General Discussion and Theories #2

[Juballee]

DM's fingerprints, no MS fingerprints, on the steering wheel of TB's truck would be my first guess.

I would find it odd if a murderer went through the trouble of removing the seats from a vehicle where a murder took place, but could not be bothered to wipe off his fingerprints from the most obvious of places. That would seem to me to be another case of only doing half the job of covering your tracks, (and in this case, the far more difficult half) which would make me question whose tracks are really being covered and why everything not covered seems to point another person with no motive who will say nothing except that he is innocent.

Misdirection would be very useful to additionally cover your tracks should you violently murder someone. If you are worried that when you commit a crime that the police might eventually be lead to you through some clue you missed, wouldn't it be useful to leave misleading evidence pointing directly at someone else. Then, even if you ever were suspected and went to trial, you would have a built in defence, the misleading evidence would be there to automatically create doubt.

 

[Blomquist]

Not necessarily, but it's an interesting question. Both Kiiji and AutoTrader reportedly deny they had published TB's number yet LE has stated that there was no email messaging between the two suggesting that the meeting must have been arranged by phone. We've been told LE does not have the burner phone but they did recover TB's cell. Either Kiiji or AutoTrader have engaged in "truth adjustment" or DM found out TB's phone number some other way and called to arrange the test drive and that incoming call showed up on TB's phone OR somehow TB learned DM was looking for a vehicle like his and called his number OR who knows what? In any case, we've not been told that the burner phone, which was purchased anonymously, has been recovered so who it may actually belong to is, frankly, anybody's guess, is it not?

Yes and it puzzles me how LE came to the conclusion that the burner phone belongs to DM. After all a burner phone is anonymous (as you rightly say) and yet they have deduced that DM is the owner They apparently do not have the phone so it cannot be a case of fingerprints.... so IMO it could be that someone else bought the phone and used it pretending to be DM.

JMO

 

[Blomquist]

It's a long way back now carli but I believe early sleuthing here suggested TB's phone number was on the ads, not sure how it works with Auto Trader but Kijiji has that option where the shopper must click on or hover over the area code and the lister's full number then appears.

Yes I remember reading that too ...which would indicate that 'someone' called TB from a burner phone....and possibly TB called back. Either way both incoming and outgoing calls would have probably registered on TB's phone IMO.
But this would not IMO identify the caller from the burner phone (or the person TB reached if he called back) IMO.

 

[lanman]

I would find it odd if a murderer went through the trouble of removing the seats from a vehicle where a murder took place, but could not be bothered to wipe off his fingerprints from the most obvious of places. That would seem to me to be another case of only doing half the job of covering your tracks, (and in this case, the far more difficult half) which would make me question whose tracks are really being covered and why everything not covered seems to point another person with no motive who will say nothing except that he is innocent.

Misdirection would be very useful to additionally cover your tracks should you violently murder someone. If you are worried that when you commit a crime that the police might eventually be lead to you through some clue you missed, wouldn't it be useful to leave misleading evidence pointing directly at someone else. Then, even if you ever were suspected and went to trial, you would have a built in defence, the misleading evidence would be there to automatically create doubt.

I didn't say this is what happened, or what I thought happened, all I said was it was the first thing that came to my mind. There could be many reasons why LE mentioned that MS might have been driving the Yukon, but didn't mention DM as a possibility.

 

[Alethea Dice]

The conversation was about why LE first stated that the video of the SUV following TBs truck was blurry and they couldn't make out the type, yet later they determined it was DM's Yukon. Well the above states they have a lot more than just 1 video, so it's very possible that they used those tapes in their determination. As far as we know, they could have a HD 3D video of the DM's Yukon following TB's truck with a close-up of the license plate! Who knows. My point is that they probably didn't ID the Yukon from just the initial blurry video that we were informed of.

I guess there is a 50/50 chance. I see that article is dated the same date as when LE announced that it was DM's Yukon in the video.

