Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #13

[ILoveDateline]

I always found her story unbelievable and laughable. IMO. I honestly thought maybe she had no clue to begin with but then I think of what I would do. My hubby does landscaping and he is always lugging around a trailer and sometimes asks me to help hook and unhook it (mostly the boat during fishing season). I can't say I ever need to touch anything, it's usually directing him where to back up and stop. But I'm delicate and hate ruining my manicure ☺. I also would have been a little POed running these BS errands in the middle of the night after not seeing him for days.

 

[canadiangirl]

Could all the other characters...MS, MM etc be called by the crown??

I'm sure anyone could be called to prove the crowns case. Possibly why none of them are friends with her? What did she write in the one letter about not knowing how to get to AM and MH. Which IMO they didn't want anything to do with her. Surely if she was around DM for that long she'd have no trouble speaking to either of them. IMO once the ***** went down the smarter ones (I use the term loosely) cut all ties which is why MH says friendships dissolved due to lies.

 

[don_quixote]

Criminal trials end up in conviction in just over 50% of cases in Ontario (lowest in Canada). Stats Canada.

It means that either courts in Ontario have a higher standard for the prosecution, or that the prosecution is more likely to bring a case in front of a judge/jury. IMO, latter is the case.
CN has a priori chance of 45% or so to walk out free. In other words, it may well be the case that the Crown does not have any single condemning evidence against her, but they think have enough to try the facts. Because they went straight to the trial, her chances may be even higher.

Who knows what DM and MS will tell on the stand?

This is in contrast to many 3rd world countries where conviction rates are at 95%+

 

[Nosey Parker]

Also, what charge could she be looking at for hiding the 'stereo'?

She hid evidence at the request of DM. Doesn't matter what she thought it was IMO.

 

[andreww]

I don't know the law in how it relates to the specifics of CN's AATF charge, but FWIW, IMO the Crown would not lay such a serious charge against CN if they didn't think they could succeed at trial against CN.

Apparently the Crown strongly opposed CN's bail application and that speaks volumes to me about how serious the charge is and how much evidence the Crown likely has to prove the charge, IMO. I'm sure they will have more evidence to present against CN, IMO. Maybe I'm wrong, but like in this trial when the judge often says to the jurors it's up to them to determine if what a witness is saying is to be believed, I presume at CN's November trial, the judge will also weigh the evidence and testimony in that way too based on what he believes to be true, IMO.

CN is not a believable witness IMO and I think the judge at her trial will agree, IMO. No reasonable person will buy CN's excuse about having no suspicions about DM wanting her to help him move the Eliminator incinerator in the middle of the night, in the pitch dark, and apparently without even using a flashlight, IMO. And even worse, she asserts that when it was known that TB's body had been incinerated this shocking-to-the-rest-of-the-world news made no impact on her and nor did she even then make any connection to the murder of TB and the Eliminator she helped DM move (and likely helped clean out TB's ashes as well), and nor did she admit to that news being troublesome later, IMO. There isn't another person on the planet who would not at the very least concede that, in hindsight, once such news was heard, they would not think back to that night and wonder about the incinerator - especially since by that time DM had been charged with the crime, IMO. CN is a very cagey coyote but her feigned ignorance will not be believed IMO, and it will not work to spare her a conviction, IMO.

CN will be convicted, IMO, and I think she will testify at her own trial thinking herself so much smarter than most people (not smarter than all people, as she impudently conceded in her testimony at this trial - lol), IMO. Perhaps others in DM's crew will speak up against CN at her trial once DM has been convicted (presuming he will be soon) and is no longer perceived as a powerfully intimidating figure or threat in their lives, IMO. I hope I'm right because CN has lessons to learn, although, IMO, like DM, she is not a good candidate for rehabilitation IMO. I know I'd be terrified of them both!

All MOO.

A couple of things...

CN was kept in jail because she was trying to tamper with witness', not because of the charges against her, don't kid yourself.

A judge won't get the opportunity to determine if CN is a liar because she more than likely won't testify.

 

[chaines]

It really is too bad that while the jury is deliberating they aren't allowed access to the minds of those on Websleuths! There is so much information to process and so many lies and half truths being told that I am constantly saying to myself "hey, that's right! Thank you everyone who comments and especially those who are taking the time to put up all the tweets.

 

[andreww]

She hid evidence at the request of DM. Doesn't matter what she thought it was IMO.

