Bosma Murder Trial - Weekend Discussion #7

[Juballee]

Just my feeling, but I think we may find out about 'Scotty', and that when we do, it may reveal that DM's message for Scotty to stay away because of how 'hot' DM was, will become clear that 'hot' didn't mean he had a fever due to illness.

I've said it before and I will say it again, the things that are tweeted and the things that actually happen in court don't always line up or tell the whole story. Reporters are essentially sales people trying to sell a story, and stories get dry and boring when they don't add some mystery to them. The story of Scotty was explained to the crown's satisfaction that day in court, but in the tweets and reports he seems like a mystery still. That is intentional on the part of the media, if everything was explained, there would be no mystery, nothing to talk about to keep you coming back, in my opinion.

The people who were present that day in court heard the crown ask what she thought that text meant when she got that text. She explained that she thought he was sick, and she says that she told Scotty that DM was sick. Hours later she got the text saying that DM thought that he was being set up, and the crown asked what she thought then, if she still thought the previous text had meant that he was sick, and she replied no, not after having received the text about the set up.

She explained who Scotty was, gave his last name, told how they met, and there was no mystery left by the time the crown finished their questions about him.

Remember that LE had her phone, and since she had been recieving and sending texts to Scotty, they had his name and number, they could verify who Scotty was, and what texts were sent between them. I have a feeling that if her texts to Scotty had contradicted the idea that she thought DM was ill, that the crown would have presented those texts to discredit the witness. They didn't, and there is no need for the crown to produce evidence that proves a witness is telling the truth, it is only their job to produce evidence that a witness may be lying if they think that, and again, they didn't.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Any defence attorney that would let his client plead guilty to the worst possible charge is not a very good one. People tend to look at trial with a very simple view, that either a defendant wins or loses. In this case, people feel that would mean that for Millard and Smich to win, they would need to be found not guilty and be able to walk off in to the sunset. That is simply not the case. What the defence strategy is, their best case scenario, is to get those 1st degree murder charges dropped to 2nd degree. I'm pretty sure the jury can make that decision, or the crown could make a plea deal and end the case.

The judge will instruct the jury as to what charges are applicable and how to assess if the criteria for the charge are met. The jury can't make decisions on their own - they do not have this latitude. There is absolutely no reason for the Crown to take a plea deal when they have this much evidence against the accused - I don't really think the Crown fears losing this case, at all.

Given the notoriety of this crime, I don't see that happening, so it is up to the defence to cast doubt on any evidence that suggests that this was a premeditated crime. You can already see that Millards attorneys are already working that angle, showing at every step Millard was not attempting to hide things. We'll see how this plays out.

When they have someone ready to testify that DM was planning to steal a truck, I don't know how you can see this as not premeditated. If in the course of the truck theft, TB died accidentally (and I shudder to write that word) it's still first degree because the death came about under forcible confinement during the truck theft.

DM and MS aren't getting off of nothing!

 

[deugirtni]

The Crown has evidence that DM was going to steal a truck. He told his roommate so. So now what does DM's defense do? He can't say he was looking to buy a truck, because they know he told someone he was going to steal one.

And told someone else that he had 'purchased' one.

 

[Georgeo]

I must have missed the explanation who Scotty is/was. Can someone update please?

 

[deugirtni]

I've said it before and I will say it again, the things that are tweeted and the things that actually happen in court don't always line up or tell the whole story. Reporters are essentially sales people trying to sell a story, and stories get dry and boring when they don't add some mystery to them. The story of Scotty was explained to the crown's satisfaction that day in court, but in the tweets and reports he seems like a mystery still. That is intentional on the part of the media, if everything was explained, there would be no mystery, nothing to talk about to keep you coming back, in my opinion.

The people who were present that day in court heard the crown ask what she thought that text meant when she got that text. She explained that she thought he was sick, and she says that she told Scotty that DM was sick. Hours later she got the text saying that DM thought that he was being set up, and the crown asked what she thought then, if she still thought the previous text had meant that he was sick, and she replied no, not after having received the text about the set up.

She explained who Scotty was, gave his last name, told how they met, and there was no mystery left by the time the crown finished their questions about him.

Remember that LE had her phone, and since she had been recieving and sending texts to Scotty, they had his name and number, they could verify who Scotty was, and what texts were sent between them. I have a feeling that if her texts to Scotty had contradicted the idea that she thought DM was ill, that the crown would have presented those texts to discredit the witness. They didn't, and there is no need for the crown to produce evidence that proves a witness is telling the truth, it is only their job to produce evidence that a witness may be lying if they think that, and again, they didn't.

Are you able to enlighten us as to where Scotty was back from, what kind of 'sick' he was, why his being 'back' would be meaningful to DM, why DM asked him to stay away because he had police all over him? TIA. There are some back and forth texts between 'Scott' and DM on the cellphone exhibit, so I was *assuming* that 'Scott' might be called as a witness also.

 

[deugirtni]

Originally Posted by SnooperDuper

The Crown has evidence that DM was going to steal a truck. He told his roommate so. So now what does DM's defense do? He can't say he was looking to buy a truck, because they know he told someone he was going to steal one.

And told someone else that he had 'purchased' one.

And also that he was looking to 'trade' his red truck for a diesel.

Different strokes for different folks!

 

[SnooperDuper]

I must have missed the explanation who Scotty is/was. Can someone update please?

The only thing we know from the press is that LW2 and DM had the following exchange on their phones:

LW2: How was your day?
DM: Stress filled
LW2: Oh, that sucks! What's going on?
LW2: I hear Scotty is back but sick
DM: Do me a favour, let him know 'I'm too hot, stay away'
LW2: ****, okay. How hot are you, are you going to be okay?
DM: Looks bad, I think someone I work with has set me up, I'm not sure why
LW2: Seriously? That is outragously wrong! This has been a string of oddly bad luck, otherwise though. hmmm. I would like to hear about it and see if I could offer some insight or help.

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/2016/03/text-messages-between-dellen-millard-and-lisa-whidden.html

LW said "Scotty" was a mutual friend of LW2 and DM.

 

[deugirtni]

I've said it before and I will say it again, the things that are tweeted and the things that actually happen in court don't always line up or tell the whole story. Reporters are essentially sales people trying to sell a story, and stories get dry and boring when they don't add some mystery to them. The story of Scotty was explained to the crown's satisfaction that day in court, but in the tweets and reports he seems like a mystery still. That is intentional on the part of the media, if everything was explained, there would be no mystery, nothing to talk about to keep you coming back, in my opinion.

The people who were present that day in court heard the crown ask what she thought that text meant when she got that text. She explained that she thought he was sick, and she says that she told Scotty that DM was sick. Hours later she got the text saying that DM thought that he was being set up, and the crown asked what she thought then, if she still thought the previous text had meant that he was sick, and she replied no, not after having received the text about the set up.

She explained who Scotty was, gave his last name, told how they met, and there was no mystery left by the time the crown finished their questions about him.

Remember that LE had her phone, and since she had been recieving and sending texts to Scotty, they had his name and number, they could verify who Scotty was, and what texts were sent between them. I have a feeling that if her texts to Scotty had contradicted the idea that she thought DM was ill, that the crown would have presented those texts to discredit the witness. They didn't, and there is no need for the crown to produce evidence that proves a witness is telling the truth, it is only their job to produce evidence that a witness may be lying if they think that, and again, they didn't.

BBM on the quoted text above. According to the text exhibit between them, it wasn't hours later, it was minutes later.

 

[Orderly]

Lets not rule out that there may have been a third person involved. I find it very interesting that LE is not really attempting to put any detail to this crime, only laying out evidence to conclusively show that Smich and Millard were both present. That is it. The don't ever try to fill in the blanks like who, when or why. The are laying out evidence and trusting the jury to come to their own conclusions. But yes, it is totally possible that a third person may have been present, their car being left at the farm or possibly close to the hangar (the reason why someone left for a short period right after their arrival at the hangar). And nothing to say TB wasn't killed at the farm house either?

My guess is that LE does not have to prove the "who" part of the equation because from what I understand that given the circumstances of the crime, they'd both be guilty of 1st degree murder. That leaves me wondering what the defence strategies are going to be? If Millard were to say Smich shot him while they were both stealing the truck, wouldn't that still qualify as 1st degree? So Millard is going to have to prove that he was sincerely interested in purchasing the truck, that Smich brought the gun and that Smich shot him. If he can convince the jury of all three things, he would only be looking at accessory after the fact charges. Can he do it?

Smith on the other hand has a few more hurdles to overcome. The gun has been linked to his hand in those Facebook photos. He also turned off his phone prior to going to TBs home. If he were under the illusion that this was to be a legitimate transaction, why would he go silent at that precise moment? We also have Smich disposing of the gun. If he were going blame this on Millard, why not hand over the gun? We have him bragging to his girlfriend that the owner is gone gone gone. Not the kind of reaction I would expect from a kid who was just unwittingly tied in to a murder.

Finally, lets not forget that Millard likely has a far better legal team as he has the money to spend. My guess is that Smich will come out looking the worst when all this is said and done. Whether the jury believes it will be another story.

First your comment regarding DM having to prove less. Why would he have to prove less? His DNA is on the car door, he is on a video with an incinerator and there's his DNA and TB's DNA on a glove. Then there are the texts he sent to LW saying he's "hot" and to tell his friend not to see him. It doesn't mean he was literally hot, it is slang for being pursued by the police. Before that he was texting that he feels bad for the victims family and wants to return the truck but doesn't think he should go to the police. This in no way increases his innocence because TB was already dead and the truck was stripped down. Thus, I believe both of these guys have a pretty equal chance of being convicted.

Also, theres really no reason to believe that MS will have a worst lawyer. If let's say he is on legal aid and gets a certificate for an amount of money, he can take it to any lawyer he wants and they'll have to give him some hours. Some lawyers, because the case is very high-profile, would be willing to work it for free. This is how Everton Biddersingh wound up being represented by Jennifer Penman whose one of the most high-profile lawyers in Toronto although he literally had zero money. I believe as long as we don't know whose paying his legal bills, we can't say his lawyers are good or bad.

 

[Juballee]

BBM on the quoted text above. According to the text exhibit between them, it wasn't hours later, it was minutes later.

My mistake, it was almost an hour between the texts about warning Scotty to stay away and saying that he thought he was being set up. I knew that there was a time gap, the two are 54 minutes apart.

 

[SnooperDuper]

First your comment regarding DM having to prove less. Why would he have to prove less? His DNA is on the car door, he is on a video with an incinerator and there's his DNA and TB's DNA on a glove. Then there are the texts he sent to LW saying he's "hot" and to tell his friend not to see him. It doesn't mean he was literally hot, it is slang for being pursued by the police. Before that he was texting that he feels bad for the victims family and wants to return the truck but doesn't think he should go to the police. This in no way increases his innocence because TB was already dead and the truck was stripped down. Thus, I believe both of these guys have a pretty equal chance of being convicted.

Also, theres really no reason to believe that MS will have a worst lawyer. If let's say he is on legal aid and gets a certificate for an amount of money, he can take it to any lawyer he wants and they'll have to give him some hours. Some lawyers, because the case is very high-profile, would be willing to work it for free. This is how Everton Biddersingh wound up being represented by Jennifer Penman whose one of the most high-profile lawyers in Toronto although he literally had zero money. I believe as long as we don't know whose paying his legal bills, we can't say his lawyers are good or bad.

TD is a very renowned, capable lawyer with an excellent reputation, unlike DM's two no-name lawyers.

Personally I think MS has the better legal team.

 

[Orderly]

TD is a very renowned, capable lawyer with an excellent reputation, unlike DM's two no-name lawyers.

Personally I think MS has the better legal team.

Just on a side note, I don't know how credible this website even is but Pillay has a rating of 4.3/5: http://www.lawyerratingz.com/m/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=1047108

We should keep in mind that there's the possibility that Pillay could be working for free to get recognition.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Just on a side note, I don't know how credible this website even is but Pillay has a rating of 4.3/5: http://www.lawyerratingz.com/m/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=1047108

We should keep in mind that there's the possibility that Pillay could be working for free to get recognition.

It would be a good case to raise your profile.

TD has been practicing for over 25 years and he made his name in my mind defending the accused in the infamous Toronto "Just Desserts" robbery/murder. He has had a high profile for nearly 20 years.

Pillay has been practicing for 17. Never heard of him before.

 

[Juballee]

Yup:

- proof that DM was having financial problems
- proof that DM was hiding from the law ("I'm hot")
- proof that DM was intending to switch his gas truck out for a diesel that weekend
- proof that DM was having an affair (which was hilarious) but also shows that DM is not a forthright guy with people (accustomed to lying)

What was the proof of DM having financial problems from LW's phone? We heard talk of DM having problems getting a good rate on a mortgage, but that was it. If getting a mortgage for more than 2% interest is proof of financial problems, then most Canadian home owners have financial problems. If he could not have gotten a mortgage at all, then I would agree that it indicated financial trouble.

 

[SnooperDuper]

What was the proof of DM having financial problems from LW's phone? We heard talk of DM having problems getting a good rate on a mortgage, but that was it. If getting a mortgage for more than 2% interest is proof of financial problems, then most Canadian home owners have financial problems. If he could not have gotten a mortgage at all, then I would agree that it indicated financial trouble.

My father's accounting firm has let me down in the 11th hour of an engagement review that is of great importance to the bank and is supposed to be completed one week from today, so I'm scrambling to find their replacements.

just left the bank, it's gonna be held up longer, they're telling me Tuesday/Wednesday (a whole lot of accounting/banking **** has hit the proverbial fan this month) considering the builders call I think it would be prudent to take it of mls till Wednesday. is that much effort to do?

DM seems quite distressed at the financial woes he had. ETA: it wasn't that he didn't have money or credit; he had cashflow problems.

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/201...hidden.html/lisa_whidden_texts_dellen_millard

 

[Orderly]

Just a thought but I got the impression DM just wanted the distillery apartment off his hands as fast as possible. I thought it'd be because having it connected to a murderer decreases property value. I don't think we even need to look at his mortgage rate specifically. In my opinion the fact that he was having financial trouble is isn't even that relevant because he did this for the thrill not for the money.

IMO

 

[SnooperDuper]

OT: On the topic of rich guys doing bad things, Marco Muzzo has just been sentenced to 10 years in jail and 12 years driving probation. After credit for time served, 9 years 4 months.

Good to see wealth and white privilege didn't figure into that sentence. Highest ever sentence for impaired driving in ON.

 

[Juballee]

Are you able to enlighten us as to where Scotty was back from, what kind of 'sick' he was, why his being 'back' would be meaningful to DM, why DM asked him to stay away because he had police all over him? TIA. There are some back and forth texts between 'Scott' and DM on the cellphone exhibit, so I was *assuming* that 'Scott' might be called as a witness also.

From this post, I would have thought that you were there that day as well:

Someone asked about Mr. V's demeanour on the stand. To me, he seemed matter of fact, and perhaps a little sad. There was no hair swishing or smirks. He did keep rubbing his forehead, seeming to have a headache, and I believe it was announced that he did have a headache, but that he was okay to proceed.

My bad! If you were not there, you might not know that those questions were not asked, so I guess we will have to wait until Scotty is called to testify.

 

[brightii]

I've said it before and I will say it again, the things that are tweeted and the things that actually happen in court don't always line up or tell the whole story. Reporters are essentially sales people trying to sell a story, and stories get dry and boring when they don't add some mystery to them. The story of Scotty was explained to the crown's satisfaction that day in court, but in the tweets and reports he seems like a mystery still. That is intentional on the part of the media, if everything was explained, there would be no mystery, nothing to talk about to keep you coming back, in my opinion.

The people who were present that day in court heard the crown ask what she thought that text meant when she got that text. She explained that she thought he was sick, and she says that she told Scotty that DM was sick. Hours later she got the text saying that DM thought that he was being set up, and the crown asked what she thought then, if she still thought the previous text had meant that he was sick, and she replied no, not after having received the text about the set up.

She explained who Scotty was, gave his last name, told how they met, and there was no mystery left by the time the crown finished their questions about him.

Remember that LE had her phone, and since she had been recieving and sending texts to Scotty, they had his name and number, they could verify who Scotty was, and what texts were sent between them. I have a feeling that if her texts to Scotty had contradicted the idea that she thought DM was ill, that the crown would have presented those texts to discredit the witness. They didn't, and there is no need for the crown to produce evidence that proves a witness is telling the truth, it is only their job to produce evidence that a witness may be lying if they think that, and again, they didn't.

BBM

LW2's explanations in her testimony made no sense whatsoever to me. According to the published texts, she tells DM that she hears that Scotty is back but is sick. Now you say that she explained that she also told (texted or phoned) Scotty to tell him that DM was sick. I don't believe that either Scotty or DM were sick in the ordinary sense of the word, IF in fact, such messages were conveyed by LW2 to both Scotty and DM. It doesn't make sense. Why, IF Scotty was sick, would DM tell him to stay away because DM is hot? Why would DM even presume that sick Scotty would want to see DM in that case and vice versa? The word "sick" has another meaning in the texts IMO.

IF this exchange between LW2 and Scotty and DM happened as you say LW2 explained in court but was not reported by MSM, then IMO, it suggests something more than a flu was going around. I know I am only speculating, but that's what happens when details don't make sense, and I believe the jury too will also attach their own interpretations to information that is not fully and logically explained.

IMO, the truth I come away with so far in this trial is that DM is indeed a sick person, as is anyone in my mind who will kill another person in cold blood and remain absent of true remorse.

All MOO.

 

[JuneBug67]

OT: On the topic of rich guys doing bad things, Marco Muzzo has just been sentenced to 10 years in jail and 12 years driving probation. After credit for time served, 9 years 4 months.

Good to see wealth and white privilege didn't figure into that sentence. Highest ever sentence for impaired driving in ON.

Hopefully the family and community is prepared to see him do substantially less than that in the end. We had a guy locally who killed three teens walking by the side of the road and was sentenced to seven years. He was out in less than four and a half.