Recent content by Miranda16

Totally agree. I hope he gets the maximum sentence (10 years?) if found guilty. I'd prefer if he were able to receive a life sentence to match DM and MS in that case.

People have mentioned a difference in tone from Smich between when he was being cross-examined by DM's lawyers (where he was more combative and disrespectful) compared to when he was cross-examined by the crown. He clearly has issues with authority given his 'profession', but I think he may have...

You could be correct. I suggested the date originally thinking that the disallowed text was more strongly connected to the earlier LB crime. And that it had to be protected (if that's the correct word) for use in the later case (because we're in the somewhat awkward situation of having a trial...

Right and that's what I said in a more abbreviated way. I said that the scenario ("drawing a conclusion' in your words) needs to be based on the facts in evidence.

Maybe but it contained the remains of a male under age 40 and had a stain with TB's DNA. The gun referenced in the Iisho text may not have been demonstrably related to the TB case. I'm just guessing and I don't know enough to agree with the concept of withholding evidence. IMO everything...

How does that question follow from my post?

The overall scenario needs to be speculated based on the points of factual evidence (the scenario needs to connect the dots beyond a reasonable doubt). Paraphrasing Judge Goodman, very few scenarios can be proven with absolute certainty.

The fact that MS was there is sufficient to convict him. If one believes (as I do) that MS knew at the minimum that DM had a plan to steal and murder and had the tools to do so, then if he continued to go on missions with DM, he is guilty of M1. If SS had driven the Yukon (the mythical 3rd...

I think that's a somewhat different situation but I'm not a lawyer. Evidence which ties directly to a weapon purchased for other murders seems to be inadmissible (the Iisho text which might have been due to timing), but evidence that MS was involved in incinerator selection relates to his role...

if they both had guns (a distinct possibility in my mind) then I agree with you (though under this scenario clearly MS is guilty of M1 because he knows about the incinerator and brings a loaded weapon to test drives. The idea that MS would bring an empty gun while DM unbeknownst to MS had a...

Well said as usual, though even if heavily manipulated, if MS knew in advance that DM was planning a murder he's culpable for going along. I know you are aware, just reiterating it. That's the distinction between MS and SS. Though in my opinion MS, while possibly a follower, was a knowledgable...

pretty good odds but not good enough IMO (combined with the other factors such as location, possible GPS, daylight, etc.). Intimidation was likely one factor. ETA: when I said not good enough I was referring to the one gun scenario. In a two gun scenario I don't think intimidation would be a...

maybe timing? Iisho text closer to the LB murder so it was inadmissible, whereas the MS rap was modified after the TB murder?

Ah OK. Thank you. I think I recall it now but I discounted it in my mind because it becomes an excuse for MS (I.e. the 'real' reason why IT wasn't harmed because it was a scoping mission only). However we don't know if it was true, and we don't know how MS discovered it AFAIK.

MS said that both he and DM did oxy the night before IT. The difference was that MS also drank which is apparently a bad combo. You mentioned before that IT's truck had GPS according to MS. I hadn't heard that before but could have missed it.