Verdict: GUILTY for both Millard and Smich of 1st degree murder #3

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

JPC said:
I am still not certain her 'new' legal counsel won't ask for more time to prepare. I think that by living freely she is trying to portray in a very arrogant way that she is not guilty. Based on her new legal counsel, I am not confident that she will be convicted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Or.. She is living it up while she can.

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk
 
The judges instructions to the jury at DM/MS trial was to carefully consider all of the evidence heard and that they may believe some, none, or all of it. I presume that the judge in this trial will do the same if she testifies, and there is significant incriminating evidence that we know of. There may be more evidence that we're not aware of.

I was actually reading an article more to do with Brett Ryan and the cross-bow killing and as I was reading, I felt there were a lot of parallels concerning character/personality traits and perhaps motives to DM and MS. DM wrt his father's and maybe LB's deaths, and MS wrt his willingness to sign on as MS's partner, in that they might have represented a threat to their lifestyle. Very interesting article.

http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/fall08/6/

All moo
 
[video=twitter;777279994498285568]https://twitter.com/AnnB03/status/777279994498285568[/video]

worth mentioning I think
 
Bellers said:
[video=twitter;777279994498285568]https://twitter.com/AnnB03/status/777279994498285568[/video]

worth mentioning I think
Click to expand...

Why admit he needs a lawyer? Thought he felt confident in his own abilty to "beat this charge".....
 
Arrogant is a very good word to describe CN. IMO there is a personality disorder going on with her as well. I actually think that she believes she did nothing wrong. Just another day in the life of CN and DM. The fact remains that she did spend time in jail before mommy and daddy put up the bail money so LE must have some really good stuff on her. Her performance in court while testifying must have been horribly humiliating for her mother who sat in the courtroom with her and her father who would have heard it all from home. It says a lot about a person who would behave in that matter and not care how you are affecting other people.
 
Is this about his appeal or the babcock case?
 
Tealgrove said:
Arrogant is a very good word to describe CN. IMO there is a personality disorder going on with her as well. I actually think that she believes she did nothing wrong. Just another day in the life of CN and DM. The fact remains that she did spend time in jail before mommy and daddy put up the bail money so LE must have some really good stuff on her. Her performance in court while testifying must have been horribly humiliating for her mother who sat in the courtroom with her and her father who would have heard it all from home. It says a lot about a person who would behave in that matter and not care how you are affecting other people.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more. I think LE has a mountain of evidence. I'm inexperienced with the law, but I don't I feel there is a lot of evidence and that we've only seen the tip of the iceberg. I can't fathom being in jail for 4 months (?) if the evidence was iffy. At first I thought I was a strong arm tactic to get her to talk but now I know otherwise.

I honestly spit my tea at my screen when she admitted to the sexual act in the car. Prude or not (clearly not) but I couldn't face any member of my family without blushing, having said that... It go ahead, put on your chasity belt....

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk
 
ILoveDateline said:
I couldn't agree more. I think LE has a mountain of evidence. I'm inexperienced with the law, but I don't I feel there is a lot of evidence and that we've only seen the tip of the iceberg. I can't fathom being in jail for 4 months (?) if the evidence was iffy. At first I thought I was a strong arm tactic to get her to talk but now I know otherwise.

I honestly spit my tea at my screen when she admitted to the sexual act in the car. Prude or not (clearly not) but I couldn't face any member of my family without blushing, having said that... It go ahead, put on your chasity belt....

Sent from my LG
Click to expand...


CN has no conscience, nor cares how mortifying all of this is to her parents......
 
mozzagirl said:
Why did they spend so much time discussing whether the jury pool in Hamilton may be tainted and if she will ask for change of venue?! She is having trial by judge not jury. :facepalm:
Click to expand...

Good ole Alex Pierson, back with her great reporting! Well, she could have at least put her guest on track with that fact. Why would there e a change of venue even considered when the purpose of that would be due to potentially tainted jury selection, but yet sooo much time was spent on that. Blah.
 
I hope CN's trial happens in November and we can rest easy that she is where she belongs - in prison - for a long time. Her lack of empathy for Tim's family, crude behavior, "me me me the victim " attitude has gone on long enough. She needs to pay for her crime!
 
