mission by saying he thought this was fireworks night.

He knew about the gun(s), and they were not to protect the garbage, or the incinerator.

He is clever, and knew who his friend was, and what he was capable of doing.

He knew who was carrying gun(s) that May night before the test drive.

MOO

 

[ABro]

Oh, I dunno ... I'd be more scared of a guy with an AK47 than some dude whose history was graffiti and (iirc) driving without a licence:

from:
http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/tag/matthew-ward-jackson

That "some dude" you refer to is a guy with a first degree murder conviction and another first degree murder charge. Iisho has a gun trafficking conviction and another weapons charge.

Neither of these guys are warm and cuddly, as I've expressed many times. They're both dangerous. And I think the convicted murderer is more dangerous.

 

[canadiangirl]

That "some dude" you refer to is a guy with a first degree murder conviction and another first degree murder charge. Iisho has a gun trafficking conviction and another weapons charge.

Neither of these guys are warm and cuddly, as I've expressed many times. They're both dangerous. And I think the convicted murderer is more dangerous.

Gun trafficking to the murderer(s)?
Think it's the first time it's happened? Or first time he was caught? I wonder how one gains experience in making a "dirty girl clean again"?