weekend discussion thread: 4/14-16/2012

[Macright]

So, for me this answers the question. The Crown brought forth charges of 1st degree murder, but also included 2nd degree murder. The jury was instructed they could find either charge.

There does not appear to be any instruction that says the jury could also find for manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter. So it appears to me that the Crown does have to include the lesser forms of murder in the charge.

THANKS Wondergirl!

Salem

respectfully...the crown charged these three with 1st degree murder..the judge in turn informed the jury at the start that they could either find them guilty of 1st degree or 2nd degree...do you have a link for the crown's charges as I understand it was the judge who threw in the 2nd degree part... JMO
thankfully the jury found them quilty of 1st degree......

 

[Salem]

I didn't find the woman on the list, although I'm pretty sure she was one of the one's that was in court on Friday. I'll check Friday's thread - but if anyone remembers that it was a different day, could you please let me know?

Thanks!

Salem

 

[Macright]

I think at the end of the day, each of us have to ask ourselves, Do I think MTR is guilty? If the answer is yes explore what made you come to that conclusion--if you don't feel he is guilty explore what made you come to that conclusion.

The scary thing is when the burden of proof is set too high and a guilty person goes free--look at CA. I think the prosecutors wanted the jurors to use common sense. There was none in that case.

I hope that doesn't happen here. MOO MOO

before I can answer that question I will need to hear and read more evidence...at the moment the only thing I can find him guilty of is being at the scene of the murder and helping to cover up but even that I am not 100 percent certain of....yes he was seen in the video and yes Tori's DNA was found in his car but........JMO

 

[Hello_Kitty]

respectfully...the crown charged these three with 1st degree murder..the judge in turn informed the jury at the start that they could either find them guilty of 1st degree or 2nd degree...do you have a link for the crown's charges as I understand it was the judge who threw in the 2nd degree part... JMO
thankfully the jury found them quilty of 1st degree......

I didn't follow this case that much, just probably at the end when they were getting sentenced, but weren't their convictions solely based on circumstancial evidence? Like the glass shards at the canal, the wiretap telephone conversations in the minivan that didn't really say much except that Shafia father wanted to ***** on their daughter's graves and such things. And the testimony of different family members and teachers of the girls. They are btw appealing All three of them.

 

[Salem]

respectfully...the crown charged these three with 1st degree murder..the judge in turn informed the jury at the start that they could either find them guilty of 1st degree or 2nd degree...do you have a link for the crown's charges as I understand it was the judge who threw in the 2nd degree part... JMO
thankfully the jury found them quilty of 1st degree......

I was commenting off of the link that Wondergirl posted. Yes, I agree that the Crown charged them with murder 1, but I INFER from the article that was posted, that the Crown also included the lesser charge of Murder 2nd, just in case the jury did not find Murder 1st. This is not an uncommon thing to do in the US.

The judge did not pull 2nd degree out of his hat, in my opinion. The judge does NOT make the charges - that is not his/her job, generally speaking. Links substantiating the judge's ability to pull charges out of his hat have been asked for since it was stated as fact that the judge could do such a thing in Canada.

No such links have been forthcoming and it appears that the only info that has been forthcoming allowed me to INFER that Canada is similar to the US in the way charges are handled and that the judge will not be putting charges before the jury that the Crown has not included in their complaint against the accused.

Hope that helps,

Salem

 

[Jezbel]

Here's the WS page with the tweets re Alexis' testimony. Basically, their relationship ended April 1, but her only reference to seeing the back seat in the car was March 23.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=168433&page=16

HTH

Ah ok, thanks SB

Maybe she posted something about it in the older threads. I had started reading through them a while ago but can't verify as they are not available anymore. Not that it matters really as we can only go on what was testified to.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

Good point HK!!!

...he didn't want her found as he knows he is guilty
...he was getting a thrill reading the headlines
...he was getting a thrill watching everyone search for an innocent girl that he had all the inside information about

Also probably waiting for decomposition to do its work.

 

[Salem]

Well the flashlight lady was May - so too late to be helpful, really. Oh well....

RaffertyLFP: Rafferty told the woman he was a dance instructor and contractor, On May 3 she was home sick and Rafferty came by in his car
He told her he was a contractor and he taught dance.
She saw his car just once. He did work on his speakers in her drive way.
RaffertyLFP: Rafferty said he was installing speakers in the back of the car. She was in the front seat holding a flashlight to help him


Salem

 

[maxfactor]

respectfully...the crown charged these three with 1st degree murder..the judge in turn informed the jury at the start that they could either find them guilty of 1st degree or 2nd degree...do you have a link for the crown's charges as I understand it was the judge who threw in the 2nd degree part... JMO
thankfully the jury found them quilty of 1st degree......

