Babcock Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #4

[Nakasaka]

totally agree....

 

[winter2017]

andreww , Ann was accurate and good to be reminded of the facts about MM. She lied continually and protected MS. I believe she continued to lie in this trial too and in this trial, she knows that they were proven to be killers. That does not speak well of her at all. Even after knowing they were killers and she still sounded like hiding things. On some other sites, people claiming to know her personally are defending her and saying she has changed her life and has a job etc., from her testimony I don't see her having changed from the first trial.
She is a very questionable person and far from honest and I forgot that even knowing MS was involved in something very serious crime she wanted to marry him.
I really doubt she has miraculously "seen the light" and leaving her past involvement in illegal things behind. I think it is who she is and IMO will always be. She may have the appearance as a naive, innocent person, but I think that is far from who she really is.

 

[Grey-St]

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.

I likely cannot change your opinion, and I’m okay with that. I value everyone’s point of view even if different from my own, and often agree with much of what you post on this forum. I just ask that you keep an open mind on what I’m about to say as it stems from personal and professional experience .

Many people lie in their first statement to police, often because they are terrified (for a variety of reasons), and their “fight or flight” and protective instincts kick in. Upon further thought, growth, guidence, support and rational decision making, they are able to be much more cooperative. Your question of “is she telling the truth now?”, I believe she is, and I believe she wants justice to be served.

Let’s not forget whose on trial, and rightfully so. And many of DM’s and MS’s cronies did and said questionable things, far worse than MM. But they have all testified to evidence that supports the crowns case, that have in the past and hopefully will in the future lead to convictions. CN is the one I truly have trouble with as her past behaviour (witness tampering, destruction of evidence) and performance on the stand suggests she does not care to see justice served.

But DM and MS are the truly evil ones.

 

[Nakasaka]

found this:
rain = slang term for PCP or dipper ([FONT=&amp]cigarette dipped into PCP)[/FONT]
PCP = Phencyclidine - street name: PeaCe Pill or Angel Dust
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=rain&page=2

To All Readers - Please disregard....in fact there was a possibility of rain and the explanation to the text messages is quite simple w/out any second meaning - MS was supposed to do some work (cleaning and/or painting) at Maple Gate ....

 

[gremlingrrl]

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.

It did come up in court, to the extent that SL testified that he had made a formal complaint to the Office of the Independent Police Review Director. I'm not clear on when the complaint was made, however.

But yes, it certainly does leave a big window between disappearance and charges.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...trial-into-laura-babcocks-murder-dimanno.html

 

[FastLikeLight]

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

Though records showed that she really disappeared by cutting everything as presented by Crown - no phone activities, no bank activities. The same things now are used as evidence that she's gone. LE, as we heard, has done not that much to trace a person. Going farther at least one more person was killed by this group, and one died under not very clear circumstances.
TB, WM, and LB relatives have a real question why the ball was not rolling.

 

[Ashley96]

before trials:

even knowing MS was involved in something very serious crime she wanted to marry him.
She lied continually and protected MS

true

during/after trials:

I believe she continued to lie in this trial too
Even after knowing they were killers and she still sounded like hiding things
from her testimony I don't see her having changed from the first trial.
I really doubt she has miraculously "seen the light" and leaving her past involvement in illegal things behind.
I think it is who she is and IMO will always be.
She may have the appearance as a naive, innocent person, but I think that is far from who she really is.

opinion...might be true, false or something in between

I guess I take exception to the harshness (in my opinion) of declaring she IS who she WAS and can never change. Maybe she hasn't, but if she has, I think we should encourage young people to rise above...not knock them down and declare any improvement made by them as being pointless because there is no hope for them.

But I respect your opinion and your right to have one

 

[matou]

The Laura Babcock murder trial is entering its fifth week of testimony and jurors in a Toronto courtroom will hear from only a handful more witnesses as the Crown is expected to wrap up its case against co-accused Dellen Millard and Mark Smich.


Crown Jill Cameron and her team have already called more than two dozen witnesses in an attempt to craft an airtight case and build a timeline of what happened to Babcock when she vanished in July 2012.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/laura-babcock-murder-trial-fifth-week-1.4409584

 

[musicaljoke]

before trials:

true

during/after trials:

opinion...might be true, false or something in between

I guess I take exception to the harshness (in my opinion) of declaring she IS who she WAS and can never change. Maybe she hasn't, but if she has, I think we should encourage young people to rise above...not knock them down and declare any improvement made by them as being pointless because there is no hope for them.

But I respect your opinion and your right to have one

This issue is not one of the noble idea of encouraging a person to rise above their past, but rather, deciding whether or not the person is a credible witness, and whether or not the testimony they speak is true.

