Babcock Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #4

[Grey-St]

The term "trial" is not necessarily accepted as a description of the day of the trial. It is very often a long process beginning from arrest. Nobody questioned my usage of it.

!!!!!!! Thank you for this, Errrr. Such an excellent point, and exactly what I was getting at earlier. Your post flew over most of our heads though

 

[ABro]

There's a statute of limitations for how long SL and Laura's family have to sue police. typically it would be 2 years from when you discover you have a potential claim against another party. As far as I know there aren't any special rules for suing the police that would change that timeframe.

I highly doubt that applies here. The police wouldn't have been available to be deposed due to ongoing investigations and trials. That's not the fault of the plaintiffs or something they can control. There would be a work-around -- assuming anyone were interested in suing.

 

[Grey-St]

There's a statute of limitations for how long SL and Laura's family have to sue police. typically it would be 2 years from when you discover you have a potential claim against another party. As far as I know there aren't any special rules for suing the police that would change that timeframe.

The statute of limitations can be waved or extended in special circumstances that would prevent a plaintiff from filing sooner. The criminal case being before the courts is a prime example. So is the fact that at the time, their main concern and focus was finding their daughter, not filing a civil suit.

 

[winter2017]

I felt like discussing about whether MM told the complete truth or not because if she did withhold information , it could be important and help convict MM>
When she said she did not know what was going on in the incinerator I am not sure I believe that. It is very important because if she knew that would prove MS was present while they incinerated Laura.
Unfortunately, the crown has to deal with very questionable witnesses. That is why I said that I have a feeling in future we are going to hear more about these characters and it won't be good.
They all claim now to suddenly have changed etc. I really doubt that.
MM was young but she was very involved with MS and he was young but clearly a not good person.
When she testified this time meaning MM, she knew this time that MS had already been involved in one murder and she testified he was happy and celebrating a few hours after Tim Bosma s murder.
In Laura s death it looks like again in the video of him doing the rap song, he looked smug and very happy and even enjoying doing the rap that very probably was about Laura being murdered.
He is a useless, worthless human being and so is DM.
If he is convicted of murder in this trial I hope he receives further justice in prison.

 

[hopingforjustice]

Slightly concerned what the jury will think about the lack of LE involvement between the time LB went missing and the time a homicide investigation began and when charges were laid.

Imo the Crown owes it to LB's family, SL and the community at large to admit that TPS ignored/shelved any info that LB suddenly dropped off the grid.

I honestly don't know if the jury will even notice this...unless DM brings it up in his defense. The crown has not brought it out in the open. All the the Crown has done is show phone records. For all the jury knows, it took this long to put it all together. Quietly There has been so much other info presented and as other posters have mentioned, it is at times very hard to follow. I am actually worried that the fact that it has not yet been brought forward with LE witnesses to talk about it that it may come back to haunt the crown. Imagine...If the crown does not provide reasoning why LE didn't follow up on this I can see.DM going to the defense closing statement saying...".they had her phone records showing she called me...No One came to see me. " That is when the phone records will really be front and centre with the jury and it will make them ask why?

 

[huntergerrard]

If we look at BillAndrew's timeline, at around 7:30pm on July 3rd, it doesn't look good for MS. Did Millard leave the gun, or the ammunition that he had picked up earlier that day, at the top of the stairs for Smich? Whatever it was, it triggered the reply from MS that he needed a small favour from DM, some money. MS knew that the "present" was not money.

Then DM leaves for an hour, leaving MS and LB together in the house. From 7:30 pm until about 1:00 am, the phones are silent.

Jul 3 7:03 pm Babcock's phone calls her voicemail, the final call reported on her phone records. It pings a tower near Maple Gate. Babcock Day 9: Fortier testimony
Jul 3 7:26 pm Millard texts Smich: "present for you at the top of the stairs." Babcock Day 13: Falconer testimony
Jul 3 7:32 pm Smich texts Millard: "Thank u. I need a small favour. Some change for food. I'm out of cash." Babcock Day 13: Falconer testimony
Jul 3 7:33 pm Millard texts Smich: "tru. I'm on a mission, back in 1 hr."

