Wayne Millard: Dellen Millard Charged With Murder In The First Degree #1

[Tamarind]

Yes, I realize that Alethea. For instance, let's say, both side agree to agree that the murder weapon was a crossbow. It will therefore not be necessary for prosecutors to produce endless testimony about the purchase, size, capacity of the crossbow and the murderers skills in that respect and the defence won't have to produce matching testimony to counter. What I meant was the Agreed Statement of Facts promotes time saving efficiency because each side reaches agreement on evidence or events that need not be introduced at trial.

Statement of Facts gets read to the jury/court at the beginning of the trial. It clarifies to the jury/court certain facts which essentially helps with deliberating as they do not have to question or deliberate on those facts. This can be helpful to both sides for various reasons, according to my lawyer friend.Sorry if this has already been said but I haven't read it or may have missed it.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Statement of Facts gets read to the jury/court at the beginning of the trial. It clarifies to the jury/court certain facts which essentially helps with deliberating as they do not have to question or deliberate on those facts. This can be helpful to both sides for various reasons, according to my lawyer friend.Sorry if this has already been said but I haven't read it or may have missed it.

Uh, meaning an Opening Statement, where each side lays out the case it intends to prove, and the other side cannot raise objections? Then the whole trial is spent evaluating that story?

 

[Alethea Dice]

I think two different things are being confused here again. The topic started from the incorrect tabloid report saying that DM had plead guilty. Then SnooperDuper posted the information about the Agreed Statement of Facts that is prepared when someone pleads guilty.

An "Agreed Statement of Facts" is the agreed upon statement that is prepared, signed and read in court when an accused pleads guilty.

What Carli is talking about is an "Admissions of Fact", which are the facts that the defense admits to so that they don't have to provide proof. For example, a man comes home and finds his wife dead and is eventually charged with her murder. He admits that she was killed with a gun that was on the floor beside her and he automatically picked the gun up when he came home and found her. But he didn't kill her. They don't have to prove that his fingerprints were on the gun because he admits that they were since he naively picked it up.

JMO

 

[Carli]

I think two different things are being confused here again. The topic started from the incorrect tabloid report saying that DM had plead guilty. Then SnooperDuper posted the information about the Agreed Statement of Facts that is prepared when someone pleads guilty.

An "Agreed Statement of Facts" is the agreed upon statement that is prepared, signed and read in court when an accused pleads guilty.

What Carli is talking about is an "Admissions of Fact", which are the facts that the defense admits to so that they don't have to provide proof. For example, a man comes home and finds his wife dead and is eventually charged with her murder. He admits that she was killed with a gun that was on the floor beside her and he automatically picked the gun up when he came home and found her. But he didn't kill her. They don't have to prove that his fingerprints were on the gun because he admits that they were since he naively picked it up.

JMO

You could be right, Alethea - I'm thoroughly confused by now - but are you certain these are two different and separate things? It's my understanding that an "Agreed Statement of Facts" is not specifically related to a guilty plea. Sure, from one point of view, elements of the prosecutors case that would receive no argument from the defense could be understood as an Admission of Facts.

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadian_Criminal_Evidence/Admissions_of_Fact

I'll look into this further but, on the face of it, I see two issues to pursue further, arising from your observation. Firstly, when and accused pleads guilty, there will be no court appearance especially in the case of first degree murder where the sentence is not negotiable. It's pretty much a mail-in insofar as the court is concerned, isn't it? Secondly, as we know, the defense role is essentially reactionary. It doesn't have to prove anything. That the prosecutor's role.

Here's a top dog lawyer talking about how the "Statement of Facts" provides the basic structure and form for the trial.

http://www.davidleelaw.com/articles/statemen-fct.html

I think you may know about this than I do, Alethea. If so, I'm quite willing to stand corrected.

 

[Tamarind]

You could be right, Alethea - I'm thoroughly confused by now - but are you certain these are two different and separate things? It's my understanding that an "Agreed Statement of Facts" is not specifically related to a guilty plea. Sure, from one point of view, elements of the prosecutors case that would receive no argument from the defense could be understood as an Admission of Facts.

