Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #7

[Inspector_North]

My current theory about DM's defense: an "accessory after fact" strategy

I've been thinking a lot about what DM's defense will be, and I have come up with the following:

1. He was rich and had no reason to steal a truck.
2. MS shot TB and he (DM) wasn't in the truck when it happened.
3. Upon becoming aware of the murder, he felt compelled to help MS clean up the evidence.

Accessory after the fact as a given

Based on the evidence to date, I don't see how DM could convince a jury that he did not play a role in disposing of the body or cleaning up other evidence. The phone activity, the DNA on the gloves, the videos, the use of his farm, his hangar, his incinerator, his vehicles, etc. At a minimum, DM will be an accessory after the fact.

Area of contention: who did the actual shooting

This is where the grand battle of the defences will take place. There is not much evidence to suggest whether it was DM or MS who pulled the trigger. The blood spatter, the GSR, the broken window, the shell casing, etc. You could argue that the shot came from the driver's side, and that DM was the driver for the test-drive, but without more evidence you cannot conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that it was actually DM who did the shooting. Therefore, DM will likely take the position that he wasn't even present when the shooting took place. He will have a story about getting out of the truck or something to that effect.

Premeditation will make or break this defense

The success of this defense strategy strongly depends on there being no premeditation by DM. This is why the "I'm rich and have no reason to steal a truck" argument is so important, and we have seen the defense building a foundation for this through their cross-examinations so far.

It is also why DM was so desperate via his letters to CN to have a key Crown witness change his evidence. That friend allegedly told police that he knew about DM's plan to steal a truck. Although this supports premeditation to theft and not necessarily murder, it is damning and incriminating enough that it could break this defense. Therefore, the lawyers will be doing everything they can to block or discredit any evidence relating to premeditation.

Good post, but I would say that having an Eliminator and PPK in your possession would require some explanation before they could even consider that his intention was not premeditated murder but rather premeditated theft.

I don't know what the motive was for murder, but I am fairly sure it didn't go down as planned. There was no way they intended to shoot him in the truck. That is why I think many assumptions made here turn out incorrect. He just wasn't as smart and organized as many have him out to be. His post 6th actions are the work of someone frantic to cover up a botched ...........

With that said, I would like to know when his uncle's neighbor CB told him about the new pet cremation business? Everything I read implies it was before his arrest, but a explicit answer would help.

Remember that CD's wife LB had been visiting DM, and MB still had SS on the payroll. The two who have mentioned the pet business.

 

[brightii]

My current theory about DM's defense: an "accessory after fact" strategy

I've been thinking a lot about what DM's defense will be, and I have come up with the following:

1. He was rich and had no reason to steal a truck.
2. MS shot TB and he (DM) wasn't in the truck when it happened.
3. Upon becoming aware of the murder, he felt compelled to help MS clean up the evidence.

Accessory after the fact as a given

Based on the evidence to date, I don't see how DM could convince a jury that he did not play a role in disposing of the body or cleaning up other evidence. The phone activity, the DNA on the gloves, the videos, the use of his farm, his hangar, his incinerator, his vehicles, etc. At a minimum, DM will be an accessory after the fact.

Area of contention: who did the actual shooting

This is where the grand battle of the defences will take place. There is not much evidence to suggest whether it was DM or MS who pulled the trigger. The blood spatter, the GSR, the broken window, the shell casing, etc. You could argue that the shot came from the driver's side, and that DM was the driver for the test-drive, but without more evidence you cannot conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that it was actually DM who did the shooting. Therefore, DM will likely take the position that he wasn't even present when the shooting took place. He will have a story about getting out of the truck or something to that effect.

Premeditation will make or break this defense

The success of this defense strategy strongly depends on there being no premeditation by DM. This is why the "I'm rich and have no reason to steal a truck" argument is so important, and we have seen the defense building a foundation for this through their cross-examinations so far.