At today's news conference, Kinsella said police believe Millard and Smich were the men who went with Bosma on the test drive. Kinsella also said the second vehicle caught on video camera following the pickup on the test drive had been identified. It was a GMC Yukon owned by Millard. It has been seized by police and is being analyzed for evidence.

http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/05/22/hamilton-bosma-second-arrest.html

He was driving the Yukon when he was arrested. Maybe, once they arrested him, they compared his vehicle to the surveillance video and decided it was a match.

Millard was arrested on Cawthra Rd. late Friday afternoon while driving his GMC Yukon, according to Paradkar.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/05/13/tim_bosma_dellen_millard_suspect_in_truck_owners_disappearance_not_talking_lawyer_says.html

 

[lanman]

Yes and it puzzles me how LE came to the conclusion that the burner phone belongs to DM. After all a burner phone is anonymous (as you rightly say) and yet they have deduced that DM is the owner They apparently do not have the phone so it cannot be a case of fingerprints.... so IMO it could be that someone else bought the phone and used it pertaining to be DM.

JMO

I don't recall ever reading or hearing that LE concluded that the burner phone belonged to DM. TB's phone records were linked to the burner phone, the burner phone records led LE to a guy in Toronto who ID'd the tattoo, which most likely led them to DM. Who purchase the burner phone or even who made the calls doesnt not change the facts as we know, since they are all based on phone records, not phone ownership.

 

[Snoofo]

Yes I remember reading that too ...which would indicate that 'someone' called TB from a burner phone....and possibly TB called back. Either way both incoming and outgoing calls would have probably registered on TB's phone IMO.
But this would not IMO identify the caller from the burner phone (or the person TB reached if he called back) IMO.

Unless once having the burner phone # from TB's phone records, all other activity of the burner phone can also be traced. So either DM very stupidly called family and friends from that phone, or someone posing as him did so cleverly so that either way LE would determine the phone was DMs and not anyone else's. if they don't have the phone then that's the only way.

Another thing is many "facts" on May 14, 17, 24, etc. may have changed by now I.e. what if burner phone was later found partially hidden on DM's front lawn (because that's EXACTLY where it would be found, if there is any consistency in this case!)

 

[Alethea Dice]

Yes and it puzzles me how LE came to the conclusion that the burner phone belongs to DM. After all a burner phone is anonymous (as you rightly say) and yet they have deduced that DM is the owner They apparently do not have the phone so it cannot be a case of fingerprints.... so IMO it could be that someone else bought the phone and used it pertaining to be DM.

JMO

The only thing I remember is that LE said the phone had been used in various locations in Etobicoke. They didn't mention anywhere else it might have been used. If these people were friends, I don't know why any one of them couldn't have been in the area using it. I would, however, be interesting to know if it had been used anywhere else.

JMO

 

[Alethea Dice]

I don't recall ever reading or hearing that LE concluded that the burner phone belonged to DM. TB's phone records were linked to the burner phone, the burner phone records led LE to a guy in Toronto who ID'd the tattoo, which most likely led them to DM. Who purchase the burner phone or even who made the calls doesnt not change the facts as we know, since they are all based on phone records, not phone ownership.

I really can't remember if LE said it was DM's phone or if that's just the general public opinion due to how MSM has portrayed it. Who purchased the phone and/or made the calls could tell us who was looking for a truck and/or who made the arrangements. (Since most seem to think DM was the leader.)

JMO

 

[Blomquist]

Unless once having the burner phone # from TB's phone records, all other activity of the burner phone can also be traced. So either DM very stupidly called family and friends from that phone, or someone posing as him did so cleverly so that either way LE would determine the phone was DMs and not anyone else's. if they don't have the phone then that's the only way.

Another thing is many "facts" on May 14, 17, 24, etc. may have changed by now I.e. what if burner phone was later found partially hidden on DM's front lawn (because that's EXACTLY where it would be found, if there is any consistency in this case!)

Yes exactly...along with the back seats from TB's truck.... :moo:

 

[Blomquist]

I really can't remember if LE said it was DM's phone or if that's just the general public opinion due to how MSM has portrayed it. Who purchased the phone and/or made the calls could tell us who was looking for a truck and/or who made the arrangements. (Since most seem to think DM was the leader.)

