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

[SnooperDuper]

I have contributed already, if you must know, and I never said I was buying the book at all, let alone only buying it because I expected half of the money to go to the victims.

I thought that I had heard somewhere that she was giving 50% of the proceeds to charity, and I found that admirable, but perhaps a high number, so I am curious as to what the actual amount will be.

I don't think this is a charity project? I haven't heard anywhere that she is doing it for charity.

 

[canadiangirl]

Well personally I don't feel anyone should profit from someone else's grief, however I suppose that is why I work in the profession I do. Although I would find it very interesting to read something written by a person who was convicted. No proceeds to be made, just strictly a blog format would be something of interest to me. Basically we've been here the entire time, I feel a book while a publication ban is in place still is just a recap of what we already know. MOO

 

[SnooperDuper]

Well personally I don't feel anyone should profit from someone else's grief, however I suppose that is why I work in the profession I do. Although I would find it very interesting to read something written by a person who was convicted. No proceeds to be made, just strictly a blog format would be something of interest to me. Basically we've been here the entire time, I feel a book while a publication ban is in place still is just a recap of what we already know. MOO

I believe ABro's book goes back far beyond 2012. We've only really heard events from 2012 onwards in MSM and the whole story of DM and MS's life before that remains to be told.

 

[canadiangirl]

I believe ABro's book goes back far beyond 2012. We've only really heard events from 2012 onwards in MSM and the whole story of DM and MS's life before that remains to be told.

Both families are very private. We have heard of both their upbringings, both families are pretty private when it comes to talking to the media.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Both families are very private. We have heard of both their upbringings, both families are pretty private when it comes to talking to the media.

That doesn't mean that people who knew the families won't speak on the record.

 

[MsSherlock]

I have contributed already, if you must know, and I never said I was buying the book at all, let alone only buying it because I expected half of the money to go to the victims.

I thought that I had heard somewhere that she was giving 50% of the proceeds to charity, and I found that admirable, but perhaps a high number, so I am curious as to what the actual amount will be.

I don't work a regular salaried job, and always find it funny that people at head office who earn a salary are the first to ask me and others like me to give a percentage of everything we earn to the Company's charity and the people who earn a salary aren't expected to do the same. They actually guilt us into it. Double standard? Twisted perception? Crime is a business that people earn a living off of. Judges, Lawyers, court staff and journalists. I just can't imagine asking Justice G to donate a portion of his salary because he got to preside over this major case and will now be somewhat famous. Same with the Law firms involved- look at all that free publicity each of the firms have received. I would imagine that TD can't even keep up with the calls! According to AC, this case has done wonders for his career. If the convicted murdering duo of DM & MS didn't take a victim that fateful night, all of these people would have been successfully working on something else. MOO

 

[canadiangirl]

That doesn't mean that people who knew the families won't speak on the record.

This is true but I tend not to hold much weight in hearsay.

 

[SnooperDuper]

This is true but I tend not to hold much weight in hearsay.

If someone has direct experience with the family, it's not hearsay.

 

[canadiangirl]

If someone has direct experience with the family, it's not hearsay.

If someone has direct experience with the families they would have gone on record long before now. This has been big news. Headlines everywhere. Reporters live for this kind of thing. They all want the story first.

 

[SnooperDuper]

If someone has direct experience with the families they would have gone on record long before now. This has been big news. Headlines everywhere. Reporters live for this kind of thing. They all want the story first.

Perhaps people did go on the record long ago, but there are limits to what MSM can publish when the trial is ongoing. IMO a lot of reporters have been sitting on info they just can't publish.

 

[canadiangirl]

Perhaps people did go on the record long ago, but there are limits to what MSM can publish when the trial is ongoing. IMO a lot of reporters have been sitting on info they just can't publish.

Yes exactly due to the publication ban

 

[SnooperDuper]

Yes exactly due to the publication ban

Well they have to be careful that there is not too much bias in the news that they are reporting. If there were many damning articles about DM and MS's character it might affect the two's ability to get a fair trial. For this reason a lot of detail never hit the press.

 

[canadiangirl]

Well they have to be careful that there is not too much bias in the news that they are reporting. If there were many damning articles about DM and MS's character it might affect the two's ability to get a fair trial. For this reason a lot of detail never hit the press.

This trial is over now, so I would suspect they would be waiting to push the button on what they knew such as AC Wayward Son article.
However to be fair there are 2 more upcoming trials for DM. So likely what can be published is still limited as it would affect that as well.

 

[SnooperDuper]

The trial is over now, so I would suspect they would be waiting to push the button on what they knew such as AC Wayward Son article

Yes, but that was just a feature-sized article. No one has tackled the question of WHY DM and MS turned out the way that they did.

 

[canadiangirl]

Yes, but that was just a feature-sized article. No one has tackled the question of WHY DM and MS turned out the way that they did.