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadian_Criminal_Evidence/Admissions_of_Fact

I'll look into this further but, on the face of it, I see two issues to pursue further, arising from your observation. Firstly, when and accused pleads guilty, there will be no court appearance especially in the case of first degree murder where the sentence is not negotiable. It's pretty much a mail-in insofar as the court is concerned, isn't it? Secondly, as we know, the defense role is essentially reactionary. It doesn't have to prove anything. That the prosecutor's role.

Here's a top dog lawyer talking about how the "Statement of Facts" provides the basic structure and form for the trial.

http://www.davidleelaw.com/articles/statemen-fct.html

I think you may know about this than I do, Alethea. If so, I'm quite willing to stand corrected.

Spoke with my lawyer friend and Statement of Facts can be read in at the opening of a trial as I said earlier. The defense can draft this document that the crown approves and it then gets read into the record at the outset of trial. This would be at the trial itself, so not a guilty plea case.

 

[Tamarind]

Uh, meaning an Opening Statement, where each side lays out the case it intends to prove, and the other side cannot raise objections? Then the whole trial is spent evaluating that story?

Not exactly. Each side will have already agreed on these facts and defense lawyer reads it into the record. It simply means that any fact therein is not up for discussion as it has been agreed on or with. The jury can begin to see the outline of the case based on agreed facts. The jury can refer to these facts when deliberating and not have to wonder whether what has been put forward as a fact is something they need to decide about.

Things like:
Someone was not home at a certain time, or there are no witnesses to any murder or No bloodstained clothing was found etc. Not saying these are what could be in this case, but it clarifies certain point of fact JMO

 

[Alethea Dice]

You could be right, Alethea - I'm thoroughly confused by now - but are you certain these are two different and separate things? It's my understanding that an "Agreed Statement of Facts" is not specifically related to a guilty plea. Sure, from one point of view, elements of the prosecutors case that would receive no argument from the defense could be understood as an Admission of Facts.

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadian_Criminal_Evidence/Admissions_of_Fact

I'll look into this further but, on the face of it, I see two issues to pursue further, arising from your observation. Firstly, when and accused pleads guilty, there will be no court appearance especially in the case of first degree murder where the sentence is not negotiable. It's pretty much a mail-in insofar as the court is concerned, isn't it? Secondly, as we know, the defense role is essentially reactionary. It doesn't have to prove anything. That the prosecutor's role.

Here's a top dog lawyer talking about how the "Statement of Facts" provides the basic structure and form for the trial.

http://www.davidleelaw.com/articles/statemen-fct.html

I think you may know about this than I do, Alethea. If so, I'm quite willing to stand corrected.

Trying to do searches for this information and sometimes it comes up one way and sometimes the other. So maybe they are both called "Agreed Statement of Facts" regardless of whether it is the one that is used at the beginning of a trial, or the one used when pleading guilty.

I do know that there is still a court appearance and sentencing when an accused pleads guilty, even when the charge is first degree murder and the sentence is automatic. In the case of Russell Williams, the reading of the Statement of Facts took place over two days - October 18th & 19th, 2010. He then returned to court on October 21st for sentencing.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/col-russell-williams-pleads-guilty-to-all-88-charges-1.872289

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/williams-gets-2-life-terms-for-despicable-crimes-1.891499

Also in the case of Terri-Lynne McClintic, not sure of the dates but they also had a court appearance when she plead guilty. Her Agreed Statement of Facts was read into the court, then they had victim impact statements, and then she was sentenced.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/a-killers-plea-revealed-court-lifts-ban-on-tori-stafford-murder-case/article565295/?page=all

Both cases were first degree murder with an automatic life sentence. I would think there would still need to be these court appearances to keep everything formal and on record.

JMO

 

[MsSherlock]

JMHO, but it seems like we're light years away from the topic of this thread: "Wayne Millard: Dellen Millard Charged with Murder in the First Degree" Even though it's fascinating to read about DM's living conditions and his right to be presumed innocent, IMO, the theme of this thread has been hijacked. WM is dead. DM has been charged with his murder.