JMO

Thats the problem imo...so much speculation by the public imo to point to DM that the waters are muddied. If the phone is a burner I doubt it will reveal who bought it. Even the numbers on it could have been calculated. JMO

 

[Sillybilly]

AFAIK, it was never specified that the burner phone was purchased or owned by DM, just "suspects".

from May 10:
http://www.cp24.com/news/bosma-s-cellphone-found-police-release-new-details-on-suspects-1.1275631

Meanwhile, police have also been able to trace the phone number the suspects used back to a cellphone that stopped working soon after Bosma disappeared.

The cellphone was purchased about three months ago and was bought under a fake name, Kavanagh said.

Detectives said that cellphone was used in Etobicoke the day before Bosma disappeared and that they are making efforts to contact everyone who received a phone call from that number.

This is the Incinerator thread and the last page and a half of posts are about the burner phone. Maybe we can move this discussion to the General Discussion thread.

 

[Carli]

I don't recall ever reading or hearing that LE concluded that the burner phone belonged to DM. TB's phone records were linked to the burner phone, the burner phone records led LE to a guy in Toronto who ID'd the tattoo, which most likely led them to DM. Who purchase the burner phone or even who made the calls doesnt not change the facts as we know, since they are all based on phone records, not phone ownership.

Quite so. But then again, and I hate to sound like a broken record here, (is the contemporary phrase "broken MP3 player?") we've noted at some length that (a) the "ambition" tattoos are boxed but pics of DM show them as NOT boxed. (b) the tattoo is further up the arm than most people would wear a watch. (c) the tattoo is on BOTH arms, not just one and (d) the suspect is described as wearing a "long sleeved" orange t-shirt. and (e) while the description as reported is very unclear, it seems that SB did not see this tattoo.

So far we've danced around this by suggesting that maybe he framed his tattoo later than the last available pics (Why?) and that the Really Huge Guy first test drive saw only the tattoo on one arm (although he described DM as "heavily tattooed") and that he must have seen it because DM may have pushed up his sleeve (one sleeve?) while driving the vehicle, thus revealing the tattoo to his owner/passenger. Incidentally, we recall that (according to the tattoo picture issued) the somewhat faded, scripted word "Ambition" is written so that a person facing DM would be able to read it whereas he himself, or someone seated beside him seeing his arm on the steering wheel, would view the word as upside down. If you would care to write out the word "Ambition" in longhand on a piece of paper, then turn it upside down, is it easy to read?

Mind, I don't know the social protocol associated with tattoos. Maybe Really Huge Guy just asked DM "What's that on your arm?" to which DM replied "Oh, that says "ambition". It used to be even harder to read before I had the artist draw a frame around it."

 

[Sillybilly]

This is in response to Carli's post over in the Incinerator thread:

Quite so. But then again, and I hate to sound like a broken record here, (is the contemporary phrase "broken MP3 player?") we've noted at some length that (a) the "ambition" tattoos are boxed but pics of DM show them as NOT boxed. (b) the tattoo is further up the arm than most people would wear a watch. (c) the tattoo is on BOTH arms, not just one and (d) the suspect is described as wearing a "long sleeved" orange t-shirt. and (e) while the description as reported is very unclear, it seems that SB did not see this tattoo.

<rsbm>

The first description was from SB about the long-sleeved orange shirt was contained in the May 8 presser. The Toronto victim is the one who subsequently gave a description which referenced the short-sleeved orange shirt, thus he was able to see the tattoo.

 

[Sillybilly]

Carli, I responded to the part of your ^^ post about the orange shirt over in the General Discussion thread:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=215186&page=5

PS: I've asked a Mod to move all the ^^ unrelated posts re burner phone, tatts and orange shirt over to General Discussion when they get some time.

 

[skatergirl]

Strange isn't it...that LE could barely determine that the vehicle was an SUV from the grainy footage before . Do you have the link to the LE video of LE saying it was the Yukon.... or is there no evidence of this?

Here are the videos of the press releases where the vehicle following TB's truck is discussed
In this first one, the topic is discussed beginning at about 11:15 of the video. MK says it looks like an SUV type vehicle, and states he does not want to be wrong, so IMO he does not wish to make a statement confirming what vehicle it is before he is 100 percent certain. Also note it is never stated that the video is grainy or of poor quality, just that there has not been confirmation of what the vehicle is at the time of the press conference.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ny87BjsZuv0"]Hamilton Police Media Conference - Investigative Briefing for Tuesday, May 14, 2013 (Afternoon) - YouTube[/ame]

In this video, the statement is made right at the start confirming the vehicle following TB's truck IS the blue Yukon owned by DM
http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...lton_police_arrest_second_murder_suspect.html

 

[lanman]

Quite so. But then again, and I hate to sound like a broken record here, (is the contemporary phrase "broken MP3 player?") we've noted at some length that (a) the "ambition" tattoos are boxed but pics of DM show them as NOT boxed. (b) the tattoo is further up the arm than most people would wear a watch. (c) the tattoo is on BOTH arms, not just one and (d) the suspect is described as wearing a "long sleeved" orange t-shirt. and (e) while the description as reported is very unclear, it seems that SB did not see this tattoo.

So far we've danced around this by suggesting that maybe he framed his tattoo later than the last available pics (Why?) and that the Really Huge Guy first test drive saw only the tattoo on one arm (although he described DM as "heavily tattooed") and that he must have seen it because DM may have pushed up his sleeve (one sleeve?) while driving the vehicle, thus revealing the tattoo to his owner/passenger. Incidentally, we recall that (according to the tattoo picture issued) the somewhat faded, scripted word "Ambition" is written so that a person facing DM would be able to read it whereas he himself, or someone seated beside him seeing his arm on the steering wheel, would view the word as upside down. If you would care to write out the word "Ambition" in longhand on a piece of paper, then turn it upside down, is it easy to read?

Mind, I don't know the social protocol associated with tattoos. Maybe Really Huge Guy just asked DM "What's that on your arm?" to which DM replied "Oh, that says "ambition". It used to be even harder to read before I had the artist draw a frame around it."

I personally don't see what all the fuss is about with the tatoo. If it turns out the DM's tattoo actually says "Ambidextrous" and has a circle around it, it doesnt matter. What matters is after they arrest him they found TB's body on his farm and the truck at his mothers house. They obviously have the right guy IMO. We don't know what they have on MS so I can't comment on that.

 

[Snoofo]

Thanks for posting the links to the press conferences skatergirl. I was really starting to miss Det. Kavanagh.

I noticed Kavanagh mentions in his presser that they have reviewed video footage of the Etobicoke test drive and confirmed there was no vehicular dropoff. I guess if he can so convincingly state this then one would presume DM and MS can be seen walking to the site on the video. If so, perhaps RBEG's descriptions etc are not as important if DM and MS can be clearly positively identified by LE on video. If DM and MS do not show up on that video either then one can't be so sure that there was no car either, right? Kavanagh didn't say anything about that nor did any of MSM ask if DM and "suspect 2" were on the video. Just throwing it out there - MOO.

 

[Snoofo]

Thanks for posting the links to the press conferences skatergirl. I was really starting to miss Det. Kavanagh.

I noticed Kavanagh mentions in his presser that they have reviewed video footage of the Etobicoke test drive and confirmed there was no vehicular dropoff. I guess if he can so convincingly state this then one would presume DM and MS can be seen walking to the site on the video. If so, perhaps RBEG's descriptions etc are not as important if DM and MS can be clearly positively identified by LE on video. If DM and MS do not show up on that video either then one can't be so sure that there was no car either, right? Kavanagh didn't say anything about that nor did any of MSM ask if DM and "suspect 2" were on the video. Just throwing it out there - MOO.

 

[bessie]

Mod Note: It's becoming tiresome, not to mention ridiculous, to read the same details misrepresented over and over again. If you note a post which does not include links, and you question the veracity of the information -- or know it to be false -- please don't respond. Instead, alert the post so that a mod can remove it.

*Random reminder intended for everyone, and for no one in particular*