General Discussion and Theories #4

[Juballee]

I think I understand what you mean, but I think that there are differences that can make the comparison less relevant, namely that Toronto is a huge multicultural city where people can and do slip away unnoticed.


We have had an Underground Railroad for almost as long as we have been a city, not to mention that our country has the longest undefended border and an easily accessible criminal underworld that would be able to provide the necessary supplies to start a new life. Which this judge was suggesting that Tasmania does not have, I believe.


One was on assistance that was being garnished, the other had a shoebox of cash. One had a son to live for, the other had a dog she dropped off before she disappeared. One was an under-educated teen and the other was in her twenties and had attended university.

Granted there are some similarities between them as well, if LB's case goes anything like this one, there also might not be enough to convince a judge that the preponderance of evidence finds that she definitely died at the hands of the accused. Just my opinion only.

 

[SnooperDuper]

I think I understand what you mean, but I think that there are differences that can make the comparison less relevant, namely that Toronto is a huge multicultural city where people can and do slip away unnoticed.


We have had an Underground Railroad for almost as long as we have been a city, not to mention that our country has the longest undefended border and an easily accessible criminal underworld that would be able to provide the necessary supplies to start a new life. Which this judge was suggesting that Tasmania does not have, I believe.


One was on assistance that was being garnished, the other had a shoebox of cash. One had a son to live for, the other had a dog she dropped off before she disappeared. One was an under-educated teen and the other was in her twenties and had attended university.

Granted there are some similarities between them as well, if LB's case goes anything like this one, there also might not be enough to convince a judge that the preponderance of evidence finds that she definitely died at the hands of the accused. Just my opinion only.

But LB was under the care of doctors, and there was no further activity on her health card. She gave up her cash but did not access her bank accounts. (You would think cash is king if you are going off the grid.) Canada is much more technologically developed than Tasmania, and it is a big city with many eyewitnesses. She had no car to get away, and did not have a passport. She had a family and friends and a dog she doted on in the city.

 

[Juballee]

I would actually think that being under the care of doctors for mental or emotional issues would add to the probability of someone having a sudden change of identity. Impulsive behaviour, mental fugues or even a split or fracture in personality are typically events preceded by some sort of mental health care, I imagine. But I'm not saying that is what I think happened, only pointing out the differences and the possibilities.


Personally I still think that her abandoning a dog that she doted on is a very telling sign. She walked away from the one thing she apparently loved and that might have been giving her a good reason to live. Then she left a box of money, which is something that everyone needs to survive, as if she had no other worldly use for it. To me that suggests neither running away or being murdered, to me that seems like someone who decided that they didn't want to live anymore.

If she was planning on running away, she likely would have brought the shoebox of money with her, unless she had so much money she was leaving some behind as a way to cushion her parents from the expense. And since people don't usually prepare to be murdered, I can only surmise that she was planning for a different kind of departure.

Maybe it's been asked before, but why was she looking for a place to stay and having an ex pay for her hotel room if she had a shoebox of money?

 

[swedie]

Well, they are sure HM is dead for the same reasons LB is assumed to be dead: her electronic trail went dead.

Snooper I would bet LE have way more evidence than just her electronic trail to come to their conclusion LB is deceased...and had been incinerated (my speculation on the incinerated part). <modsnip> MOO.

 

[SnooperDuper]

On the subject of murderers paying (financially) for their crimes, LM's case against her attacker Col. RW, his wife EH, and the OPP has been settled in part - the OPP has reached a settlement with her. The suit against RW and EH continues.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/08/16/russell-williams-victim-settles-suit-with-opp

 

[SnooperDuper]

Snooper I would bet LE have way more evidence than just her electronic trail to come to their conclusion LB is deceased...and had been incinerated (my speculation on the incinerated part). <modsnip> MOO.

Remember LE thinks LB was incinerated too:

Homicide detectives believe Dellen Millard bought a gun illegally and used it to murder his father. And that he also murdered Laura Babcock and incinerated her body &#8212; just as he allegedly did with Tim Bosma.

http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4...ed-bosma-killer-s-girlfriend-was-incinerated/

LE was willing to state that much in April 2014.

Remember that the Crown made an application for a direct indictment in that case as well, which surely must speak to the strength of the evidence they hold. Is there anything they don't already know at this point?

