You are correct
"The Crown intends to prove that on this date in the late evening hours, Tim Bosma was killed in his truck, shot by the two accused at close range, while on a test drive with his truck; his body then incinerated hours later by the two accused."
The question for me is what do they need to prove first degree in this trial? And whatever it is, can we look at, and discuss the evidence supporting that intention?
I am not trying to take a side, but challenge evidence, and the speculation that may be a leap for fair justice. Nothing would please me more than proving first degree. whatever angle the crown may be using to prove it. As long as the judgement criteria meets the spirit of our laws.
MOO
Well other than the death occurred during a forcible confinement (TB never exited that vehicle of his own free will) there is the fact that neither accused has offered up any plausible explanation to LE at the time of the killing or even at the time of their subsequent arrests, without benefit of discovery, that indicates the other was absolutely responsible for the killing. So the default seems to be that each is also capable (2 guns?) of having committed this murder simultaneously. And if that is not enough, there is also evidence that the murder may have been premeditated by both of them
3 strikes and you're out?
MOO