The Shafia case was a very interesting one, I believe that they only had circumstantial evidence in that case. They did have a cell phone ping from a tower near the locks too. They were all found guilty of first degree which actually surprised me, I had expected the mother to get second degree.

 

[robynhood]

Guys - this is not a contest about who is more despicable than who. TLM is not on trial here.

Let's stay on topic. The topic is MR's trial.

Thanks,

Salem

...thanks Salem ...it is micheal Rafferty;s trial....Tm Pleaded gulity....thanks robynhood!

 

[Ardy]

Very, very good point kitty!!! He could have very easily done that.

That is a good point........although to truly remain anonymous he could have put the information into a letter and mailed it to LE from another city.

Everything electronic is traceable, if experts want to find it.

The only explanation for his actions that I can come up with in my mind, are that IF he had no knowledge of what he was involved in and took no part in the crimes...........he somehow convinced himself that he didn't do the actual crime and therefore had done nothing wrong. It would take a convoluted sense of ethics and morality......but maybe that is what he has.

That is not to excuse him...............in any way, shape or form.

If he did absolve himself of the crimes by such means, he will be punished.

In fact, he already has been for 3 years and will have some more time to serve yet. His reputation is completely destroyed and he will most certainly have to move and change his name, regardless of the outcome of this trial.

Any more scorn we can heap on him...........is okay with me.

But, if he didn't intend for any of the crime to happen, he shouldn't be found guilty of these most serious charges.

JMO.........

 

[Macright]

I was commenting off of the link that Wondergirl posted. Yes, I agree that the Crown charged them with murder 1, but I INFER from the article that was posted, that the Crown also included the lesser charge of Murder 2nd, just in case the jury did not find Murder 1st. This is not an uncommon thing to do in the US.

The judge did not pull 2nd degree out of his hat, in my opinion. The judge does NOT make the charges - that is not his/her job, generally speaking. Links substantiating the judge's ability to pull charges out of his hat have been asked for since it was stated as fact that the judge could do such a thing in Canada.

No such links have been forthcoming and it appears that the only info that has been forthcoming allowed me to INFER that Canada is similar to the US in the way charges are handled and that the judge will not be putting charges before the jury that the Crown has not included in their complaint against the accused.

Hope that helps,

Salem

I found this info if you or anyone would like to read it..it may explain some of the questions that have been posed by some...

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/pcvi-cpcv/guide/sech.html

 

[maxfactor]

That is a good point........although to truly remain anonymous he could have put the information into a letter and mailed it to LE from another city.

Everything electronic is traceable, if experts want to find it.

The only explanation for his actions that I can come up with in my mind, are that IF he had no knowledge of what he was involved in and took no part in the crimes...........he somehow convinced himself that he didn't do the actual crime and therefore had done nothing wrong. It would take a convoluted sense of ethics and morality......but maybe that is what he has.

That is not to excuse him...............in any way, shape or form.

If he did absolve himself of the crimes by such means, he will be punished.

In fact, he already has been for 3 years and will have some more time to serve yet. His reputation is completely destroyed and he will most certainly have to move and change his name, regardless of the outcome of this trial.

Any more scorn we can heap on him...........is okay with me.

But, if he didn't intend for any of the crime to happen, he shouldn't be found guilty of these most serious charges.

JMO.........

He could have gone to a pay phone and called Crimestoppers, although he would have probably forgotten to look for surveillance cameras first, although maybe he had learned that lesson after the video of TLM was released.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

The Shafia case was a very interesting one, I believe that they only had circumstantial evidence in that case. They did have a cell phone ping from a tower near the locks too. They were all found guilty of first degree which actually surprised me, I had expected the mother to get second degree.

I was surpised too, but I Shafia mom was aware of what was going to happen.

 

[Ardy]

TLM testified that she and MR went to a car wash in Cambridge and went into a convenience store washroom to change clothes.

From what I understand, LE said they never located the car wash.

I am wondering why that would be.

I think that about every convenience store I ever go into, has copies of the Toronto papers in it. The Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail, the Toronto Sun........at least one of them is always there.

Why couldn't LE find the people who deliver the papers in that area, show them the drawings and locate the car wash and store that way?

Physical evidence may have been gone, but perhaps an employee would remember them coming in. Perhaps there was video tape of them being there.

It was after all........a pretty important part of TLM's story.

Any thoughts........?

JMO...............

Added to post........