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Hb6kEtpLa8cHCVorBuy4yqfHymGvhfHeM6s8QMWGVW8/pubhtml

Wasn't the gift left for MS the "Heini" Dm picked up?

 

[JuneBug67]

Smich texts Millard: "R u here or did u dip?" Babcock Day 13: Falconer testimony
Jul 3 2:53 pm Smich texts Millard: "It's raining
Babcock Day 13: Falconer testimony
Jul 3 3:09 pm Millard texts Smich: "how bout the white & brown paint over the side entrance? no rain there

Appears to be another coded text....I checked historical toronto weather frcst - there were no rain on july 3 .. partly cloudy with temp around 24/27C....
Any thoughts anyone?

There were rain showers in the 6 pm hour at YYZ. Text was three hours earlier, but precise location and time of data recording probably introduce variability. We know at least that conditions that day were capable of creating rain at some point. Perhaps there was a brief shower in Etobicoke at that time.

http://climate.weather.gc.ca/climat...&searchMethod=contains&txtStationName=Toronto

There is a brown and white structure built on to the the Millard house that would provide shelter from the rain if MS was supposed to do painting or cleaning. You can see it beginning at about 23 seconds here:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=14s&v=DRkLi9FC_8Q

I think Occam’s Razor should probably apply here.

 

[huntergerrard]

Grey-St, if you've lost your mind, I think you're in good company as many people are driven to distraction by trying to figure out the motivations and missing details of DM and/or MS's crimes, so you're not alone, IMO.

My frustration with many of the DM/MS associates is because I don't find them trustworthy and therefore I find it hard to sift through whatever they state as reliable and it is hard for me to feel confident that they are telling the truth - the whole truth. IMO it would have been far better had any of them offered up more information willingly about DM and/or MS but I always get the sense that they hold back in an effort to protect themselves and/or one or both accused.

When in contrast I think of SL, LB's ex, he is a shining example of someone who risked a lot by opening himself (as an ex bf might be considered a prime suspect) to scrutiny by LE and yet despite that risk, SL pushed hard for TPS to investigate further LB's disappearance. SL IMO had a clear conscience whereas several of DM and/or MS's other associates were up to no good in one way or another IMO and would not likely want to deal with LE and endure LE's questions about their lives even in light of LB being missing, in possible peril, or worse.

As for whether or not LE in any jurisdiction have been or are currently investigating any other possible crimes related to DM and/or MS, I have no idea.

All MOO.

Right. SL could have been a suspect, but also, in meeting with DM, SL could have been in the incinerator next and no one would be the wiser as far as what happened to him or LB. IMO.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

I can try!lol. Lately, there have been a few "quotes of the day" posts. Thought I'd pick a "sleuth of the day" In this one it hinged on a perceived (by me) assist Posted by #175 and #191 used it, to Sleuth a possible reason.

Sorry! Just thought it was good and it makes me wonder what DM is holding back here. I do realize it may not be the actual sleuth of the day haha- was looking to add a more serious vote than the bada bing bada bang "quote of the day" get me; or no?

Also I am under the impression that it's not possible to bring quotes over from previous threads.

Thank you so much for explaining ... I understand now, and it is a great thought you had. I will see if I can track it down!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[andreww]

I highly doubt that applies here. The police wouldn't have been available to be deposed due to ongoing investigations and trials. That's not the fault of the plaintiffs or something they can control. There would be a work-around -- assuming anyone were interested in suing.

Not sure what they could possibly sue for? Lets face it, LB was long gone before SL ever contacted police. Did SL present them with any evidence that would suggest a crime had been committed? Not really. People walk away from family and friends all the time. In fact I have two close friends that I haven't heard from in decades. I gather that both of them, not happy with their family situations, just opted to move away and start a new life elsewhere. Should the police track them down for me? Of course not, its none of their business.

I'll also add that I think at least some of LE's lack of interest in investigating LBs disappearance was due to the fact that it was an ex-boyfriend that was trying to track her down. If SL had been an actual family member, he might have gotten a little more interest.

 

[andreww]

I agree, completely- and I'll give further reasoning why.

