Bosma Murder Trial 05.10.16 - Midweek Discussion

[Dutchman]

That's an important question asked that I missed. Can you point me to where that was said, and by who?

MOO

sorry inspector North, I should have added to that jmo. If MS had a hand in LB s murder or at the very least, he could not have been blind to the possibility of doing away with TB. I can't see being high on drugs, or drunk when the crime was committed having any difference on the sentencing. Jmo.

 

[SnooperDuper]

MS could claim he expected that they are gonna drop him off some place and then when MS was in the Yukon, DM killed Bosma. Really, seems like all the prep work was done by DM. I, personally, find the sausage evidence not convincing. Unless DM gets up and says "no, he knew very well what's gonna happen", I can see MS getting off with 2nd degree or something(edit: if he presents evidence that he was in the Yukon when Tim Bosma was killed). If MS was in the Yukon when Tim Bosma was shot, was he confining Tim Bosma at the time of death?

But there was a plan to steal a truck that included murder and an incinerator, and MS was playing his part in that plan if he was in the Yukon alone. It's still first-degree.

 

[SnooperDuper]

It is interesting that DM thinks what AM said about "whose truck do I steal?" is what would put him away for life. IMO, that statement is damning but what I think is more damaging is MM's testimony of the celebratory mood.

Or maybe it is those two statements combined. To me the celebratory mood after all that happened the night before shows to me (and hopefully the jury) that nothing went against plan for DM and MS.

Once AM testified, the debate over DM and MS's guilt really died down. I am sure it had a similar strong impact on the jury.

 

[Sphinx]

Something tells me she wouldn't be so smug unless her lawyer was telling her that she was going to beat this charge. Lawyers will be pretty up front when they tell you what you are facing, and by now she should know what she could plea to, or her chances of beating the charge. All MOO of course.

There is a lawyer living in Ont. that I know about through friends. She often promises to win custody cases, get huge settlements in divorces, or win large amounts in lawsuits, but rarely does she deliver. Only after the desperate or greedy client has spent at least $10,000, which has to be paid up front, do they find out that things are not going their way in the courts. They often spend a great deal of money, and get nothing but more promises to deliver, if the client pays another 5 or 6 thousand up front. I am just saying that some lawyers get a lot of money from clients, without achieving what they made their client hope for, and it is apparently all legal. IMO

 

[Dutchman]

But there was a plan to steal a truck that included murder and an incinerator, and MS was playing his part in that plan if he was in the Yukon alone. It's still first-degree.

Totally agree, which one of us could burn a human body and function at all the next day. Only someone without a soul, could participate in such an act. And needs to be reabiihated.jmo

 

[mozzagirl]

Once AM testified, the debate over DM and MS's guilt really died down. I am sure it had a similar strong impact on the jury.

That is true. Good point.

 

[mozzagirl]

I wish there was a way to recall all the posters that defended DM over the years and ask them what they think now.

 

[brightii]

I'm not really expecting that MS will take the stand in his own defence. IMO, TD will call a couple of witnesses to add to reasonable doubt about MS's guilt, but I will be very surprised if MS actually testifies, IMO. I think DM is exactly where MS wants him - already proved guilty - and MS would have to face being cross-examined by DM's defence where everything MS would say would be twisted and challenged, and by the Crown who wouldn't go easy on MS either, and that scenario may result in MS being forced into in a very dark corner where he would be seen by the jury as DM wishes him to be seen, as "treacherous Mark", a dangerously dark and shadowy figure placed in an unforgiving light, IMO.

OTOH, perhaps MS and TD believe that MS has nothing more to lose and whatever MS would testify to would be worth the risks involved, IMO. I think everyone is hoping that MS will tell the truth to ensure DM's fate and to help give the Bosma's some sense of closure, but I don't want to expect any miracles because I'd rather be pleasantly surprised by MS's testimony if it happens, than painfully disappointed if it doesn't, IMO.

All MOO.

 

[canadiangirl]

I wish there was a way to recall all the posters that defended DM over the years and ask them what they think now.

They would probably still be on his side. Thing is I looked some usernames up I recall from a few years ago and most of these people seem to be on a timeout

 

[Inspector_North]

"If Smich does "hit the box" he will be open to cross-examination, first by Millard's team, then by Fraser for the Crown.


During cross-examination, Millard's team can put to the witness its own version of how Tim was murdered, thereby getting its theory to the jury without putting Millard on the stand."

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6546273-clairmont-the-end-of-the-bosma-trial-is-in-sight/

 

[hellkat2]

I posted this in the other thread, but saw it was going to close....

I honestly believe MS and DM had a "brother" pact of sorts, through their lawyers, not to say a word, especially with the LB murder trial also on the horizon.

That said, when MS saw the letters in court, and it was evident DM had every intention of turning stool pigeon and setting him up to take the fall, MS decided their little pact was off. When DM and his counsel took a pass on taking the stand, MS pounced and is going to tell all -whether it is the whole truth or not.

Dellen the Felon, with his smug attitude, smiles and waves in open court, is about to get a reality check. He thought he was the "mission commander", so to speak, and MS was just the stupid guy who would do anything he asked. Maybe he was right, but I believe his brother, his partner is crime, is going to sing like a canary.

I think they are both going down for first degree murder, but I think MS is going to do everything he can to save his own now. DM was set to betray his "brother", and I am guessing MS is going to have a lot to say Wednesday. All this MOO

EDIT: My bad. MS would have seen the letters before court. But the premise remains: when he saw the letters, he decided he was going to turn. MOO

Can Dellen change his mind now that Smich has decided to?

