Babcock Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #3

[Claroon]

Understandable, but they also have an obligation to follow up on easy to check leads. Like the Cell phone call records SL tried to make them aware of. My understanding is they didn't even contact DM. MOO

bbm - can you provide a quote or link substantiating that?

 

[RandomName479]

MS and DM's phones pinged from the 5 Maple Gate area at the suspected time of death. From background, we know DM always had people on "lookout." I suspect MS was on lookout duty outside when LB was taken into the house. While on lookout duty either outside or inside somewhere, MS did drugs that zoned him out. DM later texting him to find out where he was because DM was not about to leave the dead body. He needed MS to come and wrap the spliff. IMO

He took part in the murder. Say if LB was merely unconscious when she was put in the incinerator, the incinerator would kill her too. He did nothing to notify LE. He is guilty. IMO

BBM. I'm again WAY behind, and I'm sure this has been addressed......but LB's body wasn't incinerated for almost 3 weeks after she was allegedly killed......I have a hard time believing it is plausible that she was still alive at that point......MOO

 

[Woodland]

bbm - can you provide a quote or link substantiating that?

Maybe this one will enlighten -

Toronto Police apologize for refusing to file a missing-person report
By: Brian Fitzpatrick Metro Published on Wed Nov 08 2017

“The response that was apparently given, that is not what is expected of officers at 51 Division or anywhere else on the service,” said Toronto Police Service spokesperson Mark Pugash. “It doesn’t reflect what 51 Division does or what the rest of the service does.”

http://www.metronews.ca/news/toront...refusing-to-file-a-missing-person-report.html

So a policy of taking all reports appears to be in place - as it should be. But not always followed, even now with the DM mess still fresh.

Imo the horse is dead on this issue - will leave it to others to continue one way or another if desired.

 

[Grey-St]

I agree. This article explains a little more about her lifestyle and the police involvement:

"In Toronto, police receive more than one missing person report per day and recently told the Star they file as many as 3,000 reports each year.

"Investigators are often blunt when a missing person has what they deem a “high-risk” lifestyle — such a designation includes prostitutes, escorts and people who might move from place to place a lot. ...

There were 5,694 missing person reports in Ontario in 2013 (the number can include repeat runaways), according to the federal government’s National Centre for Missing Persons and Unidentified Remains ."

ht[/I]tps://www.thestar.com/news/cr...ck_leaves_lingering_questions_for_police.html

I understand what you are saying, and can fully appreciate how large the case loads are for the TPS. However, that does not mean they have the right to arbitrarily determine who is more important or worthy of being found. It’s their responsiblity to promptly follow up with leads, and it’s my belief that they had many in the LB disappearance.

I know it’s been said that we don’t have all the facts yet regarding what the police did or didn’t do, and yes maybe they did contact DM or her escort agency and were given the run around. But if they had even investigated where her cell phone was pinging, and maybe where DMs was pinging also, they would have caught him in his lies.

With all the combined evidence even in the very early stages given by SL and family, it would have been obvious that LB was not on a trip, and was possibly in a great deal of danger. My gut is telling me that TPS did not pursue the investigation. JMO.

 

[Claroon]

BBM. I'm again WAY behind, and I'm sure this has been addressed......but LB's body wasn't incinerated for almost 3 weeks after she was allegedly killed......I have a hard time believing it is plausible that she was still alive at that point......MOO

Actually, I wasn't alluding to her actually being alive still. It was a hypothetical comment that imo throwing someone into a burning unit is just as bad as the initial murder.

 

[lclabtech]

Maybe this one will enlighten -

Toronto Police apologize for refusing to file a missing-person report
By: Brian Fitzpatrick Metro Published on Wed Nov 08 2017

“The response that was apparently given, that is not what is expected of officers at 51 Division or anywhere else on the service,” said Toronto Police Service spokesperson Mark Pugash. “It doesn’t reflect what 51 Division does or what the rest of the service does.”

http://www.metronews.ca/news/toront...refusing-to-file-a-missing-person-report.html

So a policy of taking all reports appears to be in place - as it should be. But not always followed, even now with the DM mess still fresh.

Imo the horse is dead on this issue - will leave it to others to continue one way or another if desired.

I’m a bit confused. I read this article and it says they felt they were dismissed because they were told to contact the non-emergency line but that’s actually exactly what you’re supposed to do when you report someone missing. Call the non-emergency line, they put up a call for someone to come see you to do the report.

They were likely sent home from the station because 51 division is a particularly busy division when it comes to emergency calls and they knew it would be a while before an officer could be pulled off the road.

 

[lclabtech]

I understand what you are saying, and can fully appreciate how large the case loads are for the TPS. However, that does not mean they have the right to arbitrarily determine who is more important or worthy of being found. It’s their responsiblity to promptly follow up with leads, and it’s my belief that they had many in the LB disappearance.

