Bosma Murder Trial 06.10.16 - Day 59 - Charge to jury

[Kamille]

Goodman says the jury must decide if Millard fabricated evidence because he was part of Bosma's death, or because he was just part of covering it up.
by Adam Carter 2:22 PM

"You must not limit your analysis to the after the fact conduct," Goodman says.
by Adam Carter 2:22 PM

 

[Kamille]

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 1m1 minute ago
If they accept that there is fabrication in Millard's letters to Noudga, jury must try to determine why.

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 1m1 minute ago
Was Millard involved in planning and executing of murder or only cleaning up after the fact?

Lisa Hepfner ‏@HefCHCHNews 1m1 minute ago
The after the fact conduct in this case may support the conclusion an accused was involved May 6, 2013, or it may not. #Bosma

Lisa Hepfner ‏@HefCHCHNews 46s46 seconds ago
Each accused must be considered separately, judge says. #Bosma

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 29s29 seconds ago
"Consider the case against each accused separately."

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 23s23 seconds ago
All the lawyers are facing the judge in the courtroom except Dungey and Moodie, who are turned toward the jury. #Bosma

 

[Kamille]

"After the fact conduct is not to be considered in isolation," Goodman says.
by Adam Carter 2:25 PM

The after the fact conduct must be considered with all the other evidence, Goodman says.
by Adam Carter 2:25 PM

 

[Kamille]

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 41s42 seconds ago
After the fact conduct cannot be considered in isolation or given undo weight. Jury must look at along with all of the evidence.

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 34s35 seconds ago
Also consider after the fact conduct in regard to the credibility of Smich and Millard, says judge.

Lisa Hepfner ‏@HefCHCHNews 20s21 seconds ago
After the fact conduct must be used with all the other evidence when they're considering whether Millard and Smich are guilty. #Bosma

 

[Kamille]

"Each accused is entitled to have his case decided on the basis of his own conduct," Goodman says.
by Adam Carter 2:26 PM

 

[Kamille]

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 1m1 minute ago
We're now starting Part 5 of judge's charge to jury. I think there are 11 parts.

Lisa Hepfner ‏@HefCHCHNews 49s50 seconds ago
Principals and aiders & abettors are equally culpable, judge tells jury. #Bosma

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 39s40 seconds ago
Goodman stresses again that the two accused, though being tried together, are to be considered individually. Separate verdicts. #Bosma

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 57s57 seconds ago
Parties to an offence. In Canada, distinction between those who commit and those who aid and abet is irrelevant.

Colin Butler ‏@ColinButlerCBC 57s57 seconds ago
Each needs to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, Goodman says. #TimBosma

Lisa Hepfner ‏@HefCHCHNews 37s38 seconds ago
That means it doesn't matter who pulled the trigger, if jury finds both Millard and Smich were helping pull off a murder. #Bosma

 

[Kamille]

People who aid and abet in a crime are equally culpable in the eyes of the law as someone who committed a crime, Goodman says.
by Adam Carter 2:27 PM

 

[Kamille]

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 57s57 seconds ago
Goodman is now reviewing Sec. 21 of the Criminal Code. Everyone is a party to an offence who a) actually commits it, or...

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 45s45 seconds ago
...b) does anything for the purpose of aiding any purpose to commit it, c) abets any person committing it.

Colin Butler ‏@ColinButlerCBC 1m1 minute ago
Goodman also tells jury anyone who aids and abets in a crime is just as guilty in the eyes of the law. #TimBosma

 

[Kamille]

Goodman says if everyone agrees that the accused did it in "one way or another," they can be found guilty. They don't have to agree how it happened.
by Adam Carter 2:30 PM

"A person may be guilty of an offence because he helped somebody commit it," Goodman says. This is an "aider."
by Adam Carter 2:31 PM

 

[Kamille]

Lisa Hepfner ‏@HefCHCHNews 52s53 seconds ago
The jury doesn't have to all agree on how they find the accused guilty, as long as they all settle on guilt. Judge talking about differences

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 54s55 seconds ago
Two people can be found guilty of an offence for different reasons. #Bosma

Lisa Hepfner ‏@HefCHCHNews 24s25 seconds ago
A person can be found guilty if he helped another commit an offense. Called the aider. He must intend to help. #Bosma

 

[Kamille]

Just being there doesn't make someone an aider though, Goodman says. "Sometimes people are in the wrong place at the wrong time."
by Adam Carter 2:32 PM

The Crown has to prove intent and knowledge that offence would happen on the aider's part, Goodman says.
by Adam Carter 2:32 PM

Abettors are people who encourage a person to commit an offence, and they can also be found guilty.
by Adam Carter 2:33 PM

 

[Kamille]

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 1m1 minute ago
Yikes. Twitter problems. Back now. Talking S. 21 of CCC, aiding in an offence.

