Weekend Discussion Thread 04/27-30/2012

[SoSueMe]

Weekend Discussion Thread:

reposting a few of the warnings:

Salem's warning from last week:

Okay everybody - LISTEN UP! We are not bashing, accusing or blaming Tori's family here. It won't be allowed.

Children walk home from school every day without incident. Parents are not perfect, it's just not possible. Tori's parents DID NOT do this to her. TLM and an accomplice DID. That is where the blame goes.

We had a lot of family bashing in the early parts of this investigation after Tori went missing and a lot of baseless accusations - NONE OF WHICH PROVED TO BE TRUE. Victim and family bashing will not be allowed during this trial.

Thank you,
Salem

---------------------------------


As some of you may have noticed, the members following this case are dropping in numbers. It's disheartening to us because we need and welcome discussion of both sides of every issue on Websleuths.

Zero tolerance means ZERO tolerance. Please discuss this case with respect to your fellow members. Subtle and veiled harassment and/or talking in code about other members will not be tolerated.

A word of caution on the Alerts in this forum. If you alert a post, make sure it is a clear violation of our Terms of Service. A difference of opinion is not a violation of TOS.

Please note that everything discussed in court and printed/tweeted is now within the realm of discussion. WS has never and does not now have a policy of "innocent until proven guilty." That is for the court room. Here, we discuss, speculate, theorize and judge according to the opinions we develop from following the case.

Keeping that in mind, abuse of our alert system is a good way to find yourself in timeout or worse. Abuse of the alert systems includes, but is not limited to:

Alerting repeatedly on the same poster;
Demanding a specific outcome;
Alerting on the same post more than once.

Once you have alerted a post, move on and don't question the decisions of our Administrators, Moderators or Owners.

Following this trial is very important to our members and we're going to see that they have their day in court. The "zero tolerance" policy in this forum will continue and it will be enforced.

Thank you and please carry on.
Sue aka SoSueMe
Websleuths Co-Owner

------

Please keep discussion focused on what has been presented in testimony and remember to link up as the partial publication ban is still in place

 

[Salem]

And it's Friday again!

Salem

 

[~n/t~]

Good Morning,

 

[~n/t~]

Some have suggested that the defense will use EOA or whatever the acronym is for that gang, as a possible defense.

Can you please explain how? I must be missing something because I find it totally irrelevant to this trial. Even if the accused child killer is a gang member, how does that justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defenseless little girl?

 

[flipflop]

Some have suggested that the defense will use EOA or whatever the acronym is for that gang, as a possible defense.

Can you please explain how? I must be missing something because I find it totally irrelevant to this trial. Even if the accused child killer is a gang member, how does that justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defenseless little girl?

JMO Nothing will justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defeseless little girl.

The term EOA was first brought up in TLM's journal. Defence has brought up EOA in his cross 2 times....I feel there is more to come. JMO

 

[flipflop]

Otto, here is the link you requested in the last thread regarding the letter that TLM wrote to Mike. pic 64

http://www.am980.ca/Other/McClintic.pdf

 

[~n/t~]

JMO Nothing will justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defeseless little girl.

The term EOA was first brought up in TLM's journal. Defence has brought up EOA in his cross 2 times....I feel there is more to come. JMO

I realize that but wondering what possible defense could there be involving a gang? Are they going to say MR wasn't there and it was a gang member? OR it was gang initiation week and TLM was the ring master and MR had to prove himself?

I honestly don't see where he could go with this theory, if that's what he plans on doing. That is why I asked what people thought his strategy could possibly be.

 

[matou]

I realize that but wondering what possible defense could there be involving a gang? Are they going to say MR wasn't there and it was a gang member? OR it was gang initiation week and TLM was the ring master and MR had to prove himself?

I honestly don't see where he could go with this theory, if that's what he plans on doing. That is why I asked what people thought his strategy could possibly be.

Well, someone in the previous thread alluded to Shipway possibly being in one of the shots at the Gallery Cinemas. I'm not sure if either Shipway or TLM were actually EOA members at all. They were friends. They both wore the colors/bandanas in some profile photos online. If TLM was an associate of EOA, Derstine didn't ask her about that. Shipway was headed for trouble and she was involved in a major crime, along with two other people. This is spin. JMO

 

[~n/t~]

Well, someone in the previous thread alluded to Shipway possibly being in one of the shots at the Gallery Cinemas. I'm not sure if either Shipway or TLM were actually EOA members at all. They were friends. They both wore the colors/bandanas in some profile photos online. If TLM was an associate of EOA, Derstine didn't ask her about that. Shipway was headed for trouble and she was involved in a major crime, along with two other people. This is spin. JMO

Thanks matou. I figured it was a spin. I don't see how it relates to this trial and if Derstine will be allowed to bring that in without evidence as it relates to his client, I'll be p'd off - yet again! TLM is not the one on trial. His client is.

 

[snoofer]

<modsnip>. Since I am not from that province and it is the general area of that crime it could be likely related to someone on this site due to my own lack of diligence in keeping private info...private. I post this to remind people to be diligent. JMO It is a common sense deduction to me as I use the internet for rarely other programs but this one, rarely fb and weather type stuff. MOO

 

[tmhco]

JMO Nothing will justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defeseless little girl.

The term EOA was first brought up in TLM's journal. Defence has brought up EOA in his cross 2 times....I feel there is more to come. JMO

I believe the defence has put themselves in a position where they must present evidence. If I were a juror, throwing a ridiculous defence theory out there is not enough to create REASONABLE doubt. JMO

 

[snoofer]

JMO Nothing will justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defeseless little girl.