I know it’s been said that we don’t have all the facts yet regarding what the police did or didn’t do, and yes maybe they did contact DM or her escort agency and were given the run around. But if they had even investigated where her cell phone was pinging, and maybe where DMs was pinging also, they would have caught him in his lies.

With all the combined evidence even in the very early stages given by SL and family, it would have been obvious that LB was not on a trip, and was possibly in a great deal of danger. My gut is telling me that TPS did not pursue the investigation. JMO.

I’m not sure it’s as simple as “someone reports you missing, LE gets to immediately dig through all of your financial records and cell phone information” though. They’d likely have to go through courts to show there was some suspicion of foul play, evidence you didn’t just decide as an adult to leave and no longer communicate with those people.

Cell phone companies are actually very protective of this information.

 

[mimimic]

This article may shed more light on it for you. For instance:

"In Toronto, police receive more than one missing person report per day and recently told the Star they file as many as 3,000 reports each year."

https://www.thestar.com/news/crime/...ck_leaves_lingering_questions_for_police.html

Add to this the 911 calls they attend to daily and follow-up with other cases makes for a busy load imo.

This article says DM's lawer Deepak says at the time - no one from LE questioned DM about LB.

 

[Tilly23]

I was just looking at the fabulous timeline put together by billandrew when I came across the series of texts from November 30 through December 8, 2011. This is where there is talk about the iphone that LB was using as an ipod.

It starts on November 30 with DM alerting CN that he is going to be talking to LB about cell phones. He tells CN that he has the serial number of the phone LB uses.

In the midst of DM/CN text conversation (9:42 pm) there is an incoming text from LB saying "Dumped out my purse. Not there "
DM texts back at 9:52 pm "Going to search truck and my driveway."
Then at 2:03 am on Dec 1 he texts: "Not here. Will check in daylight. Think you have it."
LB texts him 3 times between 10:44 am and 10:48 am:
"I'll check again fml."
"It has to be floating about the car. Def not here :s"
"Let me know if u find it. I miss my music it's my coping device."
DM texts back at 12:31 pm: "I found it!"

From this series of texts, I suggest the following might be inferred:

1. DM spent time with LB before he texted CN and let her know that he was going to see LB. He led CN to believe that it hadn't happened yet and that he was being a good boy and letting her know in advance.

2. DM took LB's ipod/phone and then pretended to look for it while LB freaked out that it was missing. Already at 9:40 pm on November 30, he tells CN that he got the serial number of LB's phone. I suggest he got that number because he took her phone.

Now is it AM's phone? I don't know, but it would not surprise me at all if it really is a phone that LB's dad found in the park and gave to her. In the early morning hours of December 8, there is a long text conversation between LB and DM in which she seems to be working hard to persuade him to have sex with her. You can sense desperation and yearning here. DM is putting her off and then says: "Tell you what, tell me the truth about Andrew's phone & I will reward your honesty." And LB replies: "My dad found it in the park. Fixed it and said I could use it. It was blank when I got it." She seemed desperate enough that she probably did tell the truth and hoped for her "reward".

I just thought the whole series of texts gave some insight into how manipulative DM could be. He had LB believing she must have lost her phone. He had CN believing he was only going to spend time with LB because he had to get AM's phone back. He also had CN believing LB was a liar and a thief - feeding her animosity.

All MOO.

 

[lclabtech]

I was just looking at the fabulous timeline put together by billandrew when I came across the series of texts from November 30 through December 8, 2011. This is where there is talk about the iphone that LB was using as an ipod.

It starts on November 30 with DM alerting CN that he is going to be talking to LB about cell phones. He tells CN that he has the serial number of the phone LB uses.

In the midst of DM/CN text conversation (9:42 pm) there is an incoming text from LB saying "Dumped out my purse. Not there "
DM texts back at 9:52 pm "Going to search truck and my driveway."
Then at 2:03 am on Dec 1 he texts: "Not here. Will check in daylight. Think you have it."
LB texts him 3 times between 10:44 am and 10:48 am:
"I'll check again fml."
"It has to be floating about the car. Def not here :s"
"Let me know if u find it. I miss my music it's my coping device."
DM texts back at 12:31 pm: "I found it!"

From this series of texts, I suggest the following might be inferred:

1. DM spent time with LB before he texted CN and let her know that he was going to see LB. He led CN to believe that it hadn't happened yet and that he was being a good boy and letting her know in advance.

2. DM took LB's ipod/phone and then pretended to look for it while LB freaked out that it was missing. Already at 9:40 pm on November 30, he tells CN that he got the serial number of LB's phone. I suggest he got that number because he took her phone.