It is also why DM was so desperate via his letters to CN to have a key Crown witness change his evidence. That friend allegedly told police that he knew about DM's plan to steal a truck. Although this supports premeditation to theft and not necessarily murder, it is damning and incriminating enough that it could break this defense. Therefore, the lawyers will be doing everything they can to block or discredit any evidence relating to premeditation.

Very interesting theory, but if DM is counting on this to succeed, he's misguided, IMO. It won't work because, of the two accused, DM, IMO had the motive to steal a truck and MS did not as far as I can see.

Imagine had MS killed TB so he could have the truck, how would he explain that to his mom, girlfriend, friends and even DM? Does anyone believe that DM would show any loyalty to MS had things happened that way? I don't buy that for a minute, as so far, DM is clearly shown to be a person whose own interests are his only concern. Not to mention that MS had no means to buy a truck and had he stolen it he could not have explained it away, unlike DM who convinced himself he could, IMO.

Also, DM was desperate for that truck for the Baja race and he alone had all the resources to try and cover up the theft after the fact, and I believe he had either the intent or the will to kill TB. I also believe he had good reason to believe MS would help him cover up everything - perhaps because MS had done so prior with LB, and just generally, DM seems to expect loyalty no matter what from his family and friends, IMO.

I don't know why MS went with DM to steal TB's truck, or what DM had on him that might motivate him to steal it and/or to murder TB, but I'm patiently waiting for more evidence against MS - or - the details of his defence.

All MOO.

 

[redwing7225]

After reading this, it appears that the testimony of CN can not be used against her in her own court case.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-incrimination

Pardon my ignorance if not allowed but, in another trial I was following, testimony from a Crown Witness stated he knew that was he said out of court could be used against him, again, leads me to believe what's stated in court can't be used against person testifying. *see halfway down column, Warwick* http://m.therecord.com/news-story/6...olice-didn-t-feed-him-info-in-howlett-s-death

 

[MsSherlock]

I found the reported wording of that jailhouse letter from DM to CN to be peculiar (BBM), "If he knew his words were going to get me a life sentence, he would change them. Show him how he can, and he will change them". Interesting prospect that perhaps he was secretly trying to say something like, 'let him know there is a reward in it for him if he changes his statement'?

That letter had been sent prior to whatever happened to prompt the courts to issue a search warrant for CN's residence, which immediately seemed to lead to many other charges (her own Accessory charge, 2 additional murder charges for DM, 1 additional murder charge for MS, and it seems like also the charges to the 3 other individuals for selling an illegal weapon to DM (which was subsequently used in the murder of his father), also came around the same time). I wonder if CN continued to be uncooperative once evidence was found in her home, or if the floodgates opened when she saw that she was also going to be implicated in TB's case.

FAIK, it could have been CN who, approximately one year after DM's arrest, was the one who, for some reason, became willing to cooperate and decided to come clean? Perhaps she found out about the other women that DM seemed to also have some kind of relationship with at the same time as her, and questioned herself as to why she was continuing to protect him? (LB, Whidden, and obviously DM was still communicating with his ex-fiancee (there are at least a few communications between the two, shown on the cellphone records)).

It will be interesting when CN takes the stand, to see if she is introduced as another unwilling witness (like Whidden), or if she became the Crown's key witness somewhere along the way.

IMHO, she is going to be a very interesting witness. Of the two gf's, CN definitely has the most to lose in the event she turns her testimony around on the stand to try to protect DM. And why would she protect him anyhow? She's a young attractive girl with a future ahead of herself. Is she really going to want to tie herself to DM or is she going to assist the crown to put him away forever.

LW on one hand seemed to be flattered doing this "casual" thing with the wealthy younger man, CN on the other hand has been under house arrest for the past 2 years. IMO, 2 years of house arrest to a 23 year old is like an eternity. Of course, CN may have gotten "mail" for services rendered, but IMHO, if Dungey knew about LW's mail, he would know about any mail that CN would have gotten. They also have the letters that DM sent her. Still interested in finding out who DM's "Harry Potter Owl" was.

