- Joined
- Jan 17, 2004
- Messages
- 42,909
- Reaction score
- 126,821
Jess said::crazy: :crazy: :crazy: >>>>defense team !
The lawyers appear to have a very dim view of the jury, clearly assuming that their combined IQ barely reaches 100.
Jess said::crazy: :crazy: :crazy: >>>>defense team !
No worries . . . . .as long as they don't have the OJ jury.otto said:The lawyers appear to have a very dim view of the jury, clearly assuming that their combined IQ barely reaches 100.
Dang, I'm still angry about that trial.docwho3 said:No worries . . . . .as long as they don't have the OJ jury.
Jess said:http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=d0e6c381-dd3f-41d8-9332-8b0a2921036d&k=0
Published: Friday, November 03, 2006
A neighbour saw Michael White speed away from their Castledowns community, driving his wife's Ford Explorer, about an hour before the vehicle was found abandoned in the parking lot of a nearby recreation area.
"I saw him drive by and I waved I guess he didn't see me," Paul Beaudoin testified today during the second day of White's murder trial.
"In my mind, Oh, he's late for work. He's in a big rush," said Beaudoin.
View Larger Image View Larger Image
An evidence phto shows the contents of a garbage bag, including blood-stained clothes, paper towels and a broken lamp and latex gloves. Police seized the bag after following Michael White to a field where he picked up these and other items and left them at the curbside for garbage pickup.
Greg Southam/Edmonton Journal
Email to a friendEmail to a friendPrinter friendlyPrinter friendly
Font:
* *
* *
* *
* *
White's pregnant wife, Liana, was reported missing later that day, July 12, 2005. White pleaded through the media for the public's help to find her.
On July 17, a volunteer search party discovered the decomposing body of the 29-year-old woman in a ditch north of the city.
White was charged with second-degree murder and offering an indignity to a dead body.
Beaudoin said it was about 5 a.m. when he saw White cruise through a yield sign at 161st Avenue and Dunluce Road. He said White was behind the wheel of Liana's brown SUV. White usually drove his pick-up truck, he said.
Other witnesses testified they saw Liana's Explorer just before 6 a.m. in the parking lot next to a baseball diamond at 157th Avenue and 116th Street. Its driver's side door was wide open and a purse and shoes were lying on the ground.
otto said:Michael obviously thought that by leaving her out in the country, police and the public would assume that she was another victim like so many other women that disappeared from the streets and ended up in the countryside. It sounds like he had a change of heart, at some time, and collected the stuff he discarded and put it curbside. This doesn't really make any sense, but if the lamp was left in a field and it could be traced to the home, then the husband clearly realized he'd made a big mistake. Why he didn't take the stuff to a dumster is a true mystery. I guess the neighbours knew early on that there was a problem with his story about sleeping while his wife left for work.
Alta said:I hope this guy rots in jail for the rest of his pathetic life.It always amazed me he just happened to be a part of the search party who found his wifes body that day.He probably led them right to her.
WhiteWolf said:Well, sheesh! Why would the "real killer" bother to take their lamp, paper towels, etc., away from the crime scene? AND how convenient that the "real killer" was a fat, bald doofus.
otto said:It's so comical that it's almost clinically absurd ... the lawyers are trying to diminish the crime to one of passion and accidental death ... he did such incredibly stupid stuff with the lamp and bloody paper towels, he couldn't possible have planned the murder ... except the fact that he had the forethought to leave her body in a rural field, like several other current missing women. The fact that Michael White thought to murder his wife and try to make it look like part of a string of murders demonstrates that he had forethought and intent (mallice) when he murdered her. It should be first degree ... but I think the jury will give him the benefit of the doubt and make it second.
Thoughts?
I do believe this is not a question of guilt, but one of first or second degree guilt. Second is 10 years, first is 25 years. I thnk he's guilty of first, but his lawyer is painting a picture of second.
WhiteWolf said:I think the crime was first degree murder. He did a "Peterson" on his wife.
His plan for hiding his wife's body had to have some forethought because it was too elaborate to be spur of the moment. But, basically, I think his motive for killing her was to get rid of the responsibility of their baby.
otto said:snip
So why were they so strapped for cash if he was in the armed forces ... can't they pay a salary that allows moms to raise children?
otto said:He definitely did a Peterson but people will wonder what he had planned for their existing daughter. I suppose his parents were so used to looking after one but two meant that the family had to find other childcare.
So why were they so strapped for cash if he was in the armed forces ... can't they pay a salary that allows moms to raise children?
WhiteWolf said:Jess answered some of your questions in the above post.
They may not have been critically strapped for cash yet, but with the impending doctor and hospital bills for the new baby, he probably didn't want to wait to kill her.
I'm wondering if he had a double life going on like so many other wife killers?
otto said:He wouldn't have had any doctor or hospital bills because of national health care.
The double life seems like a possibility, but still ... they already had one child so his life had already changed. Maybe I'm generalizing, but it seems to me that men that murder their pregnant wives are usually trying to avoid growing up and having the responsibility of a family. This one seems different.
WhiteWolf said:Oh, I forgot about the Canadian health care.
Two children are still more responsibility, though, especially if he didn't want to pay child support for another child if he divorced his wife.
Maybe his main focus was killing Leanne, and the baby was secondary? Remember the Peterson jury convicted Scott of 1st degree murder for Laci, and 2nd degree murder for Conner's murder. If he didn't love her anymore (hated?), and she just happened to be pregnant when he killed her, their first child wouldn't have been a problem for him.
WhiteWolf said:I think the crime was first degree murder. He did a "Peterson" on his wife.
His plan for hiding his wife's body had to have some forethought because it was too elaborate to be spur of the moment. But, basically, I think his motive for killing her was to get rid of the responsibility of their baby.
Bobbisangel said:snip
Is the trial still going? Can anyone from Canada post the newspaper links so we can keep track of what is happening please. I followed this case as much as we were allowed to hear and I really want to see that there is justice for Lianna. In my mind 10 yrs isn't justice for anyone. Will he be out in about 6 yrs or so? Lianna's life was worth much more than that.