Dellen Millard: Innocent Dupe? Alternative Theories

[swedie]

Thanks, sillybilly. You sent me off on some interesting reads. Although only 2 are from Ontario, I would like to offer some comments, starting with those two.

Death of Const. Garrett Styles - the accused was a 15 year old who tried to run away, tipping the van onto Styles, and leaving himself a quadriplegic. The charges were at one time reduced to manslaughter, then upgraded again to first degree. I assume the first degree charge is because it was a police officer and all deaths caused to LE are 1st degree. Being a quadriplegic, and considering the circumstances, there isn't a large chance of him being a danger to the public.

Blake Lapierre - His charges were reduced to 2nd degree and his preliminary hearing was last August. What ever happened after that? Has he been given a court date? I couldn't find anything since the preliminary trial started.

Mohamed Abdilla Awaleh - The evidence against him hinged on one not so reliable witness. He was acquitted of the murder charge. His co-accused, who was found guilty, did not receive bail.

Jacques Delisle - a 75 year old retired Quebec Superior Court Judge.

David Woods - bail didn't last long. It was rescinded less than 2 months later.

Nick Greco - 69 years old, drunken argument. Charges downgraded to 2nd degree within 7 months. Found not guilty of 2nd degree, guilty of manslaughter.

Brian Malley - previously with Edmonton Police Services. Investments??? This one's unbelievable.

The last three - drugs and gangs, Zig Zag Crew, HA. Won't bother to comment on these, but is this a normal occurrence in Winnipeg???

JMO

No matter the reasoning behind these Canadian cases, they still received bail on taking or being involved in taking someone's life. Thank you SB for bringing this very legit point information forward. Alethea Dice thanks for the research. What can be said then for DM and DP's lack of attempt to seek bail for his client? Personally I believe it's pretty telling but that's JMO.

 

[Alethea Dice]

And FWIW Alethea Dice although these devices have been around since the 80's, they were not as abundant or commonly used as they are nowadays. The mid 80's brought forth the discovery of DNA but it was not used in conviction until the late 80's and we know from cases such as PB's how the back log for testing back then was generally four to eight months before results were completed; not so much nowadays. HTH.

BBM Accused, that is the ultimate word in which you chose to use now but not in your post I responded to, so I my explanation clarifies. Your words were claiming the person stole the credit card, not that they were accused of stealing a credit card, there is a difference. I did not read the article you linked, therefore cannot comment on a particular case if it was mentioned in the article; I am speaking based on your own words. You wrote, If you can't get bail for using a stolen credit card, why risk asking for it on a murder charge? For what it's worth, anyone who is entitled to seek bail may as well try it. As I stated; what have they got to lose. So should you have worded it using the word accused, my opinion would have reflected that. Someone who pleads guilty to their charges may still seek for bail while awaiting their sentencing. It is MOO if that is the case, they do not deserves bail. They did the crime and plead guilty. DM is claiming innocent, he is entitled to file for bail. MOO.

Actually, my words didn't claim the person stole the credit card. My words said "for using a stolen credit card". It was simply an example of the types of charges that people in Ontario are being denied bail for, which you probably would have realized had you looked at the link. I apologize for not putting the word "accused" in my sentence, but I would have thought that was obvious since we were discussing applying for bail. I've never heard of someone requesting bail after they have been found guilty or plead guilty, at least not in Canada. Do you have a link please that shows people can still seek bail after pleading guilty while they wait for sentencing? TIA

If you really want to get technical, DNA was discovered in 1953. It just wasn't used in criminal investigations until the mid 80's. CCTV surveillance videos go back to the 60's and became more popular in the 70's when videocassettes were introduced, which is when banks, stores, gas stations and LE started using them. But it really doesn't matter. It may seem recent to some, but it's still been 30 years since the 80's. And yes, everything does continue to improve as years go by. But it has nothing to do with what I was originally commenting on.

JMO

 

[SnooperDuper]

I was listening to that song that had the lyrics "I'm heaven sent..."

It was released in 2003 by a new york emo band Brand New that sounds (with the help of a lot of autotune) somewhat like the Psychedelic Furs.

The very first line in the song is "I'm heaven sent, don't you dare forget" and the theme of the song deals with a rather bitter breakup


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slsUsaXOb1w

 

[Alethea Dice]

I was listening to that song that had the lyrics "I'm heaven sent..."