When MM gave her statement to police after MS was originally arrested and charged, LB wasn't even on their radar. Only TB. She was likely only questioned about her knowledge of a truck theft and a murder relating to it. This could have likely been her only statement to police. Later on, as the investigation opened up to LB's disappearance, it's very plausible that she would miss news coverage of it. I can't even tell you the amount of people I know who have never even heard of DM, MS, TB, and certainly not LB, who was reported on disproportionately less than TB. And my friends are all quite progressive and educated and watch the news... It's easy to miss things.

Secondly, it's not unreasonable that she misunderstood the question. When she's asked "before this trial, had you ever heard of her?" maybe she misinterprets the word "trial". Maybe she means "before this investigation" or "before charges were laid in her death" or "before all this". On the contrary, maybe she didn't misunderstand the question, and the first time she's heard of LB was in fact, this trial. If you even meet with a crown attorney AT ALL to prepare, you only do so a day before or the morning of your testimony. I know this from first hand experience testifying in a trial.

And lastly, I'm just reluctant to call her a liar at all. You may all have your opinions about her, she may come across as uneducated, naive, young, aloof, etc. but liar just doesn't strike me. She has no real reason to lie about this. If she knew Laura; had met her or heard of her, she would have just said so. It doesn't implement her in LB's disappearance or murder in any way. And she's admitted to far worse things already. It's so incredibly plausible that their paths never crossed.

If you go back to MMs initial statements to police you will find that she had no problems with lying, that is if what she is saying now is the truth. She originally told LE that she didn't know anything about an incinerator, and now we have her helping build a trailer for it and being present for the incineration of LB. So what is the truth? Or is either the truth? Whether she is a liar or not is not up for debate here, she is a liar. That point can't be argued, its fact. The question can only be "is she lying this time?".

 

[andreww]

brightii, I agree with what you said. It would be believable she did not meet her, but knew about her I think she did. MM knew about her and he was around MM all the time and I don't believe he did not discuss Laura. Also about the rap, I am sure MM asked MS about the rap, it was a weird rap and almost 99.9% she asked for the lyrics.
she was playing dumb. She told the truth about what she wanted and lied about what she wanted to.
If she would have told the full truth it might be a big help to convict MS.
It makes me wonder why she still wants to protect him. she knows he is a murderer so why not tell the whole and let him be convicted of another murder if he deserves it.
I think for some sick reason she is still protecting him. Which to me shows she has not learned much from her involvement in these heinous crimes, and it makes me think my thoughts about her have always been right.
I seriously doubt and there is always a small chance she would let what happened to change her but looks to me like it has not.

I don't think she is protecting Smich at all, she's protecting herself. Lets just say for argument sake that she was fully aware what was in the incinerator that night. Admitting that would open her up to charges as an accomplice to that crime. Even if she were offered immunity to any charges, she would still have to live with the fact that everyone would know what she had done. Friends, family and co-workers would never look at her the same again. Better to claim ignorance and accept everyones sympathy for her being innocently involved in this mess.

 

[THXGuru]

Right. SL could have been a suspect, but also, in meeting with DM, SL could have been in the incinerator next and no one would be the wiser as far as what happened to him or LB. IMO.

Not exactly. He went to police. Murder suspects do not go to police telling them someone is missing.

 

[Factoria]

If you go back to MMs initial statements to police you will find that she had no problems with lying, that is if what she is saying now is the truth. She originally told LE that she didn't know anything about an incinerator, and now we have her helping build a trailer for it and being present for the incineration of LB. So what is the truth? Or is either the truth? Whether she is a liar or not is not up for debate here, she is a liar. That point can't be argued, its fact. The question can only be "is she lying this time?".

I just read through MM's testimony from the TB Trial on April 21, and when asked by the Crown whether she knew about the incinerator, she stated that she'd seen the incinerator at the hangar. I haven't yet read the cross-examination ~ is that when it was revealed that she'd initially denied any knowledge of it?

 

[andreww]

I just read through MM's testimony from the TB Trial on April 21, and when asked by the Crown whether she knew about the incinerator, she stated that she'd seen the incinerator at the hangar. I haven't yet read the cross-examination ~ is that when it was revealed that she'd initially denied any knowledge of it?

It was in ABro's book.

