Verdict Watch Discussion Thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not too long ago I was discussing this case with someone and we were specifically discussing how the reporters actually report on the daily court proceedings. I think most of them are doing a pretty good job at reporting the facts, but some of them aren't even trying to hide the fact they have a personal opinion of both of the accused. I think that's perfectly understandable, given the horrific nature of this case and the details. But at the same time, I'm just wondering if that doesn't cross some sort of journalistic code of ethics (don't laugh, I don't know what it's called - Journalism 101?) that says they're to report the news, not their interpretation of the news. Not sure if that makes sense.
CBC discussed that in the Facebook live today. I found it interesting
 
From Susan Clairmont:

http://m.thespec.com/news-story/672...by-20-more-things-the-bosma-jury-was-never-t/

"4. Toward the end of its case, the Crown made an "application to view" requesting to take the jury on a 130-km tour of sites associated with the case, ending with a first-hand look at the massive Eliminator, which is too big to be brought into the courthouse."

- - - - - -

"There was also a text exchange between Millard and Smich that was excluded.

Millard: German can find himself a friend.

Smich: under the glove box in the caddy we can build a place for him to live"

- - - - - - -

"When Smich took the stand, he confirmed — in the absence of the jury — that there was more than one gun belonging to him and Millard."

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Geesh!! So 9mm/gun one is the "dirty Spanish girl" and the .380 is "the German". Hiding the "German" in the Caddy must be how the Caddy came into play?
 
The Crown wondered if the reason Meneses didn't recognize the photo was because it had been altered for the jury. The original photo actually showed two handguns side by side.


The gun the jury saw was a Walther PPK, believed to be the murder weapon. The gun that was cropped out was a Bodyguard .380.When Smich took the stand, he confirmed — in the absence of the jury — that there was more than one gun belonging to him and Millard.


"There's multiple firearms of different calibres," he said.

http://m.thespec.com/news-story/672...bby-20-more-things-the-bosma-jury-was-never-t
 
Perhaps it used to be like that, but now a days you've got your Sun newspapers and other broadcasts that want opinion and edginess.

Rolling of eyes in the courtroom is not appropriate, especially in front of the jury!
 
So yesterday, when the judge was refreshing evidence, and doing the charge, it was mentioned in a summary of items that Hag and (*) Made a pact for MS to take the fall.
This really stood out to me obviously, and earlier I was going to post that, and now I see this question from jury. The reason I am putting a (*) Is because full disclosure, in my notes yesterday I wrote 'Hag and Sh made a pact for Ms to take the fall'
I'm presuming that I meant Michelski( which short handed to the sound sh for ch) and that it wasn't SS I had to write really fast sometimes, as I would try to write down exact words to keep the context.
Hopefully this all made sense :)
 
I agree. That is the main difference in their testimony and a big one imo

MH said him and AM first met up at a park. There was a text from AM saying to meet at the park. But then AM said they met at MH house. So it may not matter in the end where they met to some, but this makes me feel MH is the more truthful.
 
The Crown wondered if the reason Meneses didn't recognize the photo was because it had been altered for the jury. The original photo actually showed two handguns side by side.


The gun the jury saw was a Walther PPK, believed to be the murder weapon. The gun that was cropped out was a Bodyguard .380.When Smich took the stand, he confirmed — in the absence of the jury — that there was more than one gun belonging to him and Millard.


"There's multiple firearms of different calibres," he said.

http://m.thespec.com/news-story/672...bby-20-more-things-the-bosma-jury-was-never-t

Didn't MM testify that she never knew MS to have a gun...ever? I don't recall her saying she didn't remember the picture. It was CN that said she didn't recognize the gun picture or remember the picture? Or am I confused again lol
 
Ok......hypothetical for anyone who paid close attention to the decision trees......

Let's say MS didn't know about the murder plan, but DID know DM was possibly bringing a gun along......

What verdict does that leave us with?
 
Millard and Smich were fond of each other.

The jury knows they spent lots of time together and texted constantly.