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 1m1 minute ago
A person may be guilty of an offence bc they helped someone commit it--they're an "aider." But just being there doesn't make you an aider.

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 1m1 minute ago
Aider must have intended to help with commission of offence....Abetters are persons who encourage an offence.

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 59s59 seconds ago
Abetter must intend to encourage someone to commit an offence.

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 59s59 seconds ago
"Abettors" are people who encourage someone to commit an offence. They must be intentionally doing so. #Bosma

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 49s49 seconds ago
"Just being there does not make someone an abetter of a crime...Sometimes people just wind up in the wrong place at the wrong time."

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 48s48 seconds ago
Again, simply being there does not make one guilty as an abettor. "Sometimes people just end up int he wrong place at the wrong time."

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 33s34 seconds ago
"On the other hand, if a person knows someone intends to commit a crime...and encourages...that person is also guilty (as an abettor)."

 

[Kamille]

"If a person knows that someone intends to commit a crime, and encourages it, that person who encourages it, is also guilty of the crime the other commits."
by Adam Carter 2:34 PM

There's also instances where the accused have planned to commit a certain offence, like a theft, and then something else happens.
by Adam Carter 2:36 PM

 

[Kamille]

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 1m1 minute ago
Common unlawful purpose. If one of the group carries out a different offence than the original offence planned for...

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 54s55 seconds ago
If Millard and Smich planned and agreed on a truck theft and then one committed a murder while carrying out truck theft...

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 29s30 seconds ago
Goodman explaining that there are also cases where parties agree to commit one offence, such as a theft, and then something else happens.

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 24s24 seconds ago
Accused must know co-accused was going to carry out murder during theft or that they knew there was "risk" of serious harm during theft.

Lisa Hepfner ‏@HefCHCHNews 4s4 seconds ago
I'm limiting my tweets for clarity. Some of this charge is confusing and some of it repetitive. #Bosma

 

[Kamille]

An accused cannot be convicted as an aider or abettor unless it's proven that he had the state of mind or intent with that offence.
by Adam Carter 2:38 PM

This is an extremely technical discussion. I'm trying to break it down as best I can for everyone.
by Adam Carter 2:38 PM

 

[Kamille]

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 56s57 seconds ago
Before an accused can be convicted of murder, they must have a certain state of mind, that the judge will explain later.

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 49s50 seconds ago
An accused cannot be convicted of an offence as an aider or abettor...unless it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he had...(1/2)

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 1m1 minute ago
... the requisite state of mind...for such an offence. (2/3)

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 1m1 minute ago
Do not confuse aiding or abetting truck theft with aiding or abetting murder, says judge. "You must be very careful not to do that."

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont 1m1 minute ago
Brief break now. #bosma

Lisa Hepfner ‏@HefCHCHNews 40s40 seconds ago
In this case, jury might find both accused intended truck robbery and 1 committed murder. If aider doesn't intend murder, not guilty.#Bosma

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 1m1 minute ago
Taking a 15 minute recess. #Bosma

 

[Kamille]

Now taking a 15 minute recess.
by Adam Carter 2:39 PM

 

[NashBridges2]

Ok, I've followed many huge trials, more than a dozen. I've never heard a judges charge this in depth, he's pretty much rehashing all the evidence.

 

[NashBridges2]

Now taking a 15 minute recess.
by Adam Carter 2:39 PM

3 cheers for kamille, you're kicking butt today with the tweets.

 

[Kamille]

Ok, I've followed many huge trials, more than a dozen. I've never heard a judges charge this in depth, he's pretty much rehashing all the evidence.

I believe that Michael Rafferty is trying to appeal his conviction based on information being omitted from the charge. At least we can be sure that this should not be the case with this decision.

MOO