It was released in 2003 by a new york emo band Brand New that sounds (with the help of a lot of autotune) somewhat like the Psychedelic Furs.

The very first line in the song is "I'm heaven sent, don't you dare forget" and the theme of the song deals with a rather bitter breakup


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slsUsaXOb1w

His girlfriend at the time cheated on him with his best friend. The result was the end of the relationship, the end of the friendship (for a time anyway) and a feud between Brand New and Taking Back Sunday.

The best interpretation of the lyrics, in my opinion, can be read here:

http://tracylacey.blogspot.ca/2009/03/8-okay-i-believe-you-but-my-tommy-gun.html

If you're interested in the feud.....

http://www.aux.tv/2013/09/remembering-the-taking-back-sunday-and-brand-new-beef/

Emo.......

JMO

 

[Variant]

A view of the recent interview and DM's assertion of innocence, by a retired assistant Crown attorney:

http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/4307084-why-hasn-t-millard-told-his-story-/

 

[newone]

A view of the recent interview and DM's assertion of innocence, by a retired assistant Crown attorney:

http://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/4307084-why-hasn-t-millard-told-his-story-/

Thanks for this link. His comments were eloquently and simply stated.:jail:

 

[swedie]

Actually, my words didn't claim the person stole the credit card. My words said "for using a stolen credit card". It was simply an example of the types of charges that people in Ontario are being denied bail for, which you probably would have realized had you looked at the link. I apologize for not putting the word "accused" in my sentence, but I would have thought that was obvious since we were discussing applying for bail. I've never heard of someone requesting bail after they have been found guilty or plead guilty, at least not in Canada. Do you have a link please that shows people can still seek bail after pleading guilty while they wait for sentencing? TIA

If you really want to get technical, DNA was discovered in 1953. It just wasn't used in criminal investigations until the mid 80's. CCTV surveillance videos go back to the 60's and became more popular in the 70's when videocassettes were introduced, which is when banks, stores, gas stations and LE started using them. But it really doesn't matter. It may seem recent to some, but it's still been 30 years since the 80's. And yes, everything does continue to improve as years go by. But it has nothing to do with what I was originally commenting on.

JMO

BBM Isn't that still against the law; to use a stole credit card? From what I know it is, and therefore charges should apply. No bail why? Could it be this person has had previous charges or maybe it's based on the amount charged against the stolen credit card? :dunno:

I was thinking of this disturbing case when I was thinking of someone being out on bail awaiting sentence. And no I don't have a link to what you are asking for. I do think it is possible though on less serious charges but complicated cases. Typically thought I believe when someone pleads guilty, they are generally handed down a sentence then and there. Not so certain though so I HTH. This woman's sentence was reduced from second degree to manslaughter by LE. Being as there was a PB on this case, there wasn't much information release in the MSM. She did end up pleading guilty to manslaughter so this isn't a case of someone pleading guilty and released awaiting sentence. She was out of jail though while awaiting her trial and sentencing which just happened days ago. She had served 57 days prior to change of charge and had been free until she was sentenced. Why was this woman not imprisoned awaiting trial? IMO manslaughter is more serious than credit card theft...

“My client coming forward and pleading today … much of that had to do with her remorse, wanting the family to know what had happened.”
Sentencing will take place in January.

Remorse or not wanting details of her life exposed to the public through evidence and witness testimony? Wanting the family to know now; :O three years after the fact or three years to concoct her story? IMHO and sadly the family will never know the truth; she was able make her side of the story to fit based on evidence. JMHO.

Read more: http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/babysit...er-in-death-of-infant-1.1540224#ixzz2qPaLFKNb

http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/murder-charges-in-death-of-ingersoll-baby-1.628027

RIP sweet little angel Brooklyne.

 

[Alethea Dice]

BBM Isn't that still against the law; to use a stole credit card? From what I know it is, and therefore charges should apply. No bail why? Could it be this person has had previous charges or maybe it's based on the amount charged against the stolen credit card? :dunno:

I was thinking of this disturbing case when I was thinking of someone being out on bail awaiting sentence. And no I don't have a link to what you are asking for. I do think it is possible though on less serious charges but complicated cases. Typically thought I believe when someone pleads guilty, they are generally handed down a sentence then and there. Not so certain though so I HTH. This woman's sentence was reduced from second degree to manslaughter by LE. Being as there was a PB on this case, there wasn't much information release in the MSM. She did end up pleading guilty to manslaughter so this isn't a case of someone pleading guilty and released awaiting sentence. She was out of jail though while awaiting her trial and sentencing which just happened days ago. She had served 57 days prior to change of charge and had been free until she was sentenced. Why was this woman not imprisoned awaiting trial? IMO manslaughter is more serious than credit card theft...

