Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #4

[JPC]

Okay here is the original ARIN registration that we saw back in 2013. Registered by SS June 6, 2012. Wrong address and used DM's email.

http://whois.arin.net/rest/poc/SCHLA-ARIN

I am still not convinced that DM wasn't using SS identity when he saw fit to do so.

 

[Ironworker736]

I dont. She told the truth. She revealed that the Baja trip was being planned and she confirmed that MA was on thin ice financially. Everything that was expected of her.

Williams says she was paying the company's taxes.
by Adam Carter 2:47 PM


"I would not personally pay, or write cheques for anything," Williams says. Now she says taxes were done by a chartered accountant -- which is contrary to what she said a couple of minutes ago.
by Adam Carter 2:49 PM


"When was the last time you personally saw Mr. Millard?" Moodie asks. "May 3, 2013," she responds. It was at the hangar in Waterloo.
by Adam Carter 2:51 PM


Feb 25 2016 11:05 AM Williams says she still sees Madeleine Burns sometimes to talk business. The last time she saw Millard, she says, was Sept. 2014. He was arrested in 2013.


Feb 25 2016 11:05 AM "I think I visited him maybe six times," Williams says.

Truth?

 

[6degrees]

I will admit to knowing NOTHING about visiting someone in jail.....but how do you know they use the phone/plexiglass instead of visitor tables? <modsnip>

Ditto in terms of not knowing anything about visiting prisoners but if the mode of visiting (open tables vs phone/plexiglass) is based on the level of security of the prisoner, would the high profile nature of the case given the media exposure place the security risk higher? Maybe the risk level is determined by the totality of factors including past record, current charges, etc....JMO but I would have thought it would have been tough for him to get letters passed?

 

[MsSherlock]

No. MB wasn't a paid employee and she didn't have a job function. Neither did Dellon. My your reasoning, she should have said 3. Dellon an MB did not have job titles, they simply drew salaries. SS was the only "Employee" drawing a salary.

That may be, but to buy into that I'd have to believe that WM had his ex-wife of 10+ years being paid outside the scope of Revenue Canada's requirement for deductions? Was he giving her a draw or something? AFAIK, Millardair would have had to be on quarterly remittances at a minimum. DM was a Director of Millardair and carried the title of CEO. I believe his pay could be legally accounted for as a draw and perhaps looked after by shareholders loans or something. IIRC, prior to WM's death, MB was not an officer for Millardair, had no ability to take or give shareholders loans. If she was in fact an employee prior, she would have been on the payroll and the bookkeeper would have had to make at the minimum, quarterly remittances on her behalf.

IMO, the bookkeeper knew how many people were on the payroll by the number of people she remitted for. When WM died and everyone was let go, she only had one- SS. Once MB became an officer/director for Millardair she would have been able to take draws from Millardair and not have to be processed as an employee. That's not to say she still doesn't have to claim it, but there's only a few ways to legally get money from a company, but it still has to be documented and declared as income, dividend or a loan or payback for a loan. It's been a while since I've had to deal with stuff like this, but IIRC, if you're an owner- you can borrow or take a draw, and if you're not an owner, you're either an independent contractor (working for more than one company) or and employee. The point to remember is that in the eyes of the law and the CRA, Millardair is it's own entity. Just because you're the son, daughter or mother of the owner(s) doesn't mean the company can pay you cash or give you a taxable benefit and circumvent the tax system. MOO

 

[andreww]

Williams says she was paying the company's taxes

As the bookkeeper don't you agree that she likely kept a file of receipts for tax purposes? So possibly she calls that function "doing taxes". How many of us say "I gotta do my taxes" then run off to H&R Block? Doesn't make you a liar because there is still preparation that needs to be done.

When was the last time you personally saw Mr. Millard?" Moodie asks. "May 3, 2013," she responds. It was at the hangar in Waterloo.

Simple misunderstanding. She understood the question to be "When was the last time you saw him before ehe was arrested?". Why would she lie about such a thing? She already admitted still working for them.

 

[andreww]

That may be, but to buy into that I'd have to believe that WM had his ex-wife of 10+ years being paid outside the scope of Revenue Canada's requirement for deductions? Was he giving her a draw or something? AFAIK, Millardair would have had to be on quarterly remittances at a minimum. DM was a Director of Millardair and carried the title of CEO. I believe his pay could be legally accounted for as a draw and perhaps looked after by shareholders loans or something. IIRC, prior to WM's death, MB was not an officer for Millardair, had no ability to take or give shareholders loans. If she was in fact an employee prior, she would have been on the payroll and the bookkeeper would have had to make at the minimum, quarterly remittances on her behalf.

IMO, the bookkeeper knew how many people were on the payroll by the number of people she remitted for. When WM died and everyone was let go, she only had one- SS. Once MB became an officer/director for Millardair she would have been able to take draws from Millardair and not have to be processed as an employee. That's not to say she still doesn't have to claim it, but there's only a few ways to legally get money from a company, but it still has to be documented and declared as income, dividend or a loan or payback for a loan. It's been a while since I've had to deal with stuff like this, but IIRC, if you're an owner- you can borrow or take a draw, and if you're not an owner, you're either an independent contractor (working for more than one company) or and employee. The point to remember is that in the eyes of the law and the CRA, Millardair is it's own entity. Just because you're the son, daughter or mother of the owner(s) doesn't mean the company can pay you cash or give you a taxable benefit and circumvent the tax system. MOO

Do you know they were circumventing CRA procedure? If she was getting a pay check, its highly likely that all deductions are coming off. My best guess is that when WM and MB split, she had the option of taking a piece of the company or a guaranteed salary for life.

Seems like she made the right choice.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Do you know they were circumventing CRA procedure? If she was getting a pay check, its highly likely that all deductions are coming off. My best guess is that when WM and MB split, she had the option of taking a piece of the company or a guaranteed salary for life.

Seems like she made the right choice.

Doesn't really make sense because Millard Air was winding down for a long time and stopped operating before the MRO project came to be...can we then opine that the hangar was not "DM's project" but "MB's project" because he was only building it to fulfill some bizarre, never-heard-of alimony arrangement?

 

[MsSherlock]

In concern to www.millardair.ca, I wanted to make sure that Feb 21, 2013 was in fact the original date. I compared it with the whois for my own domain name that's been in existence since 2007. Whois does show the original date even though I've changed my hosting company and renewed several times. This would confirm that www.millardair.ca did not exist prior to February 21/13. As a side note- I sure hope he didn't pay anyone for the Millardair website- I forgot how bad it was!! :scared:

http://web.archive.org/web/20130512004956/http://www.millardair.ca/

 

[Abitcountry]

You know this for a fact? I more get the feeling that she took the incoming invoices, cut the checks, had them signed, then filed the paperwork. Wouldn't cut the mustard at my company, but I know plenty of family owned business that don't want nosy bookkeepers.



Again, beyond the scope of the witness. She knew the account was empty and she testified to that. She was probably aware that there was no money coming in, but that was not her business. So long as there was enough money in the account to cover the checks she was writing, she was good.



She was nervous and out of her element. We all make mistakes.Posters on this observed her testimony when they attended court. I do not recall a single adjective to suggest that she was nervous.


Thats you. She probably had no idea what the thing even was. So long as the invoice matched the quote and all the authorizations were there, She likely didn't care less. She may not have known what it was on May 14, 2013 when she first gave her statement to police...but she sure knew by the time she appeared in court. She could have simply stated that fact by way of explanation and it would have left a better impression than what you have suggested. But then maybe it is just possible 'she likely didn't care less' what people may have thought of her response this week ???



And you know this how? I believe the defence was about to expose her lacking education when she agreed that she wasn't qualified. LW is probably nothing more than a glorified part time secretary and there is no evidence that she had any kind of financial services business.

She owns her own bookkeeping company AGM Inc. (see post #188, 02.25.16) and she is a director along with her husband in the computer company that is commonly referred to as his IT company in Mississauga.
I believe she has no formal training, diploma or degree in accounting however---there is a whole segment of the population who are self taught in many fields and their skills for good or ill equal and may even surpass those who are formally trained. Are you suggesting that by not being qualified LW is not highly skilled in bookkeeping ......oh my!!

 

[Kamille]

No. MB wasn't a paid employee and she didn't have a job function. Neither did Dellon. My your reasoning, she should have said 3. Dellon an MB did not have job titles, they simply drew salaries. SS was the only "Employee" drawing a salary.

I actually agree with your assessment here. I also believe that MB may have been on the payroll all along. Which certainly would have given her incentive to be concerned about all the money going out and not coming in, as well as her son, when WM was "running the show", taking out loans and signing cheques.

MOO

 

[CJPRINCESS]

IMO, yes totally playing stupid!! If she was in fact the "bookkeeper" before being passed off to the chartered accountant..her job should have been as stated below. If she didn't fill those duties, then IMO she'd have no business there at all (pertaining to the books) unless sketchy things were being done before going to the Chartered Accountant...BTW, can't wait to see who this is!

"Bookkeeping is usually performed by a*bookkeeper. A bookkeeper (or book-keeper) is a person who records the day-to-day financial transactions of a business. He or she is usually responsible for writing the*daybooks, which contain records of purchases, sales, receipts, and payments. The bookkeeper is responsible for ensuring that all transactions are recorded in the correct daybook, supplier's ledger, customer ledger, and*general ledger; an accountant can then create reports from the information concerning the financial transactions recorded by the bookkeeper."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bookkeeping

 

[Kamille]

I am still not convinced that DM wasn't using SS identity when he saw fit to do so.

That would be implying that he actually knew his way around a computer which I think would be giving him way too much credit. DM doesn't appear to have learned or done much of anything other than enjoy his travel and hobbies with the help of paid staff to make things happen for him. Which is a shame considering the sky was the limit for him in terms of what he could have done with his life....literally. It's like he "peaked" at 14 years old as an aviation protege and went steadily downhill from there.

MOO

 

[andreww]

I actually agree with your assessment here. I also believe that MB may have been on the payroll all along. Which certainly would have given her incentive to be concerned about all the money going out and not coming in as well as her son, when WM was "running the show", taking out loans and signing cheques.

MOO

Would she really have had any clue? So long as her pay check was in her mailbox every week, she probably didn't care.

 

[MsSherlock]

Do you know they were circumventing CRA procedure? If she was getting a pay check, its highly likely that all deductions are coming off. My best guess is that when WM and MB split, she had the option of taking a piece of the company or a guaranteed salary for life.

Seems like she made the right choice.

IMHO, that's extremely presumptuous. Do you have anything to support your theory? I'm sure we'll hear more financial info that will accurately fill in the blanks, so I'm good with waiting. As far as circumventing the CRA- no, I don't believe they were. IMHO, I believe she went on the MA payroll when DM took over. It was a way that he could show his love for his mother and gain her support. IIRC, MB was a freelance home decorator. A salaried job with MA would give her an opportunity to top up her RRSP's, pay into her CPP and sock away a couple bucks for her retirement. Perhaps DM was upset at the settlement MB got from WM and thought this was an opportunity for him to make it right. IMO, we'll find out, but perhaps not until the WM trial. MOO

 

[Ironworker736]

As the bookkeeper don't you agree that she likely kept a file of receipts for tax purposes? So possibly she calls that function "doing taxes". How many of us say "I gotta do my taxes" then run off to H&R Block? Doesn't make you a liar because there is still preparation that needs to be done.


Simple misunderstanding. She understood the question to be "When was the last time you saw him before ehe was arrested?". Why would she lie about such a thing? She already admitted still working for them.

"When was the last time you personally saw Mr. Millard?" seems like a pretty straight-forward question to me. I suppose any lie could be explained away as a 'simple misunderstanding'

 

[MsSherlock]

As the bookkeeper don't you agree that she likely kept a file of receipts for tax purposes? So possibly she calls that function "doing taxes". How many of us say "I gotta do my taxes" then run off to H&R Block? Doesn't make you a liar because there is still preparation that needs to be done.



Simple misunderstanding. She understood the question to be "When was the last time you saw him before ehe was arrested?". Why would she lie about such a thing? She already admitted still working for them.

IMO she was referring to 2 entirely different things. I took the first one as meaning she did the payroll taxes for MA- preparing the remittances etc. The second one I thought she interpreted to mean the Corporate Taxes, which would have been prepared by the Accountant. MOO

 

[andreww]

"When was the last time you personally saw Mr. Millard?" seems like a pretty straight-forward question to me. I suppose any lie could be explained away as a 'simple misunderstanding'

And what would be the purpose of that lie? If she just said she saw him a month ago, what would be different?

And people can be stupid. Watch Making a Murderer and see how dumb people can be.

 

[andreww]

IMO she was referring to 2 entirely different things. I took the first one as meaning she did the payroll taxes for MA- preparing the remittances etc. The second one I thought she interpreted to mean the Corporate Taxes, which would have been prepared by the Accountant. MOO

Many types of taxes and functions relating to them. Federal tax? Provincial tax? GST? Income tax? To just say she looks after "taxes" is pretty vague.

 

[Juballee]

I checked that out on www.johnhoward.on.ca in Visitors Handbook.
It appears that unless there is a security risk, a visitor sits at a table with the detainee....no glass no phone.

What about when that reporter went in to speak to them, was she a security risk? Her article described speaking to them over a telephone handset with glass between them, from what I recall.

 

[brightii]

You know this for a fact? I more get the feeling that she took the incoming invoices, cut the checks, had them signed, then filed the paperwork. Wouldn't cut the mustard at my company, but I know plenty of family owned business that don't want nosy bookkeepers.

I think it is more than a reasonable assumption given the duties of a bookkeeper. One cannot pay cheques for payments without knowing how much money is available in a company's bank account. Bookkeeping is not rocket science, but it is a skill and it requires a certain understanding of finances.

Again, beyond the scope of the witness. She knew the account was empty and she testified to that. She was probably aware that there was no money coming in, but that was not her business. So long as there was enough money in the account to cover the checks she was writing, she was good.

Since MA apparently, according to LW's testimony, was in dire straits financially, as per her access to the bank account and bank statements, I wonder why she thought it wise to keep them on as a client? Did she not wonder or worry how she was going to be paid? I stand by my observation of her testimony. You are free to interpret it as you please.

She was nervous and out of her element. We all make mistakes.

I don't see why she would be nervous about testifying about MA's finances unless she had good reason to be nervous. My interpretation of her testimony is that she didn't want to cause DM any problems, for whatever reason, and that may have caused her to be nervous while testifying in front of him, IMO.

Thats you. She probably had no idea what the thing even was. So long as the invoice matched the quote and all the authorizations were there, She likely didn't care less.

I believe you missed my point about her testimony when given after the fact, in court, that she was fully aware of the role that incinerator played in an innocent man's death.

And you know this how? I believe the defence was about to expose her lacking education when she agreed that she wasn't qualified. LW is probably nothing more than a glorified part time secretary and there is no evidence that she had any kind of financial services business.

I think it's safe to say that someone who is identified as a bookkeeper is someone who is involved with figures for a living.

All MOO. (Sorry if I haven't quoted your responses properly, andreww, I don't have experience with doing that yet).

ETA: Actually, I see that I did post the quotes right. Proud of myself. lol:happydance: