I was struck by the mention of the "statement of fact" from MS re the test drive with Igor Tumanenko. As introduced in court, it says that MS admits to being the back-seat passenger in that drive. It does NOT say that he identified DM as the front seat person, which, from the context of the testimony, it appears he did not. This would suggest why he did not (even if he could) provide the location of the buried gun, assuming it has DM's prints on it. Is he afraid of DM, are they still "friends?" At least it appears so far he has been unwilling to turn against him.
As for a question raised earlier, what would one or the other be guilty of if he just went out to steal a truck and his companion did the murder? Since the (assumed for the sake of argument) "innocent" party went along with the action and assisted in the cleanup immediately, not just later, like CN, and did not appear to intervene or call police, seek immediate medical aid for the wounded, or whatever, he would be as guilty as the aggressor.
Just as in the Bernardo case, it didn't matter whether Homolka or Bernardo actually strangled the girls (FWIW, I am convinced it was Homolka), Bernardo was guilty because he was a partner in crime.
Rick Bullmann's testimony certainly got me thinking. Whatever happened, it seems to me they executed their murderous intention immediately after leaving Tim's house. I drive by that location all the time and am quite familiar with it. Let's say, as seems to be the case, they left the Yukon there and walked to Tim's house. Millard got in the driver's seat when they left Tim's house. He drove back to the hayfield on Book Road. As soon as he pulled in there, Tim would have realized something was radically wrong, and would have put up a fight, tried to escape, or something: after all they said a friend dropped them off. Here was a big red flag.
So they would have had to subdue him immediately he was out of sight. That area is rural but not sparsely populated; people are out and about doing chores etc. so they could not have afforded to use the gun right there, or have Tim yell or call out at the field. Also, a gunshot to the back of the head would not leave the amount of blood subsequently found in the truck. I suspect they used something else, whether the box cutter or a knife, to subdue Tim before they got to the field. Once in the field, they could do some further adjustments to their seating arrangements. If one follows the path there, it winds around behind quite a few bushes (they could even have gone behind the hay stacks) where, without lights, they would not have been visible. We know they didn't stay long, because Rick Bullman saw them within about 15 minutes, roughly, of their leaving the Bosma house.
People have wondered what he meant when he said he saw them driving west on Book Rd towards Brantford but "didn't know which way they turned," as that statement did not seem to make sense. It does if you know the road. Not far along, Book Road comes to a dead end and you have to take a sharp angled turn either northwest towards Alberton or southwest towards Ohsweken.
Once they were back at the farm, or even before, if in a remote enough location, they could have used one or more guns to finish the job. But the amount of blood found suggests an initial jugular job to me, though I'm sure we will find out more. If the box-cutter were the weapon, I would think they would have disposed of it.
I haven't followed all threads here closely, but while I have seen people say they reserve judgement on DM's guilt until after the trial, I haven't seen anyone trumpeting his innocence. Reserving judgment is a fair stance to take. As a member of AIDWYC, I'm quite aware of how even an apparently ironclad case can lead to a miscarriage of justice. I was as convinced as any anyone here is about Millard about Guy Paul Morin's guilt back in the day. Then we learned of all the police bungling, Centre for Forensic Sciences mistakes and contamination of evidence, and much more. And in Steven Truscott's time, the feeling was the same, absolute certainty that the fiend had been found. 50 years later, we find that documents were altered, various perjuries committed, and more. Now Lynn Harper's family will never know who her killer was.
I can't imagine what exculpatory evidence the defense could bring forth (an unexpected identical twin? Alien abduction?) but I will consider it if it comes. Meanwhile, it is gratifying to see how many of the improvements suggested by the Kaufman Report into the Morin case, and the Galligan report into the Homolka case, have been incorporated into police work and case preparation, thus making such miscarriages (on the one hand) and bungling failures to convict (on the other) far less likely now than previously.
Unfortunately, what the trial may never tell us, unless one or the other accused decides to talk, is WHY? That question must torment the Bosma family.