Millard's Lawyer brought it up I believe. She lied about knowledge of the incinerator. She lied about cancelling Smich's phone the day Millard was arrested. She was far from cooperative. But thats to be expected from a girl who upon learning of her boyfriends involvement in one of the most heinous murders this area has ever seen, responds by saying that she wants to marry the guy. Sure she is young, cute, innocent looking, and naive, but make no mistake about it, MM is an evil, cold hearted, self serving person. Take that in to account before you decide what, and what not to believe about her testimony.

 

[Factoria]

It was in ABro's book.

Millard's Lawyer brought it up I believe. She lied about knowledge of the incinerator. She lied about cancelling Smich's phone the day Millard was arrested. She was far from cooperative. But thats to be expected from a girl who upon learning of her boyfriends involvement in one of the most heinous murders this area has ever seen, responds by saying that she wants to marry the guy. Sure she is young, cute, innocent looking, and naive, but make no mistake about it, MM is an evil, cold hearted, self serving person. Take that in to account before you decide what, and what not to believe about her testimony.

Thanks, andreww. Guess it's time for me to re-read ABro's book, too.

 

[Grey-St]

Not sure what they could possibly sue for? Lets face it, LB was long gone before SL ever contacted police. Did SL present them with any evidence that would suggest a crime had been committed? Not really. People walk away from family and friends all the time. In fact I have two close friends that I haven't heard from in decades. I gather that both of them, not happy with their family situations, just opted to move away and start a new life elsewhere. Should the police track them down for me? Of course not, its none of their business.

I'll also add that I think at least some of LE's lack of interest in investigating LBs disappearance was due to the fact that it was an ex-boyfriend that was trying to track her down. If SL had been an actual family member, he might have gotten a little more interest.

The point isn't about whether TPS could have saved her life, (we know from evidence that she was gone by this point), but that a thorough investigation was not done. Her family still deserved to know what happened to her. Maybe the phone records didn't suggest that crime had been committed, but thats why you investigate. DM was admittedly never even questioned, let alone pursued in any way. I wonder what evidence leading to her murder would still have been around had the TPS investigated in July 2012 instead of June 2013? That is the point.

Who cares whether SL was an ex-boyfriend or an actual family member? He was speaking on behalf of everyone who loved Laura and was concerned about her disappearance. The police cannot just arbitrarily decide what they will investigate or what "interests" them as you say, based on who brings forward evidence. This case reeks of negligence by the TPS, and the Babcock family certainly have a strong case, if that is an avenue they wish to pursue.

 

[Nov2017]

Long-time reader, first-time poster...

It looks like the stars will align tomorrow and I might have some free time to drop by the trial.

Basic questions - where is the courthouse? What courtroom? What time should I get there? Can I bring my laptop in and type on it?

 

[andreww]

Long-time reader, first-time poster...

It looks like the stars will align tomorrow and I might have some free time to drop by the trial.

Basic questions - where is the courthouse? What courtroom? What time should I get there? Can I bring my laptop in and type on it?

It’s at Queen and University. On University (east side) about a block north of Queen. Enter there, you’ll be security checked, then walk down the hall to the escalator. At the second floor there is a second security check, that’s where you line up.

Only the press can use phones and laptops.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’d be there as early as possible. Before 8:00?

 

[andreww]

The point isn't about whether TPS could have saved her life, (we know from evidence that she was gone by this point), but that a thorough investigation was not done. Her family still deserved to know what happened to her. Maybe the phone records didn't suggest that crime had been committed, but thats why you investigate. DM was admittedly never even questioned, let alone pursued in any way. I wonder what evidence leading to her murder would still have been around had the TPS investigated in July 2012 instead of June 2013? That is the point.

Who cares whether SL was an ex-boyfriend or an actual family member? He was speaking on behalf of everyone who loved Laura and was concerned about her disappearance. The police cannot just arbitrarily decide what they will investigate or what "interests" them as you say, based on who brings forward evidence. This case reeks of negligence by the TPS, and the Babcock family certainly have a strong case, if that is an avenue they wish to pursue.

Maybe a woman doesn’t want to be found by an ex boyfriend. That’s the point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk