General Discussion and Theories #4

[Tamarind]

I also started following during TB's disappearance, well before anyone had any inkling of who was behind this.The things that make me feel this was a premeditated murder are the burner phone and the incinerator.

The burner phone doesn't really mean much for me. The incinerator doesn't really point to any one person either , JMO

I don't understand, if DM is "100% not guilty", how he got in so deep to this. Say DM went with MS to test drive a truck, and he totally doesn't expect anything else, but MS somehow kills TB. Why would DM not just get in his Yukon and get the heck out of there? Leave MS and the mess he created (hot truck, dead body) and don't look back?

Something called repercussions comes to mind her for me. For all we know there may have been someone else involved. Until we know who was actually involved, I think maybe more than the two accused. When people are threatened or scared they react accordingly. I think DM would have had a hard time leaving such a scene without others who may have been present.

Instead DM ended up assisting enough that if he were not charged with first-degree murder, he would face accessory after the fact to murder charges.If what CN did helped MS escape just as well as DM, I expect her charges would also remain.What kind of defense could DM possibly offer, that wouldn't make him face as-serious charges?

All allegations, there are a few possible scenarios. IMO

 

[SnooperDuper]

ABro posted on her blog today that the target publication date for the book is fall 2016

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/201...d-dellen-millard-and-mark-smich.html#comments

 

[Juballee]

The burner phone doesn't really mean much for me. The incinerator doesn't really point to any one person either , JMO

RSBM

I agree, a pay as you go phone is the type of phone that can be bought for another person, or can be passed from person to person. Whoever it is given to cannot rack up a huge phone bill, and it is easier to control, it can be topped up as needed.

I also seem seem to remember that the media originally reported that the incinerator was bought by DM, but then that those stories were quietly retracted and replaced with versions that said it was purchased by an employee.

 

[SnooperDuper]

RSBM

I agree, a pay as you go phone is the type of phone that can be bought for another person, or can be passed from person to person. Whoever it is given to cannot rack up a huge phone bill, and it is easier to control, it can be topped up as needed.

I also seem seem to remember that the media originally reported that the incinerator was bought by DM, but then that those stories were quietly retracted and replaced with versions that said it was purchased by an employee.

Ultimately though the phone was only used to find a victim and the incinerator was only used to cremate the victim. The providence of these items doesn't matter; what does is how DM used them and for what purpose.

I noticed that you are unwilling to tackle the bigger question: if DM is innocent, then why didn't he get in his Yukon and drive away when things went pear-shaped?

 

[Tamarind]

Ultimately though the phone was only used to find a victim and the incinerator was only used to cremate the victim. The providence of these items doesn't matter; what does is how DM used them and for what purpose.

DM? Again it's DM. Was MS there or anyone else? Or possibly MS was hiding underneath the Yukon, maybe he was scared. :thinking: ...Fact is we don't know who was responsible for allegedly using the burner phone or the incinerator.

I noticed that you are unwilling to tackle the bigger question: if DM is innocent, then why didn't he get in his Yukon and drive away when things went pear-shaped?

I noticed that my comment about repercussions wasn't tackled either, which is a bigger question.
How do we know that DM ( or both) didn't try to leave in the Yukon, if in fact it was the Yukon.?

 

[SnooperDuper]

I noticed that my comment about repercussions wasn't tackled either, which is a bigger question.

<modsnip> I was responding to Juballee's post.

 

[Tamarind]

<modsnip>I was responding to Juballee's post.

<modsnip>
Maybe anything that is posted that makes people think outside of the mainstream story is not easy to answer. Repercussions for trying to escape the scene of a murder are very possible IMO. It also addresses your question about why someone wouldn't just leave the scene HTH TIA

 

[SnooperDuper]

Michelle Mandel on the tough times federal prisoners face:

Inmates must use their own money to purchase personal items such as shampoo, soap, deodorant and over-the-counter medications. But all prescription drugs are free as is all dental, medical and eye care. Prisoners are allowed to bring in $2,500 worth of personal items when they first arrive and have weekly access to a canteen to purchase more.