The term EOA was first brought up in TLM's journal. Defence has brought up EOA in his cross 2 times....I feel there is more to come. JMO

I believe you are right; there will be more to come.

I do think though that the only defense that could remotely be successful is if defense could definatively refute crown evidence which i believe is iron clad. JMO

I don't think that smoke and mirrors and theories will sway the jury in the face of fact. MOO But I think defense will try!!

 

[Wondergirl]

Some have suggested that the defense will use EOA or whatever the acronym is for that gang, as a possible defense.

Can you please explain how? I must be missing something because I find it totally irrelevant to this trial. Even if the accused child killer is a gang member, how does that justify kidnapping, raping and murdering an innocent defenseless little girl?

Gang initiation.

 

[lightlady]

Wondergirl, I was thinking something like that too. Could the "drug debt" be to the gang, not TLM? And they will imply TLM was doing the dirty work of the gang by kidnapping and killing VS? If so, I wonder how they could prove this? And somehow that TLM was just using MR because he was a dumb sap for a ride, and implicating him for rape? I could see that being the strategy they use. But of course to me, I would have to wonder WHY he didn't react differently after the fact if this was the case.

 

[Wondergirl]

I believe the defence has put themselves in a position where they must present evidence. If I were a juror, throwing a ridiculous defence theory out there is not enough to create REASONABLE doubt. JMO

I agree.

If the Defense does not call evidence, the jury will be left scratching their heads, and convict him on everything, IMO. Derstine can't just call it a wash, as if to say the Crown has nothing. Clearly the Crown has alot.

If the Defense does call evidence, I really don't see how they can get around not putting Rafferty on the stand, unless someone is stepping up for him with an alibi. He is the only one who can attest to all these suggestions about what really happened, and testify against TLM's credibility on her version of events.

The Crown has shown with all the hard, corroborating evidence, that TLM's version of events is exactly what happened that day, IMO.

The Crown has also shown with all the witnesses it presented, that not only was Rafferty NOT horrified by what he did, he clearly went out of his way to hide evidence of what he did.

I don't know if he will get up there or not, the odds show he will not, but, for some reason I just think that he will.

JMO

 

[Wondergirl]

Wondergirl, I was thinking something like that too. Could the "drug debt" be to the gang, not TLM? And they will imply TLM was doing the dirty work of the gang by kidnapping and killing VS? If so, I wonder how they could prove this? And somehow that TLM was just using MR because he was a dumb sap for a ride, and implicating him for rape? I could see that being the strategy they use. But of course to me, I would have to wonder WHY he didn't react differently after the fact if this was the case.

Good point, maybe the "drug debt" theory is all about EOA, I don't know. Those online social media profiles that people have been discussing here for 3 years, pretty much indicate participation in that gang. Derstine could have dug up quite a bit.

Maybe Derstine found someone who would say that there was an initiation of murder etc. for that gang, I don't have a clue about it.

Pretty hard to argue with the fact that Tori was not seen inside the car, on any video or by witnesses that day. That is a strong indication she was hidden.

There is only 1 reason why she would be hidden.

It wouldn't have anything to do with a drug debt.

JMO

 

[Oldsoul2]

Thanks matou. I figured it was a spin. I don't see how it relates to this trial and if Derstine will be allowed to bring that in without evidence as it relates to his client, I'll be p'd off - yet again! TLM is not the one on trial. His client is.

I'll take a crack at that. I think what he is going to say is this crime was an abduction planned by TLM and her "gang" for profiting purposes and that they set MR up without his knowledge to take the fall. Hey, why not use the exact reverse that the Crown has presented. As far as the rape, they will try to present that it was someone else who did it and not MR....problem here is Derstine was thrown for a loop when the jury heard he was a pimp IMO

 

[snoofer]

I agree.

If the Defense does not call evidence, the jury will be left scratching their heads, and convict him on everything, IMO. Derstine can't just call it a wash, as if to say the Crown has nothing. Clearly the Crown has alot.

If the Defense does call evidence, I really don't see how they can get around not putting Rafferty on the stand, unless someone is stepping up for him with an alibi. He is the only one who can attest to all these suggestions about what really happened, and testify against TLM's credibility on her version of events.

The Crown has shown with all the hard, corroborating evidence, that TLM's version of events is exactly what happened that day, IMO.

The Crown has also shown with all the witnesses it presented, that not only was Rafferty NOT horrified by what he did, he clearly went out of his way to hide evidence of what he did.

I don't know if he will get up there or not, the odds show he will not, but, for some reason I just think that he will.

JMO

It was extremely "cocky" behavior for MTR to have gone to Genest knowing what he knew. I consider it tantamount to "walking the gauntlet and dancing a jig" considering it is a place of law enforcement and he is a huge criminal. He may just be cocky enough to take the stand. JMO

 

[Wondergirl]

I have to say, that I would be pretty disappointed if Derstine didn't put up some kind of a defense for Rafferty. Just doesn't seem right. There is so much incriminating evidence, that if he doesn't present a defense, it is basically an admission of guilt, IMO. I am sure there are legal arguments otherwise, but, to me that is what it would seem like.

JMO

 

[Wondergirl]

O/T - I don't know when this picture was taken, presumably a day during the trial.

I thought it was a little odd that a lawyer would be wearing jeans to court, in a high profile case. It doesn't mean much, but, sometimes appearances matter, and I would speculate that this would be one of them.

JMO

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/0...ap-up-its-case-in-tori-stafford-murder-trial/