“My client coming forward and pleading today … much of that had to do with her remorse, wanting the family to know what had happened.”
Sentencing will take place in January.

Remorse or not wanting details of her life exposed to the public through evidence and witness testimony? Wanting the family to know now; :O three years after the fact or three years to concoct her story? IMHO and sadly the family will never know the truth; she was able make her side of the story to fit based on evidence. JMHO.

Read more: http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/babysit...er-in-death-of-infant-1.1540224#ixzz2qPaLFKNb

http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/murder-charges-in-death-of-ingersoll-baby-1.628027

RIP sweet little angel Brooklyne.

Swedie, the person using the credit card isn't an actual person from a linked case. It was a hypothetical example of the types of people who are not given bail while awaiting trial for low-risk, non-violent crimes. The article I linked to was about the problems with the bail system in Ontario and how it contributes to the fact that 2/3 of the people in Ontario jails are waiting for their trials and 70% of those people are facing non-violent charges. If the credit card guy was a real live case, maybe he just had no one to put up the surety for his bail. The Criminal Code states that, unless there is just cause, an accused should be released on an undertaking to appear in court. The reasons not to grant bail are a danger to the public, a danger to himself, or a flight risk. But almost half (around 46%) of those in Ontario jails are waiting for trials on non-violent charges. HTH to better explain the point I was trying to make.

Also, I was more specifically referring to 1st degree murder charges that bail is rare for. In the case you have linked to, the woman was originally charged with failing to provide the necessities of life. When the baby died, she was also charged with criminal negligence causing death and was released on $25,000 bail. Almost 8 months later, she was charged with 2nd degree murder, applied for bail again and was granted it with a surety of $35,000. I don't know why, maybe because she had already been out for the 8 months leading up to that charge. Personally, I don't think she should have been given bail and I don't think they should have allowed her to plead down to manslaughter. In my eyes, even her story describes murder. First she asked for trial by judge only, then asked for a change in venue, before deciding to plead guilty 3 1/2 years later. Remorse? I doubt it.

Ironically Garland told the author of a presentence report that she had left an abusive husband, now deceased, because he had swung their child in an airplane swing and injured her son’s head.

http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/2014/01/09/ingersoll-babysitter-sentenced-to-six-years-for-manslaughter-death-of-baby-brookelyn

JMO

 

[swedie]

Swedie, the person using the credit card isn't an actual person from a linked case. It was a hypothetical example of the types of people who are not given bail while awaiting trial for low-risk, non-violent crimes. The article I linked to was about the problems with the bail system in Ontario and how it contributes to the fact that 2/3 of the people in Ontario jails are waiting for their trials and 70% of those people are facing non-violent charges. If the credit card guy was a real live case, maybe he just had no one to put up the surety for his bail. The Criminal Code states that, unless there is just cause, an accused should be released on an undertaking to appear in court. The reasons not to grant bail are a danger to the public, a danger to himself, or a flight risk. But almost half (around 46%) of those in Ontario jails are waiting for trials on non-violent charges. HTH to better explain the point I was trying to make.

Also, I was more specifically referring to 1st degree murder charges that bail is rare for. In the case you have linked to, the woman was originally charged with failing to provide the necessities of life. When the baby died, she was also charged with criminal negligence causing death and was released on $25,000 bail. Almost 8 months later, she was charged with 2nd degree murder, applied for bail again and was granted it with a surety of $35,000. I don't know why, maybe because she had already been out for the 8 months leading up to that charge. Personally, I don't think she should have been given bail and I don't think they should have allowed her to plead down to manslaughter. In my eyes, even her story describes murder. First she asked for trial by judge only, then asked for a change in venue, before deciding to plead guilty 3 1/2 years later. Remorse? I doubt it.



http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/2014/01/09/ingersoll-babysitter-sentenced-to-six-years-for-manslaughter-death-of-baby-brookelyn

JMO

Thank you for the explanation Alethea Dice

Awesome. I'm glad we agree on the outcome of this case. I highly doubt the parents of this beautiful baby girl anticipated any answers from this . Sadly even liars can beat the system. Maybe she will get a taste of her own medicine while in prison. Maybe she will be sent to the same prison where TLM resides and they can do some peer work together Hmm interesting, judge Heeney resided over this case also and he didn't "buy" into her story. JMHO.