It certainly does matter what she thought it was.

 

[andreww]

Criminal trials end up in conviction in just over 50% of cases in Ontario (lowest in Canada). Stats Canada.

It means that either courts in Ontario have a higher standard for the prosecution, or that the prosecution is more likely to bring a case in front of a judge/jury. IMO, latter is the case.
CN has a priori chance of 45% or so to walk out free. In other words, it may well be the case that the Crown does not have any single condemning evidence against her, but they think have enough to try the facts. Because they went straight to the trial, her chances may be even higher.

Who knows what DM and MS will tell on the stand?

This is in contrast to many 3rd world countries where conviction rates are at 95%+

Your stats only include cases that go to trial. How many cases are plea bargained out or dropped before going to trial? My guess is most of them.

 

[don_quixote]

Your stats only include cases that go to trial. How many cases are plea bargained out or dropped before going to trial? My guess is most of them.

Is she not going to trial?

 

[ILoveDateline]

Is she not going to trial?

My understanding is if they are found not guilty, her charges would be dropped. So, yeah, she is going to trial.

JMO

 

[canadiangirl]

It certainly does matter what she thought it was.

By this reasoning if she was given a gun and said she THOUGHT it was a toy and had no bearing then her ignorance is acceptable in a court of law?

 

[EspressoBean]

Yes but I quoted your post saying she testified she didn't know "missions" meant criminal activity. When clearly IMO drugs and being the lookout or helping with so called missions is not legal.

She has never said she was the lookout. She referred to the drugs as the two of them getting drugs for them. But it was an ambiguous term that she did not know to mean "crime".

 

[Sphinx]

I don't believe CN is going to get off. She chose trial by judge, no jury. That will be harder for her, at least with a jury she could hope for 1/2 men that would get turned on by her sex talk and feel bad and let her off. A judge will see right through her "I didn't know" BS.

I hope you are right, because I believe she is very guilty. Some parts of DM's letters were blacked out, and redacted for this case. I hope they can use that additional evidence against her in her upcoming case. She reminds me so much of Karla Homolka, and I hope the criminal justice system wants to make very sure they never let another one like that outsmart them again. I have a feeling she may have been very involved in the murder of LB. IMO

 

[EspressoBean]

By this reasoning if she was given a gun and said she THOUGHT it was a toy and had no bearing then her ignorance is acceptable in a court of law?

There is a part of an accessory charge that refers to "willful blindness," that would apply for something like that.

 

[andreww]

I'm sure anyone could be called to prove the crowns case. Possibly why none of them are friends with her? What did she write in the one letter about not knowing how to get to AM and MH. Which IMO they didn't want anything to do with her. Surely if she was around DM for that long she'd have no trouble speaking to either of them. IMO once the ***** went down the smarter ones (I use the term loosely) cut all ties which is why MH says friendships dissolved due to lies.

I think the problem there as I understood it was that AM & MH were on the DNC list. She couldn't go to their doors if she was being followed, she couldn't call as phone records would show that, and writing a letter leaves an obvious paper trail. I think she is just saying that she just doesn't know what strategy to take to get in touch with them more than worrying that they wouldn't want to talk to her.

 

[andreww]

Is she not going to trial?

We'll see in November won't we. Again, I'm just going by what was presented at this trial, who knows what else they have and what Millard will say?

 

[canadiangirl]

She has never said she was the lookout. She referred to the drugs as the two of them getting drugs for them. But it was an ambiguous term that she did not know to mean "crime".

No I didn't say she said that she was a lookout. I was using that from the others MH and AM. Just pointing out the missions meant illegal activities

 

[EspressoBean]

My understanding is if they are found not guilty, her charges would be dropped. So, yeah, she is going to trial.

JMO

DM does not need to be found guilty for CN to still be tried for accessory according to the Criminal Code of Canada.

 

[EspressoBean]

No I didn't say she said that she was a lookout. I was using that from the others MH and AM. Just pointing out the missions meant illegal activities

Yes. But what I was saying was that CN is claiming that she did not know missions to mean this. "Missions" when used between she and DM meant other things, is her claim and there hasn't been evidence in this case to show otherwise.

 

[andreww]

Is she not going to trial?

And sorry, what I was getting at is that if the crown lays 100 charges, maybe 50 of those will go to trial and then only 25 will actually be found guilty. Court cases are expensive and the crown would much prefer to settle things without a trial.