Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #17 [06.03.16 to 06.09.16]

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #281
This seems to be a bit of a repeated theme here -- the idea that because DM was conjuring up framing scenarios MS must be innocent.

Crooks, thieves and killers turn on each other all the time.

And as soon as DM was arrested, MS lost no time telling Marlena that DM was responsible for everything.

They both pointed the finger at each other.

DM's lawyer's framing story was given on Wednesday May 15. The toolbox moved four days earlier.

Thanks for clarifying the date when DM's lawyer mentioned the 'framing aspect' in relation to when the toolbox was looked into by MS, but I don't believe that I conveyed any such premise that if DM was conjuring up framing scenarios it would have to mean that MS must be innocent. I was responding to, and outlining my reasons for feeling differently than this post:

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by NoodlesMcgee
Isn't the simplest explaination for all of this that they were still working together and didn't have any thoughts at this point that one would turn against the other
 
  • #282
I personally think the "giddiness" was blown way out of proportion. It's very dramatic. Her first statement said they were happy the mission went well IIRC. And that would make sense if they didn't want to elude to the stuff that just went down and if MS was protecting her. This whole giddy BS I personally don't buy.
What purpose would this lie have? Why would she lie about it?

And wouldn't she be more likely to have lied when first questioned when she was in love and thinking she was carrying his baby?
 
  • #283
My opinion on DM framing MS is that once he was in jail and seeing the evidence pile up regarding the cell phone maps, he got desperate and tried to come up with a way out that involved the frame. Before then, he thought he'd beat the charges because evidence was destroyed.
 
  • #284
I personally think the "giddiness" was blown way out of proportion. It's very dramatic. Her first statement said they were happy the mission went well IIRC. And that would make sense if they didn't want to elude to the stuff that just went down and if MS was protecting her. This whole giddy BS I personally don't buy.

I think you and I have totally opposite opinions of what type of people Millard and Smich really were. You think they were bad, I thing they were both depraved psychopaths living in a real life game of Grand Theft Auto. I certainly do believe these guys were bouncing in their seats. IMO the texts show how giddy these guys were about performing this mission. We look at it now thinking how badly it went and ask why they should be celebrating, but at the time I think they actually believed that things went perfectly according to plan. These guys knew they were going to shoot TB, and they knew they were going to incinerate him by the next morning. This wasn't a shock to them. They were looking forward to it, they carried it out, and now they were celebrating their bounty.
 
  • #285
Thanks for clarifying the date when DM's lawyer mentioned the 'framing aspect' in relation to when the toolbox was looked into by MS, but I don't believe that I conveyed any such premise that if DM was conjuring up framing scenarios it would have to mean that MS must be innocent. I was responding to, and outlining my reasons for feeling differently than this post:

I should have been more clear. I wasn't referring specifically to your post, but rather the theme, which has been put forward on multiple occasions by multiple posters.
 
  • #286
I personally think the "giddiness" was blown way out of proportion. It's very dramatic. Her first statement said they were happy the mission went well IIRC. And that would make sense if they didn't want to elude to the stuff that just went down and if MS was protecting her. This whole giddy BS I personally don't buy.

Not to mention her first statement it was DM that was happy. She made the "celebration" statement just 9 days before she took the stand. Then she forgot just 9 days later and had to have the Crown "refresh" her memory. Then on cross by Dungey she went back to "DM was happy but they both said the mission went well".
 
  • #287
My opinion on DM framing MS is that once he was in jail and seeing the evidence pile up regarding the cell phone maps, he got desperate and tried to come up with a way out that involved the frame. Before then, he thought he'd beat the charges because evidence was destroyed.

That was his only play, and Smich's only play is to say Millard did it. But was getting the gun to Smich part of an attempt to frame or just a continuation of an effort to destroy evidence. I'll go with the latter.
 
  • #288
Not to mention her first statement it was DM that was happy. She made the "celebration" statement just 9 days before she took the stand. Then she forgot just 9 days later and had to have the Crown "refresh" her memory. Then on cross by Dungey she went back to "DM was happy but they both said the mission went well".

Ask yourself why she would or wouldn't say that? We know that she may have still felt something for Smich, so not originally mentioning Smich being happy may have been her protecting him. I think when she took the stand she told the truth. I think Dungey intimidated her, which wouldn't be hard, in to backing off that statement a little bit.
 
  • #289
If Millard and Smich aren't caught, is Arthur Jennings still alive today?

Terrible thought! But I'll entertain it. If they aren't "caught" then I think, no harm, no foul. AJ hadn't done anything but inquire as to the origins of the truck and speak with his SIL about it, however, he had legitimate reason to be cautious/hesitant about turning DM in. IMO.