 

[Juballee]

If requesting a direct indictment speaks strongly of the evidence, I imagine that not having that request granted speaks even louder of the strength of the evidence, in my opinion.

 

[Arnie M]

On the subject of murderers paying (financially) for their crimes, LM's case against her attacker Col. RW, his wife EH, and the OPP has been settled in part - the OPP has reached a settlement with her. The suit against RW and EH continues.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/08/16/russell-williams-victim-settles-suit-with-opp

Hi Snooper .... we see this happen more and more and I find it troubling. Not that I have a problem with victims being compensated , it is because a line is being crossed that is hard to define.

Here is a (poor) example .... years ago prisoners were literally sent out on chain gangs to work (forced labor) both for government and business and the line became blurry between justice and profit and free labor. The practice had to stop in order to preserve "justice"

In the case of Col RW I see his wife being a "financial victim" because all indications have been that RW would have continued to "supported her" in some fashion .... remember his full confession was based on causing minimum problems for her.

But closer to home in the Bosma case , if DM ended up having to forfeit say a Million Dollars to the victims , then for justice to be served MS should have to do the same .

In property crimes we often see judges impose a fine plus restitution to the victims instead of a jail term , but that is done on behalf of all society , and it can be a great form of justice and rehabilitation if the criminal has to pay back what he stole.

Mixing "justice" and "money" began to create serious problems in the USA where police departments were allowed to seize and keep keep the proceeds of crime ..... Hummers , BMW's , Boats , aircraft.

It didn't take very long before police ignored the more serious and dangerous criminals and only went after the ones with lots of luxurious toys. It is human nature.

Like I said , it is a fine line between justice and money and we (society) should not let the line become blurry.

.........

Hey Snooper ..... only a few more months before all this goes to trial .... it will be interesting to see how right or wrong our guesses have been .... I cant wait .... haaa !!!!

 

[SnooperDuper]

If requesting a direct indictment speaks strongly of the evidence, I imagine that not having that request granted speaks even louder of the strength of the evidence, in my opinion.

The TB case has strong evidence but also there was a public outcry and therefore a need to serve justice as quickly as possible.

The LB case isn't as high profile. That may be the simple difference.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Hi Snooper .... we see this happen more and more and I find it troubling. Not that I have a problem with victims being compensated , it is because a line is being crossed that is hard to define.

Here is a (poor) example .... years ago prisoners were literally sent out on chain gangs to work (forced labor) both for government and business and the line became blurry between justice and profit and free labor. The practice had to stop in order to preserve "justice"

In the case of Col RW I see his wife being a "financial victim" because all indications have been that RW would have continued to "supported her" in some fashion .... remember his full confession was based on causing minimum problems for her.

But closer to home in the Bosma case , if DM ended up having to forfeit say a Million Dollars to the victims , then for justice to be served MS should have to do the same .

In property crimes we often see judges impose a fine plus restitution to the victims instead of a jail term , but that is done on behalf of all society , and it can be a great form of justice and rehabilitation if the criminal has to pay back what he stole.

Mixing "justice" and "money" began to create serious problems in the USA where police departments were allowed to seize and keep keep the proceeds of crime ..... Hummers , BMW's , Boats , aircraft.

It didn't take very long before police ignored the more serious and dangerous criminals and only went after the ones with lots of luxurious toys. It is human nature.

Like I said , it is a fine line between justice and money and we (society) should not let the line become blurry.

.........

Hey Snooper ..... only a few more months before all this goes to trial .... it will be interesting to see how right or wrong our guesses have been .... I cant wait .... haaa !!!!

I'd expect any civil case would name DM, MB, MS and the police forces involved. The only one that doesn't have deep pockets is MS. The suit in the RW case was worth $7.6M, and that was just one of the plaintiffs. I think DM and MB will get off lightly if they are only asked to pay a combined $1M. DM has probably already paid that to his lawyer, and since he has three trials to get through, his legal bills may go much higher than that. How far will $12M go?

As for MS, fines or judgments imposed by a court cannot be eliminated through a bankruptcy. MS would be left worse than broke, permanently. https://www.bankruptcycanada.com/question1.htm#debts

 

[Juballee]

The TB case has strong evidence but also there was a public outcry and therefore a need to serve justice as quickly as possible.

The LB case isn't as high profile. That may be the simple difference.

I though that the necessary requirement for skipping the preliminary hearings was that the evidence is strong, not that public sentiment is strong. The whole point of the court system is to have accused persons judged in a way that is based on facts and not public outcries. If public sentiment dictated justice, lynchings and mob justice would rule.

Justice is is not being served any quicker for the Bosmas because of the direct indictment, from what we have already learned here, and if that were the case, then why would LB get a lower priority as a victim?

 

[SnooperDuper]

I though that the necessary requirement for skipping the preliminary hearings was that the evidence is strong, not that public sentiment is strong. The whole point of the court system is to have accused persons judged in a way that is based on facts and not public outcries. If public sentiment dictated justice, lynchings and mob justice would rule.

Justice is is not being served any quicker for the Bosmas because of the direct indictment, from what we have already learned here, and if that were the case, then why would LB get a lower priority as a victim?

10. certain guidelines set out additional, broader criteria, such as the need to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice, the public interest, or the fact that the case is notorious or of particular importance to the public, that the direct indictment is the most appropriate procedure in the circumstances, or that there is a special need to expedite proceedings.

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadian_Criminal_Procedure_and_Practice/Informations_and_Indictments

Public outcry certainly is grounds for a direct indictment.

The horror of the TB case was that TB was a good family man with a young daughter who sought to sell his truck and ended up dead. It could have been any of us.

LB's case is more like a domestic violence case as DM and LB were in a relationship, and LB ended up dead at the hands of her sometime boyfriend. It was personal.

Justice isn't served quicker in the TB case because the case was delayed by DM's lawyer not being properly retained. If there hadn't have been that game playing, the case would have moved forward more quickly.

 

[Juballee]

I'd expect any civil case would name DM, MB, MS and the police forces involved. The only one that doesn't have deep pockets is MS. The suit in the RW case was worth $7.6M, and that was just one of the plaintiffs. I think DM and MB will get off lightly if they are only asked to pay a combined $1M. DM has probably already paid that to his lawyer, and since he has three trials to get through, his legal bills may go much higher than that. How far will $12M go?

As for MS, fines or judgments imposed by a court cannot be eliminated through a bankruptcy. MS would be left worse than broke, permanently. https://www.bankruptcycanada.com/question1.htm#debts

This still implies a two tiered justice system, with differing levels of punishment based on income. If that were the case, DM would receive twice the punishment than his co-accused would receive, just because of something he had no control over, being born into a wealthier family than his co-accused. Isn't that one of the things lady justice wears a blindfold for? If if both were equally guilty, but one got a far harsher sentence, it would not be fair and just, in my opinion. What if it were the other way around, and those who were poorer got twice the punishment for the same crime because of their lower financial status? It would be equally unfair in my opinion.

What is worse than broke, permanently? Many people in society are permenantly broke, and they work for that privilege. My grandmother always used to say 'You can't get blood from a stone', so how much worse would it be for him? At worst he gets less canteen junk food than other prisoners, but it's not like debt collectors will be calling his cell harassing him for money night and day. Unless the laws change and he would be forced to work off his debt with indentured servitude, you can't get broker than broke. All my opinion only.

 

[SnooperDuper]

This still implies a two tiered justice system, with differing levels of punishment based on income. If that were the case, DM would receive twice the punishment than his co-accused would receive, just because of something he had no control over, being born into a wealthier family than his co-accused. Isn't that one of the things lady justice wears a blindfold for? If if both were equally guilty, but one got a far harsher sentence, it would not be fair and just, in my opinion. What if it were the other way around, and those who were poorer got twice the punishment for the same crime because of their lower financial status? It would be equally unfair in my opinion.

What is worse than broke, permanently? Many people in society are permenantly broke, and they work for that privilege. My grandmother always used to say 'You can't get blood from a stone', so how much worse would it be for him? At worst he gets less canteen junk food than other prisoners, but it's not like debt collectors will be calling his cell harassing him for money night and day. Unless the laws change and he would be forced to work off his debt with indentured servitude, you can't get broker than broke. All my opinion only.

Well there is a good chance that both DM and MS will end up broker than broke, by which I mean deep in debt.

DM needs lawyers in 5 cases: TB, LB, WM, and the gun case and CN's case. His defense might cost him millions.

He then might face civil suits in the three deaths: in the WM case, to recover what DM inherited from WM and return it to the rightful heir; in the LB and TB cases, wrongful death suits.

I imagine since WM and DM both held Millard Property Holdings that DM would lose half of that...the hangar is part of that so that's a loss of at least $3M. Wasn't the 6-plex part of that too? Half of that is $1.5M.

Is DM really going to have anything left? Once all the suits are resolved, will DM be any richer than MS?

Maybe the justice in this will be that both DM and MS will end up penniless and without their freedoms.

 

[SnooperDuper]

I really don't understand why, if DM is going to spend the rest of his life in solitary like RW or PB, that DM needs any money anyway. It's not like this guy has any minor children, or any hope of walking free one day.

 

[Arnie M]

I really don't understand why, if DM is going to spend the rest of his life in solitary like RW or PB, that DM needs any money anyway. It's not like this guy has any minor children, or any hope of walking free one day.

Trouble is in Canada he could be eligible for Parole in 25 years when he is 55 years old.

And if he had money in the bank it would at least double or triple in value .

 

[SnooperDuper]

Trouble is in Canada he could be eligible for Parole in 25 years when he is 55 years old.

And if he had money in the bank it would at least double or triple in value .

Well Harper's tough-on-crime legislation means he could be sentenced to 75 years. If DM had a judgement against him that was more than his fortune, the debt would double or triple in value.

You also need to ask yourself, is there anyone who has provided an alibi for DM who stands to gain financially in this situation?

The answer is yes.

 

[Juballee]

Well Harper's tough-on-crime legislation means he could be sentenced to 75 years. If DM had a judgement against him that was more than his fortune, the debt would double or triple in value.

You also need to ask yourself, is there anyone who has provided an alibi for DM who stands to gain financially in this situation?

The answer is yes.

When was DM's defence announced, who is providing his alibi? I must have missed that, please provide a link. Thanks in advance.

 

[Juballee]

Well there is a good chance that both DM and MS will end up broker than broke, by which I mean deep in debt.

DM needs lawyers in 5 cases: TB, LB, WM, and the gun case and CN's case. His defense might cost him millions.

He then might face civil suits in the three deaths: in the WM case, to recover what DM inherited from WM and return it to the rightful heir; in the LB and TB cases, wrongful death suits.

I imagine since WM and DM both held Millard Property Holdings that DM would lose half of that...the hangar is part of that so that's a loss of at least $3M. Wasn't the 6-plex part of that too? Half of that is $1.5M.

Is DM really going to have anything left? Once all the suits are resolved, will DM be any richer than MS?

Maybe the justice in this will be that both DM and MS will end up penniless and without their freedoms.

Why would DM need a lawyer in CN's trial? Is there some evidence to support the idea that he's paying for her lawyer or is that a rumour? And wouldn't the gun charge get wrapped into the same trial as the murder it was allegedly used for?

Don't people who have a debt that they have no chance of paying off file for bankruptcy? What would stop DM and MS from doing the same? Personally I've never heard of someone's debts piling up against them and tripling while they were incarcerated long term, so that they get out to a crippling debt that would give them the incentive to commit more crimes. They whole point of calling it 'paying one's debt to society' isn't so that they come out to a new debt that they can never repay, in my opinion.

 

[SnooperDuper]

When was DM's defence announced, who is providing his alibi? I must have missed that, please provide a link. Thanks in advance.

In the summer of 2013, months after her son’s arrest, she told a judge in Toronto small claims court, where she was appearing on Dellen’s behalf, that he was innocent. It’s not known what her reaction was when MIllard was charged in April 2014 with the first degree murders of his father, Wayne, and his friend, Laura Babcock. According to sources who know the Millard family, police stepped up their pressure on Madeleine Burns not long after the additional charges were laid.

Burns was present at Dellen’s and Wayne’s house while police investigated the father’s sudden death by a gunshot to the head, which was originally ruled a suicide.

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/tag/madeleine-burns

MB is vouching for the fact that WM's death is a suicide, providing an alibi for DM.