But the jury didn't see one particular text from Smich to Millard that said: "I love you baby."

Smich's lawyers asked to exclude that text out of concern for "the suggestion of an intimate relationship between these two men and the danger that could pose in the jail system if either or both of them is convicted."
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6...bby-20-more-things-the-bosma-jury-was-never-t
 
Question?? re:; CN's testimony not being held against her at her trial

So can this info now be brought up to further the case against her at her own trial or was she protected against that possibility by the law?
I know this doesn't answer your question exactly, but I'm not 100% my answer would be accurate.... but on side note I know that I've heard several times in court that DM might be testifying in her trial! Imagine that one! (Hence speculation that she would be watching what she said about him at this court case if even just to avoid him not being favourable at her trial for her)
 
MH said him and AM first met up at a park. There was a text from AM saying to meet at the park. But then AM said they met at MH house. So it may not matter in the end where they met to some, but this makes me feel MH is the more truthful.

I believe AM about as much as I believe SS! Both are as sly as snakes! I think MH was more honest and genuinely remorseful and felt sadness for the Bosma's. Even though he had 60+ pages of lies, IMO, he came more clean then the rest of them.

JMO
 
MH said him and AM first met up at a park. There was a text from AM saying to meet at the park. But then AM said they met at MH house. So it may not matter in the end where they met to some, but this makes me feel MH is the more truthful.
That's not what I'm referring to in the difference in their testimony. I'll link the tweets later but I have before. AM said MS wanted the "thing", however he told MH that DM would want MS to have it. Something along those lines. Someone is clearly lying. This is what my interpretation of "lies were told" means. Moo

These are the exact same questions I asked myself and here when discussing MS.
 
I have always wondered if they were more than friends.....adds a whole new dimension......MOO

And those "unusual web sites". Maybe Abro was right and someone else set those up in SS 'S name...perhaps DM?

Sorry, it's under SS'S screen name, not AM's.
 
Once, early in the trial, an old man pushed his way to the front as Millard was being led away by guards. The man waved to Millard and Millard greeted him with a look of surprise and gave him a broad smile and thanked him for coming.

Afterwards, the man, Irv Gendel, 85, said he had been a pilot with Millard’s family aviation firm Millardair and had been close to Millard’s grandfather, Carl, who founded the flight dynasty, and Millard’s father, Wayne, whom Millard inherited it from after his death.

Gendel said Millard’s mother had asked him to come down and send regards to Millard and show support.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/c...jury-didnt-hear-in-the-tim-bosma-murder-trial
 
I believe AM about as much as I believe SS! Both are as sly as snakes! I think MH was more honest and genuinely remorseful and felt sadness for the Bosma's. Even though he had 60+ pages of lies, IMO, he came more clean then the rest of them.

JMO

There was also something odd about the car situation if I recall. Didn't make much sense to go to MH's house and then have to search for keys to take parents car?
 
If we're going to speculate, I think maybe the pact was about what missions to tell and how much to tell. They both told pretty much about the same missions. Also maybe to not spell out about what kinds of drugs DM sold, And maybe an agreement not to squeal on anyone else. It may have been about the storyline. I don't think who called who really matters. The point was the gun was taken by DM to MH and then to the drop off. Maybe the agreement was to say they didn't know what was in the toolbox?

As well, I think they may have drawn straws as to which one of them would call Crimestoppers and raise a little more hell for MS...after all, their best bud was in jail and the sketchy one still had not been caught yet.
 
That's not what I'm referring to in the difference in their testimony. I'll link the tweets later but I have before. AM said MS wanted the "thing", however he told MH that DM would want MS to have it. Something along those lines. Someone is clearly lying. This is what my interpretation of "lies were told" means. Moo

These are the exact same questions I asked myself and here when discussing MS.

Yes I know what your saying and agree. That was just a small example and backed by a text from AM himself. I wonder why Dungey never called him out on that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
195
Guests online
3,230
Total visitors
3,425

Forum statistics

Threads
604,455
Messages
18,172,395
Members
232,585
Latest member
Swexy
Back
Top