WM is a victim, regardless if it was murder or suicide. I think we can all agree on that. Perhaps a year from now we'll find out that DM has been wrongfully prosecuted at which time he'll become a victim as well, but for right now, LE have been able to gather enough evidence to lay charges. Those are the facts as we know them today. WM dead. DM charged.

In an effort to get this thread "WM Centric", I challenge all to really do some critical thinking.
WM- was it a murder or suicide? What kind of evidence would TPS obtain from the time they signed off on WM's suicide to the time they slammed 1st degree murder charges against DM? Could it be all circumstantial? Or, could there be something a bit more damning? Would TPS switch the cause of death on a whim? Have they ever done that in the past and if they have, have they ever been wrong?

Secondly, motive. Was there a motive for DM killing his father? IMHO, it's OK for people to defend our "right to be presumed innocent". It's OK for people to think that DM should be viewed as " innocent until proven guilty". But, I truly believe that everyone simply wants justice. No one ever wants to see someone wrongfully prosecuted nor do they want to see the guilty walk free. IMHO, we're all coming from the same place- a place of Justice.

So out of respect for the deceased, let's leave the DM pity party and return to WM's untimely death. MOO

 

[Tamarind]

JMHO, but it seems like we're light years away from the topic of this thread: "Wayne Millard: Dellen Millard Charged with Murder in the First Degree" Even though it's fascinating to read about DM's living conditions and his right to be presumed innocent, IMO, the theme of this thread has been hijacked. WM is dead. DM has been charged with his murder.

Respectfully, by discussing matters that may seem peripheral to the main character (WM) it draws attention to the total picture of this case. Tunnel vision in such cases does not help solve the matter (murder or suicide) or promote discussion. IMO

WM is a victim, regardless if it was murder or suicide. I think we can all agree on that. Perhaps a year from now we'll find out that DM has been wrongfully prosecuted at which time he'll become a victim as well, but for right now, LE have been able to gather enough evidence to lay charges. Those are the facts as we know them today. WM dead. DM charged.

Regardless of what happens a year from now the subject is still open for discussion outside of 'WM dead, DM charged'. IMO . It wouldn't benefit the site or the thread, to stagnate discussion or opinion to such a limited view IMO

In an effort to get this thread "WM Centric", I challenge all to really do some critical thinking.
WM- was it a murder or suicide? What kind of evidence would TPS obtain from the time they signed off on WM's suicide to the time they slammed 1st degree murder charges against DM? Could it be all circumstantial? Or, could there be something a bit more damning? Would TPS switch the cause of death on a whim? Have they ever done that in the past and if they have, have they ever been wrong?

I think many of us have scrutinized the what if's and the did he or didnt he scenario, but without much more factual information we reach an impasse, leaving us to discuss peripheral details JMO. I think if we say that yes TPS may have switched cause of death on a whim, we leave ourselves open to attack for criticizing LE and we may not know how many times they have done this, if they have done it at all as I would think that would fall under deliberate acts of misleading the public. JMO

Secondly, motive. Was there a motive for DM killing his father? IMHO, it's OK for people to defend our "right to be presumed innocent". It's OK for people to think that DM should be viewed as " innocent until proven guilty". But, I truly believe that everyone simply wants justice. No one ever wants to see someone wrongfully prosecuted nor do they want to see the guilty walk free. IMHO, we're all coming from the same place- a place of Justice.

I agree, justice is the key element here for us all, hopefully. Aside from money, which DM obviously had sufficient access to, I find it very difficult to find any other potential motive. Regardless of whether or not DM got along well with his father, he had access to a lot of money and had several properties, at least one of which was viewed with his father before purchasing. So it was not a case of DM having to live with his father, he had many options, so he must have chosen to live with him. This says to me that they got along quite well, regardless of any vague inferences to the contrary. IMO.