 

[hellkat2]

Crown closes its case in Tim Bosma trial: Here's what comes next
By Adam Carter, CBC News Posted: May 10, 2016

On Monday, Justice Andrew Goodman asked Millard and Smich's legal teams if they would be calling witnesses.

Millard's name is first on the indictment, so the question was first put to his lawyer Ravin Pillay.

Pillay said no, meaning Millard will not testify. An accused person cannot be compelled to testify.

The majority of evidence at the trial so far has centred on Millard. The aviation company heir even wrote about addressing the jury in jailhouse letters he had smuggled out to his then girlfriend, Christina Noudga.

"My heart's racing. [It's] probably a combination of a quick workout, and [rehearsing] an [opening] address to a jury," he wrote.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/news/tim-bosma-trial-what-happens-now-1.3574185?cmp=rss

Maybe DM indicating he would not testify was a way of getting smich to go first. But I am not sure that DM cannot change his mind at any point......Anybody?

 

[Inspector_North]

Maybe DM indicating he would not testify was a way of getting smich to go first. But I am not sure that DM cannot change his mind at any point......Anybody?

That question was put to Molly Hayes during a radio interview. She was not certain about evidence, but she seemed to indicate that DM not taking the stand was final.

MOO

 

[SuperSpy]

- I'll bet we find out that MS was driving the SUV when TB was shot. Or maybe CN dropped them off ?
Agreed, except for the CN part.

Maybe MS tells us that she left her phone at home that day, on purpose.

- I think he is going to refute what CN said he said on the phone, ie "I ****ed up".
The time for that was when his lawyer cross examined her.

Nope. MS could tell us which pronoun he used. Him - meaning DM.Or maybe MS screwed in some other way.

- He is going to say that he had no driver's license and DM made him stay to incinerate the body. Maybe at gun point ?
The text messages about the fireside furniture and sausage roast pic suggest that was the plan.

I wonder if those are too crytic to count as evidence. MS could tell us what they really mean.

- CN helped with the clean up on the "tiny mission", not MS. He'll say that CN was an accomplice, she knew about the mission, she knew about the gun, she knew about the truck, she knew Bosma was dead, etc
For him to say that would also be an admission that he knew these things in advance as well. Wont happen.

Could say that CN was an accomplice, that she knew about the gun, but that he didn't know the gun was going to be use or that murder was part of the plan.

- DM carried the gun on the test drive. MS didn't know about it.
Agreed.

I bet CN is quaking in her boots tonight. All sorts of stuff could come out that she "couldn't remember". I wonder if she puts up another image on her Instagram account tonight.

Here is something that has bothered me - CN stated in court that she now knows DM had other girls. The only way she could have found this out was via the media coverage of the trial, most likely from April 20th testimony. Witnesses aren't allowed to be in court. Shouldn't they also be banned from reading the media ? But how would you enforce that, when it is everywhere ?

Whatever the case, MS could really do a lot of damage to CN tomorrow. And he could enlighten the Bosma family. I'd like to see both happen.

 

[SuperSpy]

BTW, doctors have all sorts of extra responsibilities, like being able to prescribe drugs and dealing with patient information. I don't think there is any way that CN is ever going to be licensed as a doctor given her drug use, lying and involvement in this case, especially if she is convicted of anything.

 

[canadiangirl]

Whatever the case, MS could really do a lot of damage to CN tomorrow. And he could enlighten the Bosma family. I'd like to see both happen.

<rsbm>
I have similar thoughts in regards to throwing CN under the bus. I wonder if that would trigger some memories from her.

 

[hellkat2]

This interview with Joseph Neuberger, Criminal Lawyer with Neuberger & Partners LLP provides some good insight around this case, and what is next at this phase.

I could not find the direct link to the interview with Scott Thomson of AM900, but here is a link to the interview on FB.
(modsnip)

Update link thanks to SnooperDuper
https://soundcloud.com/am900chml/is-it-common-for-an-accused-to-not-testify-at-their-trial

MOO

Great URL...radio broadcast very good.

 

[SuperSpy]

My thoughts on CN is that she would have been a star witness for the prosecution if she were innocent. Would have been really simple for her, excellent way to get revenge on DM for the other girls too. But the problem is that she isn't innocent and couldn't do a deal with prosecution without doing time. Thus she lies to cover her tracks and gets deeper and deeper into this mess.

There is a reason DM was able to convince her to help clean up - she probably knew of the whole plan and dropped DM and MS off.

Whatever MS says tomorrow will be admissible as evidence in her trial. Her own testimony wasn't, but his will be.

I'm hoping she gets 10+ years.

I can't believe how she screwed up her life being with DM. But you are who you hang around with and she apparently liked this low life gang. And now she is going to jail with them.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Whatever MS says tomorrow will be admissible as evidence in her trial. He own testimony wasn't, but his will be.

@susanclairmont If Smich testifies, can what he says be used against Noudga at her trial? Or would he have to testify again then?

Susan Clairmont &#8207;@susanclairmont 2h2 hours ago
He would have to be called to testify at her trial. Evidence has to be put in through a witness. 1/2

Susan Clairmont &#8207;@susanclairmont 2h2 hours ago
2/2 Unless there is agreed statement of facts or, if a witness dies, earlier testimony can be read into the record.

 

[flipflop]

Someone earlier questioned who goes first for closing.....I found this.

Each legal team will then present its closing address to the jury, beginning with Millard's, followed by Smich's counsel, then Leitch for the Crown.
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/6546273-clairmont-the-end-of-the-bosma-trial-is-in-sight/