&#8220;They have wired up PlayStations, everyone&#8217;s got a flat-screen TV and the extra speakers wired in. They&#8217;ve got everything, anything you could want. It&#8217;s absolutely perfect,&#8221; explains Jim. &#8220;It&#8217;s like summer camp.&#8221;

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/11/03/inmates-living-it-up-in-federal-prison-guards-say

Inspired by Joe Warmington's Jailhouse Letters from LM, an article very similar in some ways to ABro's Jailhouse Letters from DM:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/letters-from-luka-magnotta

...though apparently LM's luck has changed recently:

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/11/03/magnotta-sounding-more-lonely-in-prison-pal-says

 

[Juballee]

Ultimately though the phone was only used to find a victim and the incinerator was only used to cremate the victim. The providence of these items doesn't matter; what does is how DM used them and for what purpose.

I noticed that you are unwilling to tackle the bigger question: if DM is innocent, then why didn't he get in his Yukon and drive away when things went pear-shaped?

<modsnip>
So if I must give an answer to this question, again, I would say coercion. It seems like the obvious answer to me, and the one that fits with the all the known pieces so far, in my opinion.

Also, in fairness, we don't know what else the phone or incinerator may have been used for; neither were new when this happened, and I think it would be a stretch to argue that either were bought for this crime, so I doubt that would go towards premeditation. So in that context, yes, their providence would be highly important, in my opinion.

 

[SnooperDuper]

So if I must give an answer to this question, again, I would say coercion. It seems like the obvious answer to me, and the one that fits with the all the known pieces so far, in my opinion.

Isn't DM 4 inches taller than MS? Surely MS could not physically overpower him.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/05/10/tim-bosma-missing-persons_n_3254021.html

Also, in fairness, we don't know what else the phone or incinerator may have been used for; neither were new when this happened, and I think it would be a stretch to argue that either were bought for this crime, so I doubt that would go towards premeditation. So in that context, yes, their providence would be highly important, in my opinion.

If you are planning to kill someone, it's still first degree if you use one of your old kitchen knives vs. hit up Walmart for a new one. It's not whether these items were bought for the crime - it's that they were used for the crime, and both were intended to hide the identity of DM, and of TB. Particularly that last part, the intending to obscure identity bit...it shows they knew what they were doing was wrong. The act of calling from the burner phone, which was "anonymous", shows premeditation.

 

[Tamarind]

Isn't DM 4 inches taller than MS? Surely MS could not physically overpower him.

When someone wields a weapon(s), is assisted by another/others ( who may be taller, heavier built or more used to physically attacking someone), it is hard to determine how someone may feel or react regardless of their height. It's hard to judge a situation without knowing the facts of it IMHO.

Rumour has it that DM was driving TB truck, wouldn't that mean that TB had to have been overpowered by someone other than DM? Someone behind TB maybe? Or someone meeting them?

If you are planning to kill someone, it's still first degree if you use one of your old kitchen knives vs. hit up Walmart for a new one. It's not whether these items were bought for the crime - it's that they were used for the crime, and both were intended to hide the identity of DM, and of TB.

Were they? Was putting the truck on someones mothers driveway, using his property and whatever else he was used for, all done to hide DM's identity, or was it done as a way to redirect blame?

Particularly that last part, the intending to obscure identity bit...it shows they knew what they were doing was wrong. The act of calling from the burner phone, which was "anonymous", shows premeditation.

We don't know who called from the phone or who owned the phone. Did someone dial the number and hand the phone to someone else? Did someone else set up a test drive and tell others where to go? The use of the phone may have a few possibilities. The incinerator seems to have been moved and there was allegedly scorch marks on the ground. So are we suggestinging a fire was made on the ground and then as an afterthought the incinerator came into play? The incinerator part is something I am wanting to hear more about as it is not making sense. IMHO.

 

[Juballee]

Isn't DM 4 inches taller than MS? Surely MS could not physically overpower him.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/05/10/tim-bosma-missing-persons_n_3254021.html



If you are planning to kill someone, it's still first degree if you use one of your old kitchen knives vs. hit up Walmart for a new one. It's not whether these items were bought for the crime - it's that they were used for the crime, and both were intended to hide the identity of DM, and of TB. Particularly that last part, the intending to obscure identity bit...it shows they knew what they were doing was wrong. The act of calling from the burner phone, which was "anonymous", shows premeditation.

Having a superior height is not the only way to subdue or coerce another human being. By that theory, all criminals should be the tallest people and all short people must be innocent. How about weight, can skinnier people ever coerce heavier people into anything? Not all coercion is through physicality, and by no means is it all dependant on body type. That would be the same attitude that would say that woman cannot coerce men, because they are the weaker sex, yet women manage to coerce men into all kinds of things, if history is any judge.

To me it is very short sighted to think that everything was about hiding DM's identity when there are two accused, and the second one actually did try to hid his identity by leaving everything at his friends house and only using his friend's items, the same one who tried to conceal his identity under a hood while the other went completely unguarded. One ran and put up a fight when arrested, trying to toss possible evidence along the way, and the other was arrested peacefully.

The things that make me feel this was a premeditated murder are the burner phone and the incinerator.

Ultimately though the phone was only used to find a victim and the incinerator was only used to cremate the victim. The providence of these items doesn't matter; what does is how DM used them and for what purpose.

So to me, it still may make a difference to say that items like the phone were bought and used exclusively for this crime by DM, when that may not be the case. We still don't know why the phone was bought, but it wouldn't make sense for them to buy it and use it months in advance if they intended for it to be used in a serious crime. If they had gone out and bought a phone that weekend specifically for this crime, then I would be more likely to agree that it showed premeditation. And I think that one of the biggest differences in buying an item specifically for a crime in advance and using the items you may already have in hand is to show whether or not it was premeditated or a spontaneous act.

 

[Sillybilly]

Hey folks ... STOP the snark in this thread. It adds nothing useful to the discussion and turns guests and other members away. This thread is about the Bosma case, not egos.

:tyou:

 

[SnooperDuper]

Having a superior height is not the only way to subdue or coerce another human being. By that theory, all criminals should be the tallest people and all short people must be innocent. How about weight, can skinnier people ever coerce heavier people into anything? Not all coercion is through physicality, and by no means is it all dependant on body type. That would be the same attitude that would say that woman cannot coerce men, because they are the weaker sex, yet women manage to coerce men into all kinds of things, if history is any judge.

To me it is very short sighted to think that everything was about hiding DM's identity when there are two accused, and the second one actually did try to hid his identity by leaving everything at his friends house and only using his friend's items, the same one who tried to conceal his identity under a hood while the other went completely unguarded. One ran and put up a fight when arrested, trying to toss possible evidence along the way, and the other was arrested peacefully.

It just so happened that MS's friend had a murder kit, everything you need to commit a murder and get away with it (burner phone, trailer, incinerator) and DM feels used and taken advantage of because MS used his murder tools?

I also question MS's coercive powers. Sure, MS might have forced DM at knifepoint back into the truck, but once both vehicles were on the highway DM was free to call 911 and catch MS in the act. Why didn't he?

For that matter, once DM had a chance to speak to LE, he didn't. (I suppose he didn't want to be investigated in case those other two murders popped up.)

I also find it telling that DM's personal letters complain about LE and the media - and not at all about MS, the guy that allegedly sent an innocent man into detention.

So to me, it still may make a difference to say that items like the phone were bought and used exclusively for this crime by DM, when that may not be the case. We still don't know why the phone was bought, but it wouldn't make sense for them to buy it and use it months in advance if they intended for it to be used in a serious crime. If they had gone out and bought a phone that weekend specifically for this crime, then I would be more likely to agree that it showed premeditation. And I think that one of the biggest differences in buying an item specifically for a crime in advance and using the items you may already have in hand is to show whether or not it was premeditated or a spontaneous act.

The phone was bought months before and not used until it was used in this crime. That shows premeditation. The phone may have been bought for a non-specific criminal purpose, but using the anonymous phone in the crime shows that the perpetrators did not want to be caught and were thinking ahead. That shows premeditation.

 

[matou]

Speaking of size, I think the bigger man who was selling his truck wasn't killed since he would have been too large for the incinerator, even if he went in pieces. The rural setting of Ancaster with Tim's average size was perfect for a planned murder. JMO

 

[Tamarind]

Speaking of size, I think the bigger man who was selling his truck wasn't killed since he would have been too large for the incinerator, even if he went in pieces. The rural setting of Ancaster with Tim's average size was perfect for a planned murder. JMO

The bigger they are the harder they fall, so they say. I don't think size had anything to do with anything. If someone was planning to kill someone for a truck as is the apparent train of thought, I think the truck would have been the key, not the owner. If it was the owner who was the target and not the truck, maybe it was the wrong owner. If the test drives were simply that, test drives, then who can say what occurred on the Bosma test drive. For all we know, a mechanic and another friend or two came by to check it out. All MOO

If the rural setting of Ancaster was perfect for a murder, I wonder why there was a test drive in Etobicoke !

 

[Tamarind]

It just so happened that MS's friend had a murder kit, everything you need to commit a murder and get away with it (burner phone, trailer, incinerator) and DM feels used and taken advantage of because MS used his murder tools? I also question MS's coercive powers. Sure, MS might have forced DM at knifepoint back into the truck, but once both vehicles were on the highway DM was free to call 911 and catch MS in the act. Why didn't he?

A murder kit? Does that mean that anyone with a farm, trailer, incinerator and a phone are all potential murderers?
I think someone who has a history of the macabre or who is used to killing/maiming/beating/threatening or using people are more likely to know how to utilize more normal equipment to their advantage JMO. Maybe DM didn't call 911 for the same reason TB didn't ? Maybe his phone was taken or he had a gun or a knife to his back, or maybe he was surrounded by a group of t hugs. We don't know. I think weapons determine someones coercive powers sometimes.

For that matter, once DM had a chance to speak to LE, he didn't. (I suppose he didn't want to be investigated in case those other two murders popped up.)

Or maybe he has been threatened and knows that whoever is threatening him does not care about LE. I highly doubt that some people who live outside of the laws really care about LE. They are likely to want to take care of things themselves and likely have told DM same. All MOO and just an opinion.

I also find it telling that DM's personal letters complain about LE and the media - and not at all about MS, the guy that allegedly sent an innocent man into detention.

Maybe he feels if LE had done their job with due diligence he wouldn't be in jail. JMO. Maybe he isn't sure about MS.

The phone was bought months before and not used until it was used in this crime. That shows premeditation. The phone may have been bought for a non-specific criminal purpose, but using the anonymous phone in the crime shows that the perpetrators did not want to be caught and were thinking ahead. That shows premeditation.

I can't see how a phone would have been bought three months prior to an alleged premeditated crime. I wonder if phone records will be shown at trial. I think a payphone would have made more sense or make a call from an institution. I don't see premeditation at all as far as the phone is concerned. JMO

 

[Juballee]

The phone was bought months before and not used until it was used in this crime. That shows premeditation. The phone may have been bought for a non-specific criminal purpose, but using the anonymous phone in the crime shows that the perpetrators did not want to be caught and were thinking ahead. That shows premeditation.

This is the first that I have heard that the phone was not used in the time that it was bought months before, do you have any MSM links to that new piece of information? The last I had heard the phone was alledged to belong to DM or MS because it was used to make calls in Etobicoke in the months prior to the crime.

 

[Juballee]

I can't see how a phone would have been bought three months prior to an alleged premeditated crime. I wonder if phone records will be shown at trial. I think a payphone would have made more sense or make a call from an institution. I don't see premeditation at all as far as the phone is concerned. JMO

I wonder if the phone was ever found itself.

 

[Tamarind]

I wonder if the phone was ever found itself.

Yes I would like to know if this alleged burner phone was ever found. I guess they can find out details about a burner phone and its calls, but it would be interesting to know where it is now. I would want it powered up to check it for dates, number etc, if I was on the jury.

I always found it interesting that the TB phone was found so quickly too. MOO