But they are caught, and AJ testified. It could appear a more precarious perch than if they were not caught. We know DM was all for witness tampering but I don't think AJ was at risk. There is trying to persuade someone who is on your side, to be further on your side (like AM and CN) and then totally overreaching by interfering with someone outside your circle. I think DM's text to SS "what truck?" was suggestion enough to get AJ inline, in DMs mind.

ALL moo.
 
  • #290
Terrible thought! But I'll entertain it. If they aren't "caught" then I think, no harm, no foul. AJ hadn't done anything but inquire as to the origins of the truck and speak with his SIL about it, however, he had legitimate reason to be cautious/hesitant about turning DM in. IMO.

But they are caught, and AJ testified. It could appear a more precarious perch than if they were not caught. We know DM was all for witness tampering but I don't think AJ was at risk. There is trying to persuade someone who is on your side, to be further on your side (like AM and CN) and then totally overreaching by interfering with someone outside your circle. I think DM's text to SS "what truck?" was suggestion enough to get AJ inline, in DMs mind.

ALL moo.

I disagree. Of all Millards crew, AJ was the only one that contacted the authorities. Maybe time would wear on his conscience? I didn't think Millard and Smich would accept that risk. Maybe he doesn't go to cops, but at some point he's going to tell somebody, and that person may go to the cops. Personally I think if they hadn't been caught, AJ would have simply disappeared like LB did.

And how could Millard be sure what AJ said to crimestoppers? The fact that detectives showed up at his door the next day would probably make him believe he said a lot more than he did.
 
  • #291
Ask yourself why she would or wouldn't say that? We know that she may have still felt something for Smich, so not originally mentioning Smich being happy may have been her protecting him. I think when she took the stand she told the truth. I think Dungey intimidated her, which wouldn't be hard, in to backing off that statement a little bit.

Took her almost 3 years to remember that gem? I could see a few weeks or so, even a month..but 3 years? Yes, I've asked myself why and I keep coming back to...recognition of taking down one of the bad guys in one of the biggest murder cases. Some people like to be the center of things...I dunno ask MM why!

I don't think Dungey was hard on her or intimidated her. IMO, I thought he went too easy on her. I don't believe that's why she changed back to "DM was happy". Just that the Truth is easier to remember then a lie!

I also believe she first said MS wanted the drugs, then she said under cross, No, it was her that wanted the drugs to smoke. Why would she lie about that? She got caught in a lie, on the stand and again had to have her memory refreshed.
 
  • #292
It did hurt them though, they have been in jail for 3 years so far because of it.

It matters that they walked up to the door together for a couple of reasons. Although dead men cannot identify people, the witnesses who were not killed can.

It did make a difference that the other two witnesses saw them, because they were able to testify to that in court.

It also matters because it is inconsistent with the scenario that they were there to commit a murder and not get caught. If they had a plan to get a driver in a truck and then shoot him for his keys, why would both need to be seen at the house? Why not leave MS with the Yukon to follow, or to even pretend that he was stranded on the side of the road and pull over to help him. Surely TB would not have found that suspicious because he was naturally the kind of person who would offer help to a stranded motorist, I feel. Any tiny bit of forethought and pre-planning would have come up with a better plan than to both be seen by the intended victim's wife and tenant. If eliminating witnesses was the reason that they didn't fear showing their faces, then logic would follow that they would eliminate every witness who saw their faces. They obviously didn't.

I believe that DM was the type of person that required to have someone 'in his service' at all times (similar to a toddler). It has been shown time and again that he brought numerous numerous people into his various escapades. Whether that was done so that he would then have something to hang over their heads later, or if he just had a psychiatric need to have someone interested in him and his life and what he was doing at all times, who knows?

My belief is that DM did plan this out, perhaps even on paper, trying to think of every possibility, and that he did think of many possibilities, but simply couldn't think of all of them, such as the fantastic memory of Igor, the coming together and quick action of the B army, the speed with which the police took the incident seriously enough to put their wheels into motion SO very quickly, and perhaps even that the various cellphones could be shown to have been together WITH his burner phone at strategic times. Perhaps in Toronto with its huge population, that cellphone mapping may not have been an issue to consider, but in rural Ancaster at that time of night on a weekday, not so lucky.

Even in the courtroom, I have noticed that DM is constantly looking to chat with his lawyer at every opportunity, every break. In my opinion, he desperately seeks out others' involvement in himself at all times. There was absolutely no reason for MS or anyone else to go up to the B house that night, and it would have made much more sense on many fronts to go alone, but DM had to have someone with him nevertheless. And his plan was that there would be no evidence other than a dead man's eye witness description of the two men physically, no vehicle from which to launch a starting point.