IMO, the Crown has CN in a checkmate position and she knows it. What will be in her best interest? The Crowns putting DM away regardless. Either she can tell the truth, assist them and pray for mercy when it comes time for her sentencing , or flick her hair back, make goo goo eyes at DM and pray she doesn't have too many wrinkles when she gets released. MOO

 

[brightii]

Just thinking out loud here: I think DM chose MS to be his partner to steal a truck, IMO. Since MS had a record for basically petty crimes, I think DM figured if anything went wrong he could easily feign ignorance and point to the less credible MS as the thief, IMO. In May 2013, DM had no record and would have presented himself as a credible "wealthy" businessman and property owner with long-standing and legitimate family and business connections that in his mind would make him beyond reproach and would spare him any suspicion, unlike MS.

The more I think of it, the more I tend to think MS was groomed and set-up by DM to take the fall for the crime(s). I bet DM was totally shocked by how his plan did not play out as he had expected it would, IMO.

All MOO.

 

[puppyraiser]

Just thinking out loud here: I think DM chose MS to be his partner to steal a truck, IMO. Since MS had a record for basically petty crimes, I think DM figured if anything went wrong he could easily feign ignorance and point to the less credible MS as the thief, IMO. In May 2013, DM had no record and would have presented himself as a credible "wealthy" businessman and property owner with long-standing and legitimate family and business connections that in his mind would make him beyond reproach and would spare him any suspicion, unlike MS.

The more I think of it, the more I tend to think MS was groomed and set-up by DM to take the fall for the crime(s). I bet DM was totally shocked by how his plan did not play out as he had expected it would, IMO.

All MOO.

In one of DM's jailhouse letters, he said the Crown's disclosure didn't match facts (or something close to that). What do people think he meant by that now that we've heard more than half of the Crown's case and seen many videos?

The phone pings show him in various places involved in the crime and clean up. Video has him in the hangar in the wee hours of the morning after TB disappeared. His DNA is on items. Key locations belong to him or a family member. His vehicles are seen in video at key locations during the time frame of the test drive and clean up. The truck was at hangar and there are photos to prove this. The list goes on.

 

[brightii]

Pardon my ignorance if not allowed but, in another trial I was following, testimony from a Crown Witness stated he knew that was he said out of court could be used against him, again, leads me to believe what's stated in court can't be used against person testifying. *see halfway down column, Warwick* http://m.therecord.com/news-story/6...olice-didn-t-feed-him-info-in-howlett-s-death

Thanks for this post! I don't follow other cases and had not heard of this poor young victim. I will never understand the minds or motivations of (alleged) killers!

Interesting that the accused in this case allegedly also tried to get the key witness (who, in my mind, though not charged, was an accomplice after the fact since he admittedly helped to dispose if the victim's body) to change his story, followed by threats by the accused against all the witness's friends if he didn't comply. So chilling.

All MOO.

 

[billandrew]

Good post, but I would say that having an Eliminator and PPK in your possession would require some explanation before they could even consider that his intention was not premeditated murder but rather premeditated theft.

I don't know what the motive was for murder, but I am fairly sure it didn't go down as planned. There was no way they intended to shoot him in the truck. That is why I think many assumptions made here turn out incorrect. He just wasn't as smart and organized as many have him out to be. His post 6th actions are the work of someone frantic to cover up a botched ...........

With that said, I would like to know when his uncle's neighbor CB told him about the new pet cremation business? Everything I read implies it was before his arrest, but a explicit answer would help.

Remember that CD's wife LB had been visiting DM, and MB still had SS on the payroll. The two who have mentioned the pet business.

I agree with your points about the Eliminator and the PPK. DM could claim he bought the Eliminator for a pet cremation business or other uses as testified by Schlatman. Although his uncle knew nothing about the business plan, DM could say that he hadn't got around to speaking with him yet. As for the gun, what's to stop him from saying it belonged to Smich or anyone else? Besides the photos, there is no evidence that it actually belonged to DM or that he intended to use it for anything.

