Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #4

[Ironworker736]

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.

I hear you, it just strikes me as very suspicious that she says one thing, goes home, comes back to court and has a different answer. It makes it extremely hard for me to believe anything this witness has to say.

 

[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'

Maybe she took it to mean a "personal" or "non business" get together? Why didn't he just ask "When was the last time you saw him"?

 

[Ironworker736]

Maybe she took it to mean a "personal" or "non business" get together? Why didn't he just ask "When was the last time you saw him"?

I think you're grasping at straws IMO.

 

[brightii]

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

Precisely and that is my interpretation too. It makes sense. Thanks Ms Sherlock!

All MOO.

 

[Kamille]

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

You think she didn't talk to her son?

MOO

 

[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.

IMHO, the truth came out of LW's mouth when she jumped into the back of the unmarked cruiser and gave her statement in May/13. IMO, over the last 3 years, she has been tampered with. As we've seen with previous witnesses, it's difficult to forget the truth. IMO, LW was compromised the minute she wasn't put on the "no contact" list. Having contact with DM and his mother was an opportunity to get coached by either: to hear excuses, to start second guessing things. Personally, aside for a couple things, the only sure thing LW proved is that DM has had no problem tampering with the evidence against him and his supporters don't mind being ripped apart by DM's D team. Just the price one has to pay to be friends with DM. MOO

 

[andreww]

Agree to disagree? LW's testimony means nothing in the grand scheme of things. A clump of dirt in the shadow of Mount Everest.

 

[SnooperDuper]

I don't think anyone has asked, how can money be really tight and the bank accounts emptying mere months after a $3.7 million injection of cash?

 

[billandrew]

I don't think anyone has asked, how can money be really tight and the bank accounts emptying mere months after a $3.7 million injection of cash?

I really wanted the Crown to ask that during LW's testimony. Edit: I'm sure that it was intentionally left out for some reason. I did get the impression that the Crown was tiptoeing around a lot of points when questioning the bookkeeper, and I wondered if it had something to do with WM's murder case and the publication ban on the evidence for that.

ETA: the Crown never asked what the bank balance was or anything like that. We heard about the loan, but it was never discussed how much money was still in the bank account.

 

[Sphinx]

Thank you once again for your insightful analysis.

Perhaps when LW saw the Tri-Star "Dairy" Centre invoice for the cremator unit, it didn't raise her eyebrows because everybody was "milking" Millard Air.

As AJ testified, DM didn't like people who got into his business and asked questions, and LW seems the perfect employee in that sense. DM in turn didn't ask what the heck she was doing for 10 hours a month filing for a company that had no income or ongoing business.

It seems that the activities that were going on and financed by Millard Air were DM's hobbies and vacations. (LW, don't ask!) That can't be legit. No wonder the bank wanted their money back.

DM also was willing to ignore all of WM's obligations (i.e., to buy equipment for the hangar as WM had told the bank).

LW had no reason to visit DM in jail because MB had power of attorney for him, and there is no way that she could exchange paperwork or get things signed as an ordinary visitor. Clearly her visits were only for "(im)moral support".

Of course, an easy 10 hours of billing for doing little to nothing per month might inspire some devotion. (You scratch my back...I'll scratch yours.)

Maybe she has a minimum monthly charge of 10 hours per month, no matter how little she does. DM would have to make it worth her time. Perhaps IT Charlie, her husband, has the same kind of arrangement.

 

[Susanne]

"Perhaps when LW saw the Tri-Star "Dairy" Centre invoice for the cremator unit, it didn't raise her eyebrows because everybody was "milking" Millard Air."

That, or more likely she didn't have a clue what it was or what it would be used for. As a self admitted "I don't know what the heck I am talking about and I am certainly not trained in the least bit to be a 'bookkeeper' I am merely self trained.

"As AJ testified, DM didn't like people who got into his business and asked questions, and LW seems the perfect employee in that sense. DM in turn didn't ask what the heck she was doing for 10 hours a month filing for a company that had no income or ongoing business."

LW is nothing more than a self-educated A/R, A/P, and P/R for 3 people with minimal data entry at best. And admits to no A/R ......period.

To receive the title of 'bookkeeper' I spent many, many hours in college at night after a full time day job (with kids) to better myself. My duties as 'bookkeeper" at new job after graduation included financial administrative duties up to and including final G/L to be handed to the Tax accountants.
I guess it's showing that I get a little testy at these wannabe bookkeepers and accountants who then explain they are self-educated.