The two additional people at the house were undoubtedly a surprise. Think about men selling their work trucks on kijiji. Is it usual for the man's wife to come out to greet the potential buyer? I would personally think not, but that is moo. Perhaps if a man is selling his family vehicle, this might happen more often, and even though this truck may well have *been* TB's family vehicle, it was known as his work truck. Even so, his plan was based on a lack of evidence.. all there would be, would be people who could tell a police sketch artist what a couple of guys looked like in dim lighting/darkness from several feet away. If there had been no Igor test drive the day before, or if Igor had not had such a fantastic ability to notice and recall detail, my bet is that they would still be searching for the guys who look like the sketch artist's renderings of what SB and WDB thought they saw that night. Igor is most certainly the hero of the day, and of this case.

I can just picture MS's thoughts, in the first place likely wondering why DM required his presence in walking up to the house rather than dropping him off, and then seeing there would be not just one, but three eye witnesses to deal with, knowing that he had mugshots available. And yet people wonder why he reportedly wanted to hide his face? It doesn't make sense that it would be any other way. MS already had several convictions and I'll bet the last thing he would want to do time for, would be for stealing a truck for someone else. He was already the fallguy, but he just didn't realize it. All moo.
 
  • #293
I disagree. Of all Millards crew, AJ was the only one that contacted the authorities. Maybe time would wear on his conscience? I didn't think Millard and Smich would accept that risk. Maybe he doesn't go to cops, but at some point he's going to tell somebody, and that person may go to the cops. Personally I think if they hadn't been caught, AJ would have simply disappeared like LB did.

Perhaps, or AJ knew all too well of the impending threat and he, and his family, zip it. Its clear his SIL was of that mentality. AJ would only ever know of the stolen truck and would not be a witness for murder. I think there are many people out there that know of wrong doings and don't ever say a word, even though they might suspect something bigger going on. JMO.
 
  • #294
There is confusion here because SB, nor WDB, did not ever testify that DM was NOT wearing his satchel when he went into the car. It is only the prosecution who is stating this as fact, and unfortunately for DM, the Crown's questions and remarks are not evidence. This is not a contentious point, because I think everybody gets this, but that is only my opinion, perhaps some do not.

THIS. I had questioned earlier where the Crown had said that DM wasn’t wearing the satchel….I have since gone back and read everything pertaining to the subject. The Crown’s closing is not evidence. And no evidence has been presented that DM wasn’t wearing the satchel. SB/WDB did not say DM was not wearing it….merely that they didn’t notice if he was or wasn’t. This is the evidence. IIRC, during his close, DM’s lawyer also mentioned that DM was wearing the satchel at the Bosma’s as part of his “signature look”….but as this was mentioned by the lawyer, not evidence.
On the other hand, MS testified (and like it or not, this is considered evidence) that DM WAS wearing the satchel at the Bosma’s. He may or may not be telling the truth. But we have irrefutable evidence that DM was wearing the satchel at the hangar after the murder and that the satchel was found in his washing machine. That’s it.
People are twisting words and testimony to try and make things fit their story. MOO
 
  • #295
I would be interested in seeing MSM reports of defendants in a murder trial being exonerated by the absence of prints on a murder weapon. Could you please post a few? TIA

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence......I would also be interested in seeing this....
 
  • #296
No, we didn't see that.

What we saw was DM asking as an afterthought if the gun was clean. He'd already negotiated and made arrangements for price and pickup time.

Feb 9 ?? Millard and Isho negotiate (via text) price of gun. Day 37: Falconer testimony
Feb 9 ?? Isho texts Millard: "I can get him to bring me it now would u like it foreal?" Day 37: Falconer testimony
Feb 9 ?? Millard texts Isho: "let's do it. Pick it up tonight?" Day 37: Falconer testimony
Feb 9 ?? Isho texts Millard: "22 cash plz I'm doing ya a big favour trust. I'm not making a penny." Day 37: Falconer testimony
Feb 9 ?? Isho texts Millard: "My guys comn from Niagara so plz be on time." Day 37: Falconer testimony
Feb 9 ?? Isho texts Millard: "if u need lessons tomorrow I'm free and we can go over every piece ok?" Day 37: Falconer testimony
Feb 10 ?? Millard texts Isho: "btw is it clean or dirty?" Day 37: Falconer testimony
Feb 10 ?? Isho texts Millard: "clean." Day 37: Falconer testimon

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Hb6kEtpLa8cHCVorBuy4yqfHymGvhfHeM6s8QMWGVW8/pubhtml

Maybe Isho does deal with dirty guns, but we certainly don't know that from the evidence.

Isho was obviously a known connection for how to get guns. If Isho had the reputation of *only* dealing in 'clean' guns, there would have been no reason to ask the question, and presumably when Isho did answer the asked question, if he did not ever deal in 'dirty' guns, one might surmise that he would have elaborated and said, 'only ever clean', or 'always clean', or 'I don't get involved in anything *other* than clean', etc. But it is nonetheless correct that it wasn't stated outright in the evidence that MWJ deals in 'dirty guns'.

Even when a gun is 'clean', meaning it may not have been involved (yet) in a murder, it would still have a background, a history.. ie where did it originate, whose gun licence purchased it initially, what country did it come from, how did it cross the border, was it stolen from a particular gun heist, etc. I would imagine the last thing a gang would want is for a gun, no matter which gun, to have the potential of being connected to them, or to even have the possibility of a step along the way being connected to them. To have a gun just out there somewhere like a loose cannon is likely not an ideal situation. All moo.
 
  • #297
Thats one of the places where TL losses me because he seems to contradict himself. They didn't care about being seen because they planned to kill the witness, and yet they were seen witnesses by others but didn't kill them, that's a contradiction.

Smitch hid his face from the other witnesses to keep from being seen or identified after the murder, but DM was okay with taking that chance because he was confidant? Did Smitch only put his hood up when he saw that there were other witnesses? Unless he either planned on eliminating those other witness or had no plans to murder a man, I cannot think of any logical reason why DM would feel confident that witnesses couldn't identify him afterwards. To me that is another contradiction of logic.

My opinion only

From LE's perspective, where do they begin their investigation, if we remove Igor and his memory of the tattoo? If all LE has to go on are 2 eye witness descriptions of 2 young men with no weird uncommon unique features, then where do they start looking? In Ancaster? Surrounding area? How far? How many people live in that area or could be present in that area? On top of that, eye witness descriptions are reportedly generally not very accurate. To me, it was actually quite smart on DM's part to have considered the impossibility of being identified by face alone, and knowing what we now know about his personality, it strikes me that this was a social experiment for him. Something that he later could philosophize about and tell all of his criminal friends that they successfully pulled off a murder because all there was to go on was an eye witness description of another human, and it's just not good enough. moo
 
  • #298
Took her almost 3 years to remember that gem? I could see a few weeks or so, even a month..but 3 years? Yes, I've asked myself why and I keep coming back to...recognition of taking down one of the bad guys in one of the biggest murder cases. Some people like to be the center of things...I dunno ask MM why!

I don't think Dungey was hard on her or intimidated her. IMO, I thought he went too easy on her. I don't believe that's why she changed back to "DM was happy". Just that the Truth is easier to remember then a lie!

I also believe she first said MS wanted the drugs, then she said under cross, No, it was her that wanted the drugs to smoke. Why would she lie about that? She got caught in a lie, on the stand and again had to have her memory refreshed.
Considering she avoided the media the entire time the trial was on and hasn't talked to the media at all as far as I know, she sure is gunning for this recognition in a weird way.
 
  • #299
I personally think the "giddiness" was blown way out of proportion. It's very dramatic. Her first statement said they were happy the mission went well IIRC. And that would make sense if they didn't want to elude to the stuff that just went down and if MS was protecting her. This whole giddy BS I personally don't buy.

From what I recall, it was said that MM's statement at the time she gave it, did not make mention of the men being in a celebratory mood, nor wanting to celebrate. This first reared itself during her testimony. And yes, good point also that the men could have been trying to act 'normal', jokey, happy, to make like nothing had happened other than the theft of a truck. Or perhaps only DM was all bouncy happy since he did get his long-sought-after truck, and MM, after 3 years, embellished her story a little. moo
 
  • #300
Considering she avoided the media the entire time the trial was on and hasn't talked to the media at all as far as I know, she sure is gunning for this recognition in a weird way.

I don't necessarily mean now but later. MS hasn't been convicted yet, so nothing for her to "celebrate" just yet.

I was asked a question, so I gave my answer. I know why some of the others lied (to save their own azzes) but why would she lie? She claims that it's been over since his arrest, why wouldn't she give that "celebratory, bouncing up and down in the seats" tidbit 3 years ago? That's not something you just remember 3 years later then forget what you said just 9 days later. Sounds a bit sketchy to me.

If she had of at least remember after the 9 days, I probably would have believed her.

I don't like poking holes in the Crowns witnesses testimonies, we need them to lock these two up. But when stuff like this happens, it makes things questionable. If some of us are questioning their testimony, I'm sure the Jury is as well. That's not good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
68
Guests online
1,903
Total visitors
1,971

Forum statistics

Threads
632,332
Messages
18,624,855
Members
243,094
Latest member
Edna Welthorpe
Back
Top