I don't see any other direction that DM can take except for claiming to be an accessory after the fact. Framed? No. Manslaughter? No. If he admits to any premeditation, then he's guilty of murder, right?

 

[brightii]

In one of DM's jailhouse letters, he said the Crown's disclosure didn't match facts (or something close to that). What do people think he meant by that now that we've heard more than half of the Crown's case and seen many videos?

The phone pings show him in various places involved in the crime and clean up. Video has him in the hangar in the wee hours of the morning after TB disappeared. His DNA is on items. Key locations belong to him or a family member. His vehicles are seen in video at key locations during the time frame of the test drive and clean up. The truck was at hangar and there are photos to prove this. The list goes on.

I think DM is wrong and the Crown is proving it, IMO. I've been open to reasonable doubt, but so far there's none in my mind about DM. IMO, he's guilty.

All MOO.

 

[sleuther76]

Just thinking out loud here: I think DM chose MS to be his partner to steal a truck, IMO. Since MS had a record for basically petty crimes, I think DM figured if anything went wrong he could easily feign ignorance and point to the less credible MS as the thief, IMO. In May 2013, DM had no record and would have presented himself as a credible "wealthy" businessman and property owner with long-standing and legitimate family and business connections that in his mind would make him beyond reproach and would spare him any suspicion, unlike MS.

The more I think of it, the more I tend to think MS was groomed and set-up by DM to take the fall for the crime(s). I bet DM was totally shocked by how his plan did not play out as he had expected it would, IMO.

All MOO.

Couldn't agree more! I think you are definitely on to something.

 

[brightii]

What is a PPK? Lol I'm lost. :thinking:

All MOO.

 

[billandrew]

What is a PPK? Lol I'm lost. :thinking:

All MOO.

The gun. Walther PPK.

 

[brightii]

The gun. Walther PPK.

billandrew, :tyou:

 

[brightii]

As for DM and MS's girlfriends and/or ex-girlfriends upcoming testimonies, I am expecting to see some real emotion expressed. I can't imagine either of these women will give completely objective, cold-hard-facts accounts of the situation though I may be wrong. It will be among the most interesting days at trial when these women take the stand, IMO.

All MOO.

 

[flipflop]

Just thinking out loud here: I think DM chose MS to be his partner to steal a truck, IMO. Since MS had a record for basically petty crimes, I think DM figured if anything went wrong he could easily feign ignorance and point to the less credible MS as the thief, IMO. In May 2013, DM had no record and would have presented himself as a credible "wealthy" businessman and property owner with long-standing and legitimate family and business connections that in his mind would make him beyond reproach and would spare him any suspicion, unlike MS.

The more I think of it, the more I tend to think MS was groomed and set-up by DM to take the fall for the crime(s). I bet DM was totally shocked by how his plan did not play out as he had expected it would, IMO.

All MOO.

I have always thought this as well. MS has the minor criminal past, DM had the so called luxury living life. If caught I feel DM thought it would be easy to pin it all on MS. DM had money to buy the truck, MS did not. DM would present it as, he felt sorry for MS, gave him odd jobs to do in and around the hanger, gave him a place to stay etc. He would suggest that he offered MS everything he owned to use, his Yukon, his hanger, his house, his farm. Making it look like he had access wherever evidence was found. I think the walls have closed in on DM as he didn't realize the amount of evidence that puts him in the hot seat of the crimes committed.

 

[matou]

Why didn't DM choose CN to be his partner in this? Can she drive? I believe she conspired in at least one of the three murders. JMO

 

[brightii]

I have always thought this as well. MS has the minor criminal past, DM had the so called luxury living life. If caught I feel DM thought it would be easy to pin it all on MS. DM had money to buy the truck, MS did not. DM would present it as, he felt sorry for MS, gave him odd jobs to do in and around the hanger, gave him a place to stay etc. He would suggest that he offered MS everything he owned to use, his Yukon, his hanger, his house, his farm. Making it look like he had access wherever evidence was found. I think the walls have closed in on DM as he didn't realize the amount of evidence that puts him in the hot seat of the crimes committed.

I also think when the long arm of the law caught up so swiftly with DM, he thought money could buy him the best defence possible unlike MS, and yet ironically, IMO, MS has a very impressive defence lawyer. TD manages to make his points at key moments unlike the very aggressive and, IMO, often offensive approach by DM's defence team.

All MOO.

 

[brightii]

Why didn't DM choose CN to be his partner in this? Can she drive? I believe she conspired in at least one of the three murders. JMO

Well, if they had both been caught red-handed, it would be less believable to LE that the young female student, CN, with no criminal record (that I know of) was a car thief - at least that's IMO why DM wouldn't risk her being there as the crime went down. DM did involve CN after the fact though, but perhaps by then MS had refused to have any further involvement?

All MOO.

 

[SnooperDuper]

In one of DM's jailhouse letters, he said the Crown's disclosure didn't match facts (or something close to that). What do people think he meant by that now that we've heard more than half of the Crown's case and seen many videos?

The phone pings show him in various places involved in the crime and clean up. Video has him in the hangar in the wee hours of the morning after TB disappeared. His DNA is on items. Key locations belong to him or a family member. His vehicles are seen in video at key locations during the time frame of the test drive and clean up. The truck was at hangar and there are photos to prove this. The list goes on.

I gotta quote that jailhouse letter because I'm just loving it now:

I oppened [sic] up the news paper [sic], to yet another article about me, and the Bosma case. As usual there’s almost nothing new to say. They just reprint the same old stuff over and over. I know I should ignore it. I know I am supposed to sit tight and stay quiet until trial. But this bull**** news is really beginning to bother me. It’s not the frequency of the articles. It’s the content … and I can’t even tell you, because it’s directly about the case… but what I will say, is that “the facts” they keep repeating, don’t match the disclosure I am given. I thought by now some, even one, of those so called ‘investigative’ journalists would have picked up on some of discrepancies in what police are telling them. I thought the public might have noticed some of the things that are out of place in the news articles. I’ve never been through something like this. I’m relying on the advice of my lawyer, and several other lawyers too, all agree, stay quiet. CBS wants to do a lengthy interview. Right now, I feel like doing it. And not just sticking to my personal background; I feel like getting right into the case, and picking it all apart. For heaven’s sake, it’s right in front of everyone’s faces, and no one seems to be able to figure it all out!? This silence is very frustrating.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/c...rn-to-world-of-fast-cars-and-exotic-adventure

That letter really struck a chord with some of DM's defenders on the site. Is it a wild plea to ask why no one is looking at the Columbian contractors?

 

[MsSherlock]

I have always thought this as well. MS has the minor criminal past, DM had the so called luxury living life. If caught I feel DM thought it would be easy to pin it all on MS. DM had money to buy the truck, MS did not. DM would present it as, he felt sorry for MS, gave him odd jobs to do in and around the hanger, gave him a place to stay etc. He would suggest that he offered MS everything he owned to use, his Yukon, his hanger, his house, his farm. Making it look like he had access wherever evidence was found. I think the walls have closed in on DM as he didn't realize the amount of evidence that puts him in the hot seat of the crimes committed.

I'm of the belief that DM really didn't expect to get nailed with this and the "framing" aspect was purely damage control- an afterthought once he knew the heat was on him. He's a seasoned murderer. He's experienced in LE investigations. He sat right in front of SL who had a cell phone bill showing he was the last person contacting LB. Nothing happened. WM, LB murders went unanswered: a suicide and runaway.

TB? Just one of those guys that hikes out on his wife. IMO, he never went into this covering up his tracks. IMO, he was in damage control the minute AJ recognized the truck. That's when his pathetic little mind started to scatter evidence around like confetti. I take insult in anyone referring to DM as being smart or intelligent. IMO, he's got the intelligence of a toad- not meaning to insult toads. Little did he know that LE were onto him already and he had met his match with Kavanaugh. He was going down long before he texted his concerning "I think I'm being set up" message to LW. MOO