 

[swedie]

Wow! Another fatality with the common denominator being DM? Keep digging Ann. :clap: And I hope you're sharing your information with LE. Anyone think we may hear about these cases being reopened?

...Millard, who, it turns out, had a very troubled and unhappy childhood.
<modsnip>

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/2013/12/the-week-before-christmas.html#more-2270

 

[swedie]

Thanks Ann. :seeya:

Robert Picton came to my mind immediately. Then
John Gacey
Herbert Baumeister
Belle Gunness
Jeffery Dahmer, some of his victims remains were found in his own residence.
etc., etc., etc...

It's JMHO but I don't believe TB was meant to be found. The purpose of the incinerator. Maybe that is why there is no trace of LB....that we have heard yet. As devastating as it is, I am glad he was found.

Meanwhile, over on Facebook, there are people who believe Millard must be innocent because Tim Bosma&#8217;s remains were found on his property and no murderer would be &#8220;dumb&#8221; enough to do that. This ignores the fact that killers constantly dispose of bodies on their own property, because, by doing so, they control the situation.

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/201...-dellen-millard-accused-murderer-of-tim-bosma

During the trial's first day of jury evidence, January 22, 2007, the Crown stated he confessed to forty-nine murders to an undercover police officer posing as a cellmate. The Crown reported that Pickton told the officer that he wanted to kill another woman to make it an even 50, and that he was caught because he was "sloppy".

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Pickton"]Robert Pickton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[Snoofo]

Millard, who, it turns out, had a very troubled and unhappy childhood


http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/2013...html#more-2270

According to whom? AnnB has a tendency to throw remarks like this out there and people eat it up.

Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[redheart]

Dellen Millard devotees have a tendency to dismiss anything AnnB says that portrays DM in any light that does not involve rays shining down from heaven.
I would imagine AnnB has heard information from a lot more people who have known or currently know DM, than we have heard from on here or in MSM.

 

[redheart]

I am all for finding out the truth, as I'm sure most people on here are. I think it's probably quite likely that DM killed TB but I would not hesitate to proclaim DM's innocence if that is what the evidence shows when this goes to trial. I very much believe in innocence until proven guilty. However, at this time, with what I have learned from LE reports, my opinion is that DM and MS more than likely killed TB.

In the meantime, I am glad of Ann's and others' efforts to learn more about DM and MS' lives. What they hear from people who knew DM may or may not be accurate, but I believe the more they learn the better bigger picture we will have. I don't think many people will take every tidbit of information from MSM, blogs, Facebook etc. and believe it as absolute truth. I think many of us are intelligent enough to weigh the information, where it comes from and decide what kind of big picture is being painted. And IMO, that big picture is an increasingly sinister one of DM.

There is a small group of people on here who dispute every single negative or even possibly negative thing learned about DM. Why is that? AnnB asks that in her blog and it's a good question. I can't figure it out. I don't think it's about justice - I think some people just enjoy playing devil's advocate online.

We are ALL questioning the "holes" in the story we know, and part of that is digging up information on DM and MS. We don't know the whole story of what happened to TB, and won't until trial - if even then. In the meantime, it's important that LE and individuals like AnnB keep digging, lest we forget the harsh lessons learned by NOT immediately digging into the pasts of accused killers. Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka come to mind.

 

[ABro]

I just wanted to clarify a few points re me and the MSM.

I approach the MSM when I believe I have a "story" to tell and that it would be in my interest to have it published somewhere other than my website. This was the case for the original Millard family story published in the National Post last spring.

Since then, I've found out a lot of interesting information, but none of it is really a good story. It's more a collection of facts. I haven't approached anyone to publish it.

But just because my info. hasn't been verified by the MSM doesn't make it any less reliable. Yes it's true much of the information I publish hasn't appeared elsewhere, but then neither has anyone else quoted the Texas Airport Business Guy, as Snoofo calls him. I've worked really hard on this story and managed to reach people that a lot of others haven't. It's that simple.

Putting information on my website, also encourages other potential sources to come and talk to me, which is one of the main reasons I do it.

And finally, I can tell you that the information about Dellen Millard's childhood comes from three people who know the family, one of whom actually agreed to be named, a rare occurrence in this case.

 

[Snoofo]

Thanks Bro, I don't know why you didn't mention the source (nameless or not), in the first place. How it was brought up was my beef. Because if it's someone like the guy who barely knew him but remembered him from TFS, that is not a source. How well did these people know him?

I know you're working hard and I appreciate that.

Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[Snoofo]

I am all for finding out the truth, as I'm sure most people on here are. I think it's probably quite likely that DM killed TB but I would not hesitate to proclaim DM's innocence if that is what the evidence shows when this goes to trial. I very much believe in innocence until proven guilty. However, at this time, with what I have learned from LE reports, my opinion is that DM and MS more than likely killed TB.

In the meantime, I am glad of Ann's and others' efforts to learn more about DM and MS' lives. What they hear from people who knew DM may or may not be accurate, but I believe the more they learn the better bigger picture we will have. I don't think many people will take every tidbit of information from MSM, blogs, Facebook etc. and believe it as absolute truth. I think many of us are intelligent enough to weigh the information, where it comes from and decide what kind of big picture is being painted. And IMO, that big picture is an increasingly sinister one of DM.

There is a small group of people on here who dispute every single negative or even possibly negative thing learned about DM. Why is that? AnnB asks that in her blog and it's a good question. I can't figure it out. I don't think it's about justice - I think some people just enjoy playing devil's advocate online.

We are ALL questioning the "holes" in the story we know, and part of that is digging up information on DM and MS. We don't know the whole story of what happened to TB, and won't until trial - if even then. In the meantime, it's important that LE and individuals like AnnB keep digging, lest we forget the harsh lessons learned by NOT immediately digging into the pasts of accused killers. Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka come to mind.

If someone isn't confident of sharing the same opinion then you might say they feel it is their duty to play devil's advocate, not something they enjoy but something they feel someone must do for the sake of justice. I could care less about DM, unless of course he didn't kill Tim.

Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[ABro]

Thanks Bro, I don't know why you didn't mention the source (nameless or not), in the first place. How it was brought up was my beef. Because if it's someone like the guy who barely knew him but remembered him from TFS, that is not a source. How well did these people know him?

IMO, that TFS guy was actually amazingly perceptive. Everything that I've learned since reading that article shows that his intuition about Dellen Millard and the family was right on.

Some people can know you forever and never see the real you. Others spot it right away. The TFS guy seems to fall in the latter category.

Wayne Millard was very much an outsider and either consciously, I strongly suspect, or subconsciously projected that "Hillbilly" image that TFS guy picked up on. The message WM was sending is "I am different and I won't play by your rules." Even as a kid, TFS guy perceived this and how it affected DM, who, by the way, is still working to project that "I'm not your regular rich guy, I shop at Costco and only have one designer suit" image, which runs in the family.

TFS guy also remembered the dog biscuits incident, which is significant for what it represents. At the time, DM was coping with an alcoholic father and a mother, who, according to people who knew the family, often wasn't around. He was desperate for attention, a condition that continued to persist right up until his arrest.

 

[Sillybilly]

FWIW I don't know if DM is 100% guilty or innocent but neither does anyone else here.

<rsbm>

Drifting a bit here and just jumping off that comment in your post Snoofo ...

As members of the court of public opinion, our opinions are not held to the same standard as jurors. Guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" from the evidence presented does not have to equate to 100% (and although not defined by the courts does not have to constitute "beyond a shadow of a doubt" and is generally believed to be somewhere around or above 90% in criminal matters).

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Beyond+a+Reasonable+Doubt

from:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadian_Criminal_Evidence/Standard_of_Proof#cite_note-15

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt "it does not involve proof to an absolute certainty; it is not proof beyond any doubt nor is it an imaginary or frivolous doubt."

"Reasonable doubt" can't be based on conjecture or non-existent evidence:

from:
http://canlii.ca/en/ca/scc/doc/1970/1970canlii148/1970canlii148.html

that he acquitted the appellant not because he found that there was a rational conclusion on the facts inconsistent with his guilt, but because there was, in his opinion, a conjectural conclusion which he considered might be inconsistent with his guilt. This involved an error on a question of law alone.

the facts proved in evidence and the conclusions alternative to the guilt of the accused must be rational conclusions based on inferences drawn from proven facts. No conclusion can be a rational conclusion that is not founded on evidence. Such a conclusion would be a speculative, imaginative conclusion, not a rational one.&#8217;

 

[Snoofo]

Thanks sillybilly. I also don't know if he is 90% guilty.

Sent using Tapatalk 2