Well I doubt anyone has the answer to that question. It would be pure speculation. Even talking to someone's parents directly I'm sure they don't know. I don't see the value in it personally. Now, interview DM and MS themselves, that would be an interesting perspective. But talking to someone who knew the family holds very little value IMO.

People who know my family may think things are off. I had a father who was never around because he worked his a$$ off to support all of us. That doesn't mean I was neglected in any way because I had an absent father figure a lot of the time. But outsiders, (or insiders) may see it like that.

 

[Juballee]

I don't work a regular salaried job, and always find it funny that people at head office who earn a salary are the first to ask me and others like me to give a percentage of everything we earn to the Company's charity and the people who earn a salary aren't expected to do the same. They actually guilt us into it. Double standard? Twisted perception? Crime is a business that people earn a living off of. Judges, Lawyers, court staff and journalists. I just can't imagine asking Justice G to donate a portion of his salary because he got to preside over this major case and will now be somewhat famous. Same with the Law firms involved- look at all that free publicity each of the firms have received. I would imagine that TD can't even keep up with the calls! According to AC, this case has done wonders for his career. If the convicted murdering duo of DM & MS didn't take a victim that fateful night, all of these people would have been successfully working on something else. MOO

I'm confused, are you saying that people should continue committing heinous crimes so that people like TD and AC can stay in business, since it's doing wonders for certain careers?

There is a huge difference between a judge whose job it is to proceed over a trial being paid for his work and someone who chooses to take the details of the crime, and in their own time, of their own free will, with no one like a newspaper paying them to be there, and turn that into what is frankly, and don't be offended here, but it's entertainment. A book is considered entertainment if it's not a text book or an instruction manual, that why they sell them at places like the airport, to entertain people who have to wait.

The newspapers are not considered as much entertainment (or used to be!) because they provide for the people's right to witness trials, to ensure that there is transparency in justice. They write about it and then they move on, and I bet they all gave generously to Tim's fund, I bet even the judge did. I wouldn't be surprised if even MB did privately at some point. So I don't see why anyone would be offended by asking how much of the proceeds of the money being made off of the book about the murderers will be going to Tim's fund, since he is the victim at the heart of all this. Unless this book is just to glorify the murderers?

Also, I'm not sure how one knows whether or not other people, whether they be salaried or not, are giving to which charities or not? How does that work, unless one is the accountant for everyone? Isn't guilt how most charities solicite money, why do people have to change the channel every time those sad animal welfare commercials come on singing 'In the eyes of the Angels'? No one is forcing you to give to charity, and honestly, my question was for Abro.

All my opinion only.

 

[Juballee]

Perhaps people did go on the record long ago, but there are limits to what MSM can publish when the trial is ongoing. IMO a lot of reporters have been sitting on info they just can't publish.

I think if all those people trying to go on the record had facts that were covered under the publication ban to talk about, they would have been witnesses at trial.

I often find that people's perceptions of the past are often coloured by the knowledge that they gained in the time between then and now.

 

[SnooperDuper]

I think if all those people trying to go on the record had facts that were covered under the publication ban to talk about, they would have been witnesses at trial.

I often find that people's perceptions of the past are often coloured by the knowledge that they gained in the time between then and now.

DM's upbringing wasn't relevant to the trial so I sincerely doubt those people would have been asked to testify about it.

Yes, hindsight is often 20/20 vision.

 

[SnooperDuper]

There is a huge difference between a judge whose job it is to proceed over a trial being paid for his work and someone who chooses to take the details of the crime, and in their own time, of their own free will, with no one like a newspaper paying them to be there, and turn that into what is frankly, and don't be offended here, but it's entertainment.

I am sure that ABro got the typical advance publishers pay when a contract is signed, so the publisher would have been paying her to attend the trial.

ABro's been putting in better than 9 to 5 hours on the case so I wouldn't call this a project for her "spare time". I think it's her job.

If you want an example of "someone who chooses to take the details of the crime, and in their own time, of their own free will, with no one like a newspaper paying them to be there, and turn that into what is frankly, and don't be offended here, but it's entertainment"...I think that would be everyone on WS.

 

[Juballee]

I am sure that ABro got the typical advance publishers pay when a contract is signed, so the publisher would have been paying her to attend the trial.

ABro's been putting in better than 9 to 5 hours on the case so I wouldn't call this a project for her "spare time". I think it's her job.

If you want an example of "someone who chooses to take the details of the crime, and in their own time, of their own free will, with no one like a newspaper paying them to be there, and turn that into what is frankly, and don't be offended here, but it's entertainment"...I think that would be everyone on WS.

Personally I hope Abro chimes in, since otherwise it is all just speculation. It could be that she's already given a percentage of the proceeds she has already gotten to Tim's fund and that she is proud to tell us that.

I also think that if money was being made off of the 'entertainment' we produce here on WS, I would gladly give 100% of my share to Tim's charity.