So out of respect for the deceased, let's leave the DM pity party and return to WM's untimely death. MOO

I think it would be respectful to the deceased to give his son the right of presumption of innocence and at least try to base opinion on facts rather than jump to the conclusion than DM masterminded some kind of murder and lined up people to be there to bolster his case. Like most of this case IMO, there are often suggested twists to what some of us may feel are normal situations. I do not feel pity for DM, so I am not sure why there would be a pity party, but I do feel that everyone has the right to be given a fair trial. Thanks for your suggestions, maybe someone else has something more to add than I do, or feels differently which may hopefully encourage some healthy debate/discussion.

 

[SnooperDuper]

JMHO, but it seems like we're light years away from the topic of this thread: "Wayne Millard: Dellen Millard Charged with Murder in the First Degree" Even though it's fascinating to read about DM's living conditions and his right to be presumed innocent, IMO, the theme of this thread has been hijacked. WM is dead. DM has been charged with his murder.

WM is a victim, regardless if it was murder or suicide. I think we can all agree on that. Perhaps a year from now we'll find out that DM has been wrongfully prosecuted at which time he'll become a victim as well, but for right now, LE have been able to gather enough evidence to lay charges. Those are the facts as we know them today. WM dead. DM charged.

In an effort to get this thread "WM Centric", I challenge all to really do some critical thinking.
WM- was it a murder or suicide? What kind of evidence would TPS obtain from the time they signed off on WM's suicide to the time they slammed 1st degree murder charges against DM? Could it be all circumstantial? Or, could there be something a bit more damning? Would TPS switch the cause of death on a whim? Have they ever done that in the past and if they have, have they ever been wrong?

Secondly, motive. Was there a motive for DM killing his father? IMHO, it's OK for people to defend our "right to be presumed innocent". It's OK for people to think that DM should be viewed as " innocent until proven guilty". But, I truly believe that everyone simply wants justice. No one ever wants to see someone wrongfully prosecuted nor do they want to see the guilty walk free. IMHO, we're all coming from the same place- a place of Justice.

So out of respect for the deceased, let's leave the DM pity party and return to WM's untimely death. MOO

I wonder if WM knew about LB.

All the murmur about DM and parties and drugs...two more expensive substances standing out, quite the opposite of each other, up and down, cocaine and heroin. Both have a reputation for being somewhat moreish and putting a dent in your finances. People who have a reputaion for doing both have lived (and ofen died by) a hellish roller coaster. Did DM have a problem with either of these substances, and was WM aware of this? Because of DM's behavior? Because of money?

If DM and WM were so close that they continued to live with one another into DM's late 20's....and with some of DM's cronies in the same house...could WM be oblivious to the rumours swirling around DM?

Perhaps WM just knew too much around the situation. DM had a lot of financial freedom before WM's death. Perhaps at the time of WM's death, DM feared for his literal freedom?

 

[MsSherlock]

I agree, justice is the key element here for us all, hopefully. Aside from money, which DM obviously had sufficient access to, I find it very difficult to find any other potential motive. Regardless of whether or not DM got along well with his father, he had access to a lot of money and had several properties, at least one of which was viewed with his father before purchasing. So it was not a case of DM having to live with his father, he had many options, so he must have chosen to live with him. This says to me that they got along quite well, regardless of any vague inferences to the contrary. IMO. .

Thanks for giving this some thought Tamarind. Motive. You may be correct that DM lived with WM because he wanted to, but the questions I have surround the "why". We have reports that MS was living in the basement. With DM having so many options, why would he choose to have his friend live in the basement when he could have easily put him up in one of his many pads? Motives don't have to always surround money. Maybe WM became aware of something. MS's drug business? Info about LB? Did he overhear something? Did WM see something? Did WM hold the purse strings on DM's life? Was DM pushing WM for more money all the time until WM said "no". Was DM using the funds in Millardair as his personal ATM? Or, did WM just impose some expectations on DM- like getting the hangar ready for prospective contracts to tour?
IMHO, DM had a lot of possible motives for killing his father. MOO