Now is it AM's phone? I don't know, but it would not surprise me at all if it really is a phone that LB's dad found in the park and gave to her. In the early morning hours of December 8, there is a long text conversation between LB and DM in which she seems to be working hard to persuade him to have sex with her. You can sense desperation and yearning here. DM is putting her off and then says: "Tell you what, tell me the truth about Andrew's phone & I will reward your honesty." And LB replies: "My dad found it in the park. Fixed it and said I could use it. It was blank when I got it." She seemed desperate enough that she probably did tell the truth and hoped for her "reward".

I just thought the whole series of texts gave some insight into how manipulative DM could be. He had LB believing she must have lost her phone. He had CN believing he was only going to spend time with LB because he had to get AM's phone back. He also had CN believing LB was a liar and a thief - feeding her animosity.

All MOO.

Hm, I think that fits pretty well with what’s being said there!

 

[mimimic]

bbm - can you provide a quote or link substantiating that?

That being said, I think even if they did question DM he could have brushed it off because of the way it seems they do if someone is involved in a risky lifestyle(LB) or not in the case like TB unusual circumstances. WM for that matter as well. sad but true

 

[Errrr]

I wonder if DM used LBs request for him to "hurt" her as the inspiration to say this to CN, knowing what it really meant?
I also think that the existence of a shoebox with over $3000. is all the motive DM requires to commit a murder. He must have been pretty bummed if she told him she left a thousand behind with her dog!

 

[Lupy]

Just a reminder there is no court tomorrow due to Remembrance Day on Saturday.

Oh my goodness. It dawned on me first thing this morning that there would be no court today. Silly me and this memory! Hence why I so appreciate things like billandrew's timeline and the fantastic minds here on Websleuths. :blushing:

 

[andreww]

I don't think that MM will say that much , she might be able to verify some of the dates. That is my opinion unless she can also clear up about where MS was when Laura was murdered and if he was with DM, then that will help convict MS of the murder.
If she can say that MS was DM and that helps to convict MS of Laura s murder her testimony will be very useful.

MM will say absolutely nothing useful. She might admit to seeing Laura but then she'll say she went to her room and heard nothing. LB was gone the next morning and she didn't ask about her. She'll have to describe the conversation during the drive back to Oakville and their stop by the lake, but I highly doubt she saw or heard anything. Its all about protecting her own hide at this point and I am positive that she has been told not to admit to seeing anything incriminating.

 

[mimimic]

Think they just stayed put awhile? till just after midnight. DM told MS he was going to bed then told SS he was going to the hanger for awhile after some stops.

Is anybody clear on why we don’t seem to have cellphone ping data between 7:30 pm on the 3rd and mid morning of the 4th? Or have I misunderstood the evidence?

 

[Georgeo]

I’m not sure it’s as simple as “someone reports you missing, LE gets to immediately dig through all of your financial records and cell phone information” though. They’d likely have to go through courts to show there was some suspicion of foul play, evidence you didn’t just decide as an adult to leave and no longer communicate with those people.

Cell phone companies are actually very protective of this information.

I think the "privacy" issue is making it more difficult for LE and worried friends and family of victims... perhaps this could / should be addressed by the powers that be....

 

[mimimic]

Might there be more text to see if any were recoverable off DM phone?

They do not have LB's phone and I haven't heard anything about them having a computer back up of her phone. She didn't even have a mobile computer she was using during this time period so it's unlikely there is one.

MOO

 

[lclabtech]

I think the "privacy" issue is making it more difficult for LE and worried friends and family of victims... perhaps this could / should be addressed by the powers that be....

Not sure who you mean by powers that be in relation to cell phone pings? Not sure anything can be changed about the process in compelling private companies to turn over customers’ data.

 

[mimimic]

The way it sits right now it seems it could have been MS himself with ipad between waking from his stupor and before he went anywhere for the day. Or just after he got back before round two of mission digestion as these low-lifes say.

All that I've seen reported by MSM is broad time ranges and high level summaries of the data. I'd love to see the detailed reports and presentations to answer some questions I have, such as:

• When exactly did Millard pick up Babcock from Kipling Station? I only see it reported as "the afternoon" on July 3.
• Where was Millard at 7:30pm when he told Smich he was "on a mission, back in 1 hr"?
• What time was the "I rolled my first spliff" message sent on July 4?
• Who plugged LB's iPad into DM's computer at 10:43am, if DM's and LB's phones were pinging along the QEW around that time, and LB's phone last pinged near Indian Grove in Mississauga at 11am?
• When did Millard actually tell Schlatman he was going to the hangar? (It was reported as 1am on July 4, but it would seem to make more sense if it was 1pm).

 

[mimimic]

Hmmm? look at the shadow ...could be a shirtless woman or an elbow.

Some of us believe it is a male in black shorts sunbathing.

snipped from [video=youtube;46QwzJZulf4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=198&v=46QwzJZulf4[/video]