"It seems that the activities that were going on and financed by Millard Air were DM's hobbies and vacations. (LW, don't ask!) That can't be legit. No wonder the bank wanted their money back"

"LW had no reason to visit DM in jail because MB had power of attorney for him, and there is no way that she could exchange paperwork or get things signed as an ordinary visitor. Clearly her visits were only for "(im)moral support".

10/4 to that statement.

And, LW certainly has no handle on the family finances merely from the bank balance of one of their business accounts. They really did throw good money after bad with her, didn't they?

Now I'm gonna go eat my Friday Night Pizza.
And hope they nail these guys.

.

 

[MsSherlock]

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.

IMO, there should be no confusion. If you ask a bookkeeper what taxes they deal with it would anything related to Government Remittances. This can't be confused with Federal & Provincial income taxes and Health Tax for the Corporation that are all remitted when the annual Corporate tax return is done. Usually an Accountant does that.

In concern to GST, Millardair had no income, so I would guess that they were sending in quarterly for GST rebates. If Millardair had income it would be required to collect HST (Ontario combines GST with Provincial sales tax for HST) . When the bookkeeper fills out the HST return, she adds up all the HST collected and then deducts all the HST that was paid out on purchases made by the Co.

In most successful companies, the amount collected is more than the amount paid, so the difference is remitted. When there's no income, there wouldn't be any HST collected, just the HST paid out (i.e. HST on the window remover kit and incinerator, gas for the Yukon etc. ). Chances are, Millardair got their HST filed and rebated quarterly. The remittance/refund is calculated by Quickbooks.

Payroll deductions include: employee income tax, employer and employee portions of employment insurance and CPP. Some companies have a payroll company, but it's obvious that Millardair had their bookkeeper run their payroll for them. (quickbooks does all the calculations and even prepares the remittance forms so it's not rocket science-just click "run payroll" and then "finish". Along with the HST, payroll remittances contain employee payroll taxes and they're all often referred to as "remitting taxes". MOO

 

[CJPRINCESS]

Off topic here a bit..well away from LW anyways.

How is this case technically working as I'm confused now. MS and DM both have their own lawyers..correct? Are they being tried together or separately just in the same court? I thought I knew this till Pillay questioned about what MS was saying to his gf. Or did he not think MS lawyers question of the same was not clear enough?

 

[Deleted member 102539]

brightii #100

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.

bbm
This is old-school and in addition the boss'es secretiveness and stinginess, IMO. The (cheap in hourly wage) clerk fills the cheques without date, gives them to her boss DM and he does the signature plus the latest date only then, when he thinks the bills/taxes should be paid now. I can imagine exactly this "control freak posturing" (maybe like papa and grandpa before). - In any way LM saw one bank account and she knew, money was tight. Or she saw none and DM only told her, money was tight - who knows exactly.
You see: I feel I have to protect LM (like her I always did what my bosses wanted).

 

[brightii]

brightii #100



bbm
This is old-school and in addition the boss'es secretiveness and stinginess, IMO. The (cheap in hourly wage) clerk fills the cheques without date, gives them to her boss DM and he does the signature plus the latest date only then, when he thinks the bills/taxes should be paid now. I can imagine exactly this "control freak posturing" (maybe like papa and grandpa before). - In any way LM saw one bank account and she knew, money was tight. Or she saw none and DM only told her, money was tight - who knows exactly.

Hi FromGermany:

I see what you are saying, but from LW's own testimony she said she is the bookkeeper and works with QuickBooks so she would have a very good idea how much money was available month to month, if only even historically. Someone has to enter in those transaction details into the QB system with the corresponding date on them, and I am presuming from what she said, that was her.

Of course DM could have instructed LW to delay sending cheques to vendors or whomever until he approved them and that would indicate that he knew the state of affairs financially. The bottom line is that monthly, every transaction would have to be accounted for in order for the monthly tax (HST), payroll, and WSIB remittances to be done. If there were "other" bank accounts or deposits that came from sources other than MA generated business, I have no idea, but should this come up in court, someone would have to have been responsible for the accounting of such accounts.

I don't know why and perhaps I am wrong, but I feel that LW's testimony is important, IMO.

All MOO. :biggrin:

 

[Ontario Mom]

I'm not even sure it really matters in the long run but just to be factual about what was stated in court I think it does matter. Maybe? I could be wrong but I think when Adam Carter tweeted this, he was mistaken about something:

from his live blog: Her husband does computer networking and surveillance work, she says. Williams also has done bookkeeping for other companies under the name AGM Inc.

from twitter (slightly different): Williams also has done bookkeeping for other companies under the name AGM Inc. One of her clients was MillardAir

I think it's entirely possible the husband's company and her company are one in the same. I checked the other tweets from other reporters covering that day (the ones I'm following anyway) and Carter was the only one who said AGM Inc. I think it's just one company that when spoken, phonetically sounds like "AGM".

Looking at Susan Clairmont's tweets when LW was first brought to the stand makes me think this is the case:

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont Feb 24
Jury back. Lisa Williams called to the stand. She is a bookkeeper. Works with husband Charles Dubiens who does computers, security cameras.

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont Feb 24
They do contract work. She did bookkeeping for other companies. One of her clients was Millardair. Knew of Dellen Millard in 2001.

Just something that has been bothering me. It would be really nice if we had actual transcripts but trial by twitter is the best we've got.

 

[ABro]

I'm not even sure it really matters in the long run but just to be factual about what was stated in court I think it does matter. Maybe? I could be wrong but I think when Adam Carter tweeted this, he was mistaken about something:

from his live blog: Her husband does computer networking and surveillance work, she says. Williams also has done bookkeeping for other companies under the name AGM Inc.

from twitter (slightly different): Williams also has done bookkeeping for other companies under the name AGM Inc. One of her clients was MillardAir

I think it's entirely possible the husband's company and her company are one in the same. I checked the other tweets from other reporters covering that day (the ones I'm following anyway) and Carter was the only one who said AGM Inc. I think it's just one company that when spoken, phonetically sounds like "AGM".

Looking at Susan Clairmont's tweets when LW was first brought to the stand makes me think this is the case:

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont Feb 24
Jury back. Lisa Williams called to the stand. She is a bookkeeper. Works with husband Charles Dubiens who does computers, security cameras.

Susan Clairmont ‏@susanclairmont Feb 24
They do contract work. She did bookkeeping for other companies. One of her clients was Millardair. Knew of Dellen Millard in 2001.

Just something that has been bothering me. It would be really nice if we had actual transcripts but trial by twitter is the best we've got.

It was not clear in court what her company's name was. I wrote in my notes NGM at the time and then realized later it was Engium.

A lot of reporters who weren't clear on the name probably just preferred to leave it out.

The witness's testimony around this issue was confusing and the Crown did not seek to clear it up.

All the lawyers on this case are very well prepared. They are not forgetting to ask obvious questions. And it would be a mistake to assume they are. I can't stress this enough. This is a huge case for them.

 

[Ontario Mom]

It was not clear in court what her company's name was. I wrote in my notes NGM at the time and then realized later it was Engium.

A lot of reporters who weren't clear on the name probably just preferred to leave it out.

The witness's testimony around this issue was confusing and the Crown did not seek to clear it up.

All the lawyers on this case are very well prepared. They are not forgetting to ask obvious questions. And it would be a mistake to assume they are. I can't stress this enough. This is a huge case for them.

I certainly didn't mean to imply the lawyers aren't asking important questions. I just assumed it was possible one of the reporters covering, made an error in the witness statement. And, since all we really have to go by here for purposes of discussion is what is being reported, I thought it worthwhile to try and clarify this.

 

[ABro]

I certainly didn't mean to imply the lawyers aren't asking important questions. I just assumed it was possible one of the reporters covering, made an error in the witness statement. And, since all we really have to go by here for purposes of discussion is what is being reported, I thought it worthwhile to try and clarify this.

I understand. And I didn't interpret your comments that way at all.

I just wanted to point out that in live coverage, there will always be some confusion and reporter error. It's the nature of the beast. And I know you're not implying otherwise, but I just think AC has done a phenomenal job with that live blog. He is amazingly accurate and thorough given the conditions.

I do think there's a bit of a tendency -- and, again, I don't address this to you personally -- for people to think the lawyers are missing something, but everything is planned in advance. And they almost always check with their co-counsel to make sure there are no extra questions before wrapping up an examination.

 

[iknowhim2]

I understand. And I didn't interpret your comments that way at all.

I just wanted to point out that in live coverage, there will always be some confusion and reporter error. It's the nature of the beast. And I know you're not implying otherwise, but I just think AC has done a phenomenal job with that live blog. He is amazingly accurate and thorough given the conditions.

I do think there's a bit of a tendency -- and, again, I don't address this to you personally -- for people to think the lawyers are missing something, but everything is planned in advance. And they almost always check with their co-counsel to make sure there are no extra questions before wrapping up an examination.

As family, friends and community supporting the Bosma's, THIS. These lawyers aren't missing anything and are doing their job so well, during such a difficult time. Being in the courtroom and then coming home to digest it all day to day, is very difficult. But one thing that isn't difficult, is having faith in the Crown.