 

[XFP]

andreww , Ann was accurate and good to be reminded of the facts about MM. She lied continually and protected MS. I believe she continued to lie in this trial too and in this trial, she knows that they were proven to be killers. That does not speak well of her at all. Even after knowing they were killers and she still sounded like hiding things. On some other sites, people claiming to know her personally are defending her and saying she has changed her life and has a job etc., from her testimony I don't see her having changed from the first trial.
She is a very questionable person and far from honest and I forgot that even knowing MS was involved in something very serious crime she wanted to marry him.
I really doubt she has miraculously "seen the light" and leaving her past involvement in illegal things behind. I think it is who she is and IMO will always be. She may have the appearance as a naive, innocent person, but I think that is far from who she really is.

Hi winter2017 - it's better if you use the Reply With Quote feature at the bottom right of the post you are responding to - makes it easier to follow your train of thought. Thanks.

 

[Ashley96]

This issue is not one of the noble idea of encouraging a person to rise above their past, but rather, deciding whether or not the person is a credible witness, and whether or not the testimony they speak is true.

you are right of course...I tend to get up on my noble soap box far too often

but is there anything concrete that shows she has been lying or is not credible in her witness testimony during trial? I think she may not be 100% forthcoming or may not remember clearly, but overall I don't think she has given us reason to disbelieve all she testifies to...

Of course she hasn't been cross examined yet so maybe I should hold off on defending her testimony :/

 

[JuneBug67]

MM was right in the thick of a joined-at-the-hip relationship with MS, and I would have been surprised if she DIDN'T lie to the police initially to cover for him. She was told by MS that he was a victim of sorts of DM's impulsive recklessness and she didn't examine that too closely - again something I find predictable in an unhealthy relationship arc. Eventually what she told the police changed, likely through some combination of distance from MS, skillful police pressure, a dose of reality, and time and space for her own ethical compass to get oriented. By the time she testified she was emotional, regretful and very damaging to the defendants. She was able to testify that Smich acknowledged the robbery, the death of Tim and his ultimate fate. She was devastating to his claim to have been upset after the murder. She contributed a lot to their convictions.

Literally every piece of independent evidence I can think of supports the fact that MM was not in the loop and not taken into confidence as a matter of course. There is very little reason to think she knew LB, and many reasons to think she didn't. There is no benefit to her saying she learned of LB in 2014 rather than 2013. The most reasonable conclusion is either that's true or her memory on the subject is flawed.

Either way, I think she has been a forthright and helpful witness at both of these trials. In this one she seems to have blocked any path for the defendants to credibly suggest they weren't doing something they wanted to hide with the incinerator. Personally, I'm grateful to her.

 

[Fionn]

This issue is not one of the noble idea of encouraging a person to rise above their past, but rather, deciding whether or not the person is a credible witness, and whether or not the testimony they speak is true.

I respectfully disagree with that statement. I believe that the way one assesses the credibility of a person hinges on how one views that person. If you see her as manipulative and self interested any testimony that she gives will echo untruthfully. If you see her as a young women bound up in an unhealthy relationship and lifestyle you can accept that time and distance has provided her with some clarity.
I don’t put a lot of stock in her wanting to marry MS because, I think, at that point in time she believed (or chose to believe) that MS was in innocent and it was DM who had murdered Tim Bosma.
While we see him as damaged, abusive and without conscience she was unable to. At that time she had ,also, not seen any of the evidence against him.
That being said, all of this is only my opinion, of course, and I completely understand why she is such a polarizing figure.
It is very sad, to me, to think of what passed for love in her life and I hope that she has learned from the past and has been able to change as a result but the reality is I’ll never truly know the answer to that.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Jealoushe]

I want everyone to remember that MM is in a tough position.

You have no idea how terrifying it can be to have information that can put someone in jail for a long time, and also know what that person is capable of. MM also has to think about her safety in the future. No doubt those boys are going to be locked up forever, but that doesn't mean the fear MM could be feeling for safety isn't real.

This is why you sometimes get people lying on the stand, not to protect the guilty, but to protect herself. Whether or not those boys have made dangerous friends in jail, she knows what they are capable of, and I'm sure she spends a lot of time looking over her shoulder. I know I do.

 

[JuneBug67]

Starting to run possible fanciful defenses for DM through my head. If he testifies surely he will have to acknowledge some things, like being with her on the 3rd and 4th? I can imagine something like this maybe:

-picked Laura up and spent the night with her
-dropped her off the next day at location x (some busy place) because she had a prearranged escort date
-claim her phone died around 11 am in the car and she said she would charge it later and call him to pick her up again
-claim she was expected back so she left her stuff at Maple Gate and had DM plug her iPad in to to charge
-didn't hear from her as expected but chalked that up to her current lifestyle and didn't do anything other than try to call (he may even have made calls like that to cover up)
-got back with Christina shortly after and didn't want to have to acknowledge Laura had been there once it became clear that she really was missing. He had no useful information anyway.
-eventually gave away or discarded her belongings
-minimize/deflect his dealings with Iisho
-claim animal incinerator really was an animal incinerator and that that was not Laura or any other human being on the 23rd
-claim he said what he said to XTina about hurting LB was impulsive, not really meant or intended, and done just to smooth his own way with his angry gf

OR

-somehow pin it on Smich

It's funny. When we learned MS was going to testify at the Bosma trial I did the same creative exercise in my head and came up almost exactly with what he eventually said. DM suddenly shot Tim, looked like a madman, MS in shock, fearful, acting on auto pilot after etc. etc. LOL. That says something I think about how most people lie in a kind of predictable and universal way. Kind of like a bad, low budget movie. Reaching for credibility through limited imagination.

 

[Inspector_North]

Starting to run possible fanciful defenses for DM through my head. If he testifies surely he will have to acknowledge some things, like being with her on the 3rd and 4th? I can imagine something like this maybe:

-picked Laura up and spent the night with her
-dropped her off the next day at location x (some busy place) because she had a prearranged escort date
-claim her phone died around 11 am in the car and she said she would charge it later and call him to pick her up again
-claim she was expected back so she left her stuff at Maple Gate and had DM plug her iPad in to to charge
-didn't hear from her as expected but chalked that up to her current lifestyle and didn't do anything other than try to call (he may even have made calls like that to cover up)
-got back with Christina shortly after and didn't want to have to acknowledge Laura had been there once it became clear that she really was missing. He had no useful information anyway.
-eventually gave away or discarded her belongings
-minimize/deflect his dealings with Iisho
-claim animal incinerator really was an animal incinerator and that that was not Laura or any other human being on the 23rd
-claim he said what he said to XTina about hurting LB was impulsive, not really meant or intended, and done just to smooth his own way with his angry gf

OR

-somehow pin it on Smich

It's funny. When we learned MS was going to testify at the Bosma trial I did the same creative exercise in my head and came up almost exactly with what he eventually said. DM suddenly shot Tim, looked like a madman, MS in shock, fearful, acting on auto pilot after etc. etc. LOL. That says something I think about how most people lie in a kind of predictable and universal way. Kind of like a bad, low budget movie. Reaching for credibility through limited imagination.

Hopefully the jury is not naïve, and more like the jury at TB's trial. MS tried that story telling route, only to see it fall flat. But who knows, maybe his friend Mr. Disney can come up with something better. MOO

 

[RandomName479]

Hopefully the jury is not naïve, and more like the jury at TB's trial. MS tried that story telling route, only to see it fall flat. But who knows, maybe his friend Mr. Disney can come up with something better. MOO

HA! Nice tie in......

 

[andreww]

Seems like a lot of people here give MM a pass because she's a cute young girl. Nobody gives SS or AM the same credit, because they both claim to have changed and both testified. But we all know that they didn't tell us everything. I see MM in the same light. I have no doubt what she has said might be at least partially true, its what she isn't saying that bothers me. We know from Smich's text to Millard that she was at Maple Gate on July 3rd, and as she was taking pics with the iPad on the 4th its reasonable to assume that she was there during the murder. The fact that the crown did not even broach the subject of the 3rd tells me that whatever she said about that day was not only not helpful to the prosecution, but was likely not believable. I find it very hard to believe that a shooting death could occur in a residential home without another occupant of that home at least hearing or sensing something had happened. Same thing with the burning of the body, If Smich was going to confine her to the car, why bring her at all?

Let me ask all of you how you can be certain that MM didn't see LBs dead body at Maple Gate, and how you can be certain she didn't help with the disposal of the body? People are curious by nature. You hear what sounds like a gunshot from upstairs, you go up and see what happened. Your boyfriend tells you they are testing an incinerator, you ask "why do I have to wait in the car?". Her entire story makes little to no sense if you think about how a normal person would react if put in her situation.

 

[JuneBug67]

Hopefully the jury is not naïve, and more like the jury at TB's trial. MS tried that story telling route, only to see it fall flat. But who knows, maybe his friend Mr. Disney can come up with something better. MOO

I do think it's absolutely possible that this was 2nd degree murder. Hell, I still think that for Tim. Like in that trial, there is evidence that argues against pre-planning. Little to no evidence in texts that anything was going down that day, the probable connection to a damaged or soiled mattress, the wait for an operational incinerator. The mattress (if related) and the delay are to me the equivalent of the blown out window in the RAM, the torn out seats and the blood evidence in the truck. That CAN'T have been the plan.

 

[Jealoushe]

Let me ask all of you how you can be certain that MM didn't see LBs dead body at Maple Gate, and how you can be certain she didn't help with the disposal of the body? People are curious by nature. You hear what sounds like a gunshot from upstairs, you go up and see what happened. Your boyfriend tells you they are testing an incinerator, you ask "why do I have to wait in the car?". Her entire story makes little to no sense if you think about how a normal person would react if put in her situation.

We do not know that she was shot.