Just as a point of conversation, is anyone here seeing the opposite point of view of CN? Most of us (myself included) seem to be of the opinion that she is guilty based on what we know so far, but I'd be interested to hear contrary points of view. I'm sure there's so much we don't yet know but will come out in subsequent trials or after all trials are over.

I don't recall seeing any "CN Innocent Dupe" convos like we saw with some other players. [emoji38]
 
Velma said:
Just as a point of conversation, is anyone here seeing the opposite point of view of CN? Most of us (myself included) seem to be of the opinion that she is guilty based on what we know so far, but I'd be interested to hear contrary points of view. I'm sure there's so much we don't yet know but will come out in subsequent trials or after all trials are over.

I don't recall seeing any "CN Innocent Dupe" convos like we saw with some other players. [emoji38]
Click to expand...

Well the thing is, CN doesn't really seem to be DM's "ex-" gf. They're still in it together. I think DM's "Padawan braid" was grown for CN, to show he still counted on her.

For how many days was MS on the stand? I wonder how long it will take to fully grill CN. I wonder if DM, MS or MWJ will make an appearance. I wonder how many of the supporting cast and crew will be called back - AM?

I wonder how long is a typical penalty for someone with her depth of involvement. She wiped prints, gloves suggest she helped DM with some cleanup, she moved the incinerator, she kept the surveillance system and its recordings in her closet, and she plotted in letters with DM to help him evade his charges - when there was a no contact order between them.

I have this notion that she's going to have a long time to sit and think this all over after this trial.

So thankful it's only three weeks to a wrap.
 
Velma said:
Just as a point of conversation, is anyone here seeing the opposite point of view of CN? Most of us (myself included) seem to be of the opinion that she is guilty based on what we know so far, but I'd be interested to hear contrary points of view. I'm sure there's so much we don't yet know but will come out in subsequent trials or after all trials are over.

I don't recall seeing any "CN Innocent Dupe" convos like we saw with some other players. [emoji38]
Click to expand...

While I was ready to respond and say that it's easy to scoff at the idea of her innocence, followed by a long list of reasons, when I got distracted with the idea that there is very little out there about her involvement that didn't come from her testimony at trial. So I decided to investigate. A search of her name on the CanLII website returns 3 documents and I'm learning all sorts of information about several players. I assume that since the documents are publicly available, I can summarize the good stuff here but it's worth a read and actually not that boring or full of legalese. Parts are redacted or "omitted". I'm only part way through so I'll update if I find more interesting.

ETA: I have a fear of violating the publication ban so I removed the links and part of my post. Can anyone confirm that it is safe to post the CanLii docs here. At the top it says: THIS RULING IS SUBJECT TO A BAN ON PUBLICATION PURSUANT TO S. 648(1) OF THE CRIMINAL CODE AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSMITTED, REPRODUCED OR BROADCAST IN ANY MANNER UNTIL THE JURY IS SEQUESTERED OR A FURTHER ORDER OF THIS COURT ALLOWS. Does this meant this can now be publish because the trial is over?
 
ILoveDateline said:
While I was ready to respond and say that it's easy to scoff at the idea of her innocence, followed by a long list of reasons, when I got distracted with the idea that there is very little out there about her involvement that didn't come from her testimony at trial. So I decided to investigate. A search of her name on the CanLII website returns 3 documents and I'm learning all sorts of information about several players. I assume that since the documents are publicly available, I can summarize the good stuff here but it's worth a read and actually not that boring or full of legalese. Parts are redacted or "omitted". I'm only part way through so I'll update if I find more interesting.

ETA: I have a fear of violating the publication ban so I removed the links and part of my post. Can anyone confirm that it is safe to post the CanLii docs here. At the top it says: THIS RULING IS SUBJECT TO A BAN ON PUBLICATION PURSUANT TO S. 648(1) OF THE CRIMINAL CODE AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSMITTED, REPRODUCED OR BROADCAST IN ANY MANNER UNTIL THE JURY IS SEQUESTERED OR A FURTHER ORDER OF THIS COURT ALLOWS. Does this meant this can now be publish because the trial is over?
Click to expand...

Those 3 documents are in regard to the Millard/Smich cases, and they are published online because the publication ban is no longer in effect. If they were still pub banned, they would not be available. There is likely more info that is pub banned specifically in regard to CN's case, which is not yet available.
 
ILoveDateline said:
While I was ready to respond and say that it's easy to scoff at the idea of her innocence, followed by a long list of reasons, when I got distracted with the idea that there is very little out there about her involvement that didn't come from her testimony at trial. So I decided to investigate. A search of her name on the CanLII website returns 3 documents and I'm learning all sorts of information about several players. I assume that since the documents are publicly available, I can summarize the good stuff here but it's worth a read and actually not that boring or full of legalese. Parts are redacted or "omitted". I'm only part way through so I'll update if I find more interesting.

ETA: I have a fear of violating the publication ban so I removed the links and part of my post. Can anyone confirm that it is safe to post the CanLii docs here. At the top it says: THIS RULING IS SUBJECT TO A BAN ON PUBLICATION PURSUANT TO S. 648(1) OF THE CRIMINAL CODE AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSMITTED, REPRODUCED OR BROADCAST IN ANY MANNER UNTIL THE JURY IS SEQUESTERED OR A FURTHER ORDER OF THIS COURT ALLOWS. Does this meant this can now be publish because the trial is over?
Click to expand...

Those docs have been up there for a while now. I'm assuming if there was any mistake it would have been long ago corrected. IMO safe to post.
 
Thanks, Deugirtni & Snooper.

I'll summarize what I found interesting from the CanLii docs. Sorry if this has already been posted but I found this to be new info to me. Hopefully, it saves someone from having to read the full docs.

This first one (first that I read not the first filed), is an application to exclude evidence by Mark Smich. It basically complains about how LE was put on to him (because any mention of a second suspect was referred to as "Mark", and his rights were violated in concluding that " Mark" was Mark Smich) the search of his mother's house and the use of undue force during his arrest. It involves trying to get the photo lineup with IT thrown out, which MS later agreed to in court that it was him on the test drive. The interesting bits to me are:

“On February 23rd, 2013 Dellen MILLARD and his girlfriend Christina NOUDGA (92/04/26) were stopped and searched at the Rainbow Bridge crossing into Canada. There [sic] vehicle had a strong odour of marihuana. MILLARD had two cell phones on him, one IPhone 4 and one Samsung Galaxy. He was asked to unlock the IPhone as it was locked and MILLARD refused. As a result the IPhone was seized.
Another text to a cell phone contact labeled “Juice” stated that “Maple Gate just got robbed” and the “gats are gone.” Gat is street slang for guns.”
“there is also ample support before the issuing justice to suggest that “Juice” was Smich”

"On Sunday May 19th, 2013 I read an audio statement summary of Matt HAGERMAN taken by Detective Dave OLENIUK and Detective Constable Patrick MITCHELL. From reading the summary I learned the following;
Of the friends, he recalled a person named Mark and that Dell hung out with him. Matt stated that Mark matched the description of the other suspect and Matt believed he had a criminal past and lived in the Oakville area. Matt stated that he was positive that Mark was the second suspect in the investigation.
Matt wanted to stress and put a “big emphasis” to look at Mark as suspect #2. He stated that Mark wasn’t known for violence by Matt but used drugs and he wouldn’t be surprised if he was violent."

"On Sunday May 19th, 2013 I read an interview summary of Andrew MICHALSKI taken by Sergeant Mark PETKOFF on May 13th, 2013 and upon reading the summary I learned the following; (Omitted)"

 “police advised that they wanted to speak to Michalski on video. Michalski asked to call his lawyer. Eventually, Michalski spoke to his lawyer privately. He said “I decline to talk unless I am under arrest. I won’t be going with you”. Police then arrested him and brought him to the station. Again, he spoke with counsel and was cautioned and offered duty counsel. He then provided a lengthy videotaped statement and police subsequently released him unconditionally the same day.”

"On Sunday May 19th, 2013 I read a report authored by Detective Glenn FABE who attended the residence of Igor TUMANENKO on May 15th, 2013. As mentioned in paragraph 17 Igor TUMANENKO gave a description of the two men he took for a test drive in his truck. Upon reading the statement I learned the following: (Omitted)"

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/do...QAQY2hyaXN0aW5hIG5vdWRnYQAAAAAB&resultIndex=3


What goodies are contained within these omitted parts?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 177 more.
Total: 1,845 (members: 178, guests: 1,667)

Online statistics

Members online
178
Guests online
1,667
Total visitors
1,845
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,542
Messages
18,205,761
Members
233,881
Latest member
Rwiz
Back
Top