 

[Tamarind]

Thanks for giving this some thought Tamarind. Motive. You may be correct that DM lived with WM because he wanted to, but the questions I have surround the "why". We have reports that MS was living in the basement. With DM having so many options, why would he choose to have his friend live in the basement when he could have easily put him up in one of his many pads? Motives don't have to always surround money. Maybe WM became aware of something. MS's drug business? Info about LB? Did he overhear something? Did WM see something? Did WM hold the purse strings on DM's life? Was DM pushing WM for more money all the time until WM said "no". Was DM using the funds in Millardair as his personal ATM? Or, did WM just impose some expectations on DM- like getting the hangar ready for prospective contracts to tour?
IMHO, DM had a lot of possible motives for killing his father. MOO

I don't see the many possible motives to be honest. WM was apparently dependent on alcohol, a rumor really but may have truth. DM defended his father and spoke for him against AS who apparently wasn't bringing in business. DM took his father to view a property and WM wanted the new hangar to be 'Dellens' project ! This all points too a close relationship between father and son. With WM liking to drink he may well have felt some camaraderie with the young guys at his home and may well have been like an old friend who was always there. DM and his father may have had a friendship as well as a father son relationship- all suggestion of course as I did not know them.

The fact that many people seemed to frequent the house opens up a whole world of possibilities. Who exactly had access to the house? Was the door always left unlocked? Who did WM feel comfortable with? Did one of these people envy Dellen? Who? Why?The list is endless for me. This means many possibilities exist that do not directly involve DM. Maybe WM did hear drug conversation, maybe he used drugs himself? Maybe he was under the influence of them or alcohol when he killed himself? Maybe he was WM that wanted his son to live there ? Maybe something concerning MillardAir was weighing heavy on both DM and WM? Were they both threatened? Was WM murdered as a warning to DM? As I said the possibilities are there.

I dont see why DM would put anyone in one of his 'pads' - why would he, when those pads were for reselling or for rentals from what I have read. Just letting someone hang out there would not be good business IMO. That DM was free with money to buy jetskis and dinners does not imply that WM held the purse strings too tightly IMO

 

[SnooperDuper]

I don't see the many possible motives to be honest. WM was apparently dependent on alcohol, a rumor really but may have truth. DM defended his father and spoke for him against AS who apparently wasn't bringing in business. DM took his father to view a property and WM wanted the new hangar to be 'Dellens' project ! This all points too a close relationship between father and son. With WM liking to drink he may well have felt some camaraderie with the young guys at his home and may well have been like an old friend who was always there. DM and his father may have had a friendship as well as a father son relationship- all suggestion of course as I did not know them.

If WM did have issues around drinking, DM probably thought little about all the times they "partied" together and much more about all the disappointments that come when you have a a parent who is unable to parent and be there for you and guide you because they are too busy being a drunk. A 10 year old can outsmart a drunk, but that does not mean that a 10 year old is as capable as an adult. I don't think kids who have alcoholic parents often wear rose coloured sunglasses.

The fact that many people seemed to frequent the house opens up a whole world of possibilities. Who exactly had access to the house? Was the door always left unlocked? Who did WM feel comfortable with? Did one of these people envy Dellen? Who? Why?The list is endless for me. This means many possibilities exist that do not directly involve DM. Maybe WM did hear drug conversation, maybe he used drugs himself? Maybe he was under the influence of them or alcohol when he killed himself? Maybe he was WM that wanted his son to live there ? Maybe something concerning MillardAir was weighing heavy on both DM and WM? Were they both threatened? Was WM murdered as a warning to DM? As I said the possibilities are there.