Another thing LE could have done was approach every TO newspaper to run a picture of the carwash/convenience store drawing on their front page with the headline........If you are in a store with a car wash that looks like the drawing......please call.........

I don't know.......it just seems to me that the search for the location just got dropped somehow.

MOO.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

That is a good point........although to truly remain anonymous he could have put the information into a letter and mailed it to LE from another city.

Everything electronic is traceable, if experts want to find it.

BBM, snipped for space:

He could have used a payphone!! Or a throwaway prepaid phone a la Pierre Poutine/Robocall.

 

[brighidin]

Thi link is to a Department of Justice website. The quote I took from it does not mention lesser charges. I have read many newspaper articles about cases where the person was found guilty on lesser charges, but I don't know if that is an automatic thing, or contingent on the judge's instructions to the jury (which I think is the question here.)

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/pcvi-cpcv/guide/seci.html
"After all witnesses have been called, both the Crown prosecutor and the defence lawyer present their closing arguments. If the Crown prosecutor is able to prove the case against the accused person beyond a reasonable doubt, the result will be a finding of guilty. If not, the accused person will be acquitted, or found not guilty."

I have two acquaintances who should be able to shed some light on this. My son' friend's Mom is a Crown Attorney (in MB, not ON) and I have a colleague who teaches legal history at a Canadian university. I will ask them and post their answers here, although by that time it will be third hand info, I guess. Im going to ask anyway, at least for my own benefit.

 

[Jezbel]

I didn't find the woman on the list, although I'm pretty sure she was one of the one's that was in court on Friday. I'll check Friday's thread - but if anyone remembers that it was a different day, could you please let me know?

Thanks!

Salem

I think it was Fridays thread too, I think it was one of the older ladies and that it was after April 8th, I think she said that at that time he didn't have a back seat as he was installing speakers and she held the flashlight for him.
I would go check now but I have 3 dinners on the go for the next few nights...

ETA: just saw your above post Salem, thanks for finding it.

Does anybody recall anyone testifying that the car seat was in the car from march 29 to April 8 besides TLM?

 

[Macright]

Thi link is to a Department of Justice website. The quote I took from it does not mention lesser charges. I have read many newspaper articles about cases where the person was found guilty on lesser charges, but I don't know if that is an automatic thing, or contingent on the judge's instructions to the jury (which I think is the question here.)

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/pcvi-cpcv/guide/seci.html
"After all witnesses have been called, both the Crown prosecutor and the defence lawyer present their closing arguments. If the Crown prosecutor is able to prove the case against the accused person beyond a reasonable doubt, the result will be a finding of guilty. If not, the accused person will be acquitted, or found not guilty."

I have two acquaintances who should be able to shed some light on this. My son' friend's Mom is a Crown Attorney (in MB, not ON) and I have a colleague who teaches legal history at a Canadian university. I will ask them and post their answers here, although by that time it will be third hand info, I guess. Im going to ask anyway, at least for my own benefit.

wow we must have been on that web site at the same time...I linked it further up from yours....I could do one better than you ha...(no offence just a casual comment ) as I have a SIL that is a lawyer with the Dept of Justice in Ottawa...BUT....I have bugged him so much over the RW case that I doubt if he would want me to start on him again...

 

[Hello_Kitty]

That is a good point........although to truly remain anonymous he could have put the information into a letter and mailed it to LE from another city.

Everything electronic is traceable, if experts want to find it.

The only explanation for his actions that I can come up with in my mind, are that IF he had no knowledge of what he was involved in and took no part in the crimes...........he somehow convinced himself that he didn't do the actual crime and therefore had done nothing wrong. It would take a convoluted sense of ethics and morality......but maybe that is what he has.

That is not to excuse him...............in any way, shape or form.

If he did absolve himself of the crimes by such means, he will be punished.

In fact, he already has been for 3 years and will have some more time to serve yet. His reputation is completely destroyed and he will most certainly have to move and change his name, regardless of the outcome of this trial.

Any more scorn we can heap on him...........is okay with me.

But, if he didn't intend for any of the crime to happen, he shouldn't be found guilty of these most serious charges.
JMO.........

BBM

I should read the whole post before I respond

Again, if we are to believe Derstine's suggestion of a drug debt, he knew at one point before Tori died that she was being held for a drug debt, it's at that point that it should have clicked for him, but it didn't and that's why he is being charged of kidnapping and murder. As for the rape, jurors I'm sure will use their common sense in that matter.

I do understand what you mean tho about not being able to react quickly to a situation like that. But after the fact when he was home in his comfy bed while Tori was buried under the rocks, he should have thought that wasn't right at all.

So many lives ruined by this