I'll just say I don't think it is likely that if WM had substance abuse issues, that he killed himself on account of them. When people are addicted and they use, they feel fine or even normal. All problems come from withdrawal, or pressures from the outside world. WM would have never had to face withdrawal because he had all the money he needed to maintain e.g., an alcohol addiction, with no breaks in use (and therefore face no withdrawal-invoked depression)

I dont see why DM would put anyone in one of his 'pads' - why would he, when those pads were for reselling or for rentals from what I have read. Just letting someone hang out there would not be good business IMO. That DM was free with money to buy jetskis and dinners does not imply that WM held the purse strings too tightly IMO

WM may have been looser with the purse strings until DM changed his purchasing behavior. It's possble that in the say last 18 months before DM's arrest, the time frame in which all the murders took place, DM may have had a change in lifestyle/spending habits.

I think ABro wrote before about freeloaders and DM.

 

[bessie]

Thread's temporarily closed. Take a break.

 

[bessie]

Thread is re-opened. Proceed with caution.

 

[swedie]

I really have to wonder if DM was diagnosed with something such as ADD/ADHD years ago, WM knowing this put up with a lot of nonsense from his son, chalking it up to his condition. Dropping out of high school, allowing DM's friends to live in the basement, setting his adult child up with a career and future, WM's lack of strictness (or so it seems), hangar parties, photo shoots using the hangar, plus other things, gives me this impression WM tolerated DM's behaviours or he was just simply spoiled in more ways than one. I also have to wonder why he chose to live with WM as opposed to living with MB. MB would not tolerate his behaviours and wasn't as financially well off as WM? I imagine one day a book will be written and we will have many answers as to who the real DM is. Or through the trial, hopefully this fall. For now I guess all we can do is speculated and wait. JMHO.

 

[Snoofo]

^^^^
Usually children with a known and treatable condition are treated, not simply tolerated.

 

[Tamarind]

^^^^
Usually children with a known and treatable condition are treated, not simply tolerated.

I agree, all of the pics of DM with his dad and his mom show they more than just tolerated him. I imagine he was very much loved as an only child. With people saying he was humble and even the cell mate saying he was really nice, I would say he probably was a sweet child. No parent would keep a grown offspring around at 27 yrs old unless they got along. No parents that I have ever met would. JMO

 

[Sillybilly]

Just reading back through some old MSM articles, looking for the one where CM said to the effect that DM wasn't that interested in the business and they hoped that would change. Haven't found that yet, but re-reading does refresh some other things:

from:
http://www.durhamregion.com/news-story/4460077-accused-bosma-killer-says-he-loved-his-dad/

His father's death had been deemed a suicide. He was reportedly found at the Etobicoke home he shared with Dellen with a gunshot wound to his eye. His body was cremated at the Riverside Cemetery and Cremation Centre in Toronto.

Not sure if ^^ was the article that was quoted earlier, but just a reminder that the gunshot wound to the eye did appear in MSM.

"We would have deep discussions. He needed me a lot for the business."

Obviously those deep discussions and DM being needed for the business were when WM was still alive.

"People asked me how he died," Millard told the paper. "I'd say he died of a sudden bleed in his brain, which is what the coroner told me."

Still, he spoke of resentment for being thrust into taking over the business at such a young age.

"It was a responsibility I didn't want at that time," he told The Star. "I was angry at (my father) for the things I had to do because he wasn't there to do them."

<bbm>

Resentful, angry ... Was this directed at WM before or after he died? A responsibility he didn't want doesn't jive with suggestions that he closed the business due to business savvy and sound financial reasoning. IMO, he was simply peed off and didnt' want anything to do with responsibility, whether before or after WM's death.

 

[Snoofo]

Just reading back through some old MSM articles, looking for the one where CM said to the effect that DM wasn't that interested in the business and they hoped that would change. Haven't found that yet, but re-reading does refresh some other things:

*CM said DM wasn't interested or that WM wasn't interested?

Resentful, angry ... Was this directed at WM before or after he died? A responsibility he didn't want doesn't jive with suggestions that he closed the business due to business savvy and sound financial reasoning. IMO, he was simply peed off and didnt' want anything to do with responsibility, whether before or after WM's death.

I read it as what is said: WM wasn't around to do certain things anymore forcing DM into another role (surely WM had a specific role even if he called it Dellen's project). So this would mean after-death IMO.