General Discussion and Theories

[Claroon]

So was scanning this discussion on education, etc. and wanted to mention Humber
College also has a culinary program.


Another thing I have speculated on: I had discovered an online profile of a person who resembles DM and describes himself as a computer tech, speaks 3 different languages almost fluently (did they say DM can as well, or just WM?) and says he graduated in 2003 and two of his interests include photography and red hair. ---the point being, enough to make me speculate this profile might be one of DM's. This person mentioned his photo was taken in Orlando, FL 2006.

When sleuthing around DM and Florida, I came across two chefs in Orlando with the same last name as MS. I speculate, perhaps DM went to Orlando to work under these chefs for a time, and if so, this might have been how he became connected to MS.

 

[Blomquist]

So was scanning this discussion on education, etc. and wanted to mention Humber
College also has a culinary program.


Another thing I have speculated on: I had discovered an online profile of a person who resembles DM and describes himself as a computer tech, speaks 3 different languages almost fluently (did they say DM can as well, or just WM?) and says he graduated in 2003 and two of his interests include photography and red hair. ---the point being, enough to make me speculate this profile might be one of DM's. This person mentioned his photo was taken in Orlando, FL 2006.

When sleuthing around DM and Florida, I came across two chefs in Orlando with the same last name as MS. I speculate, perhaps DM went to Orlando to work under these chefs for a time, and if so, this might have been how he became connected to MS.

Could well be ... IMO Orlando could have been a good meeting place for new friends...especially new friends who came from the same area of Canada !!!

 

[Eldee]

Aren't high school records public information? Maybe not test scores, but the Grade 12 graduation diplomas. How does a university or college confirm graduation and averages?

 

[skatergirl]

Aren't high school records public information? Maybe not test scores, but the Grade 12 graduation diplomas. How does a university or college confirm graduation and averages?

Not sure about now, but when I attended college, I had to supply the admissions department with my original high school transcript, which they took a photocopy of, to keep in my student file. Times may have changed since then, and it's possible for it to be done electronically MOO

There is some information at these links
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/document/curricul/osr/osr.html#4
http://www.ontariocolleges.ca/ontcol/home/apply/transcripts--grades.html

 

[SnooperDuper]

For both college and university you apply through OCAS. 20 years ago when I applied I got offers for early admission, where I could abandon my last semester of school and immediately attend uni instead for the Winter semester...despite not having achieved my high school diploma first...I still had the required credits for the program I applied to.

So I assume a high school diploma is not always strictly required.

 

[Carli]

There are many "newbies" here and I would just like to point out that NEW threads can be started by anyone! For example, one can start a thread stating "DM is innocent and is being framed"...

moo

I'm a newbie and will appreciate your clarification. This thread, as I understand from the title, is for general discussion and theories which, imo, would include the consideration of various possibilities and/or motivations for this terrible crime, would it not, including the idea that others may have been involved? There is also a thread titled "Dellen Millard, Innocent Dupe - Alternative Theories", so hopefully you can help me understand why it's necessary to start a third thread to examine the possible innocence of the accused. Thanks.

 

[Carli]

Much has been made about DM's "lack of co-operation" with police investigators, on these pages, imo, with the suggestion that his unwillingness to talk implies his guilt, imo. There is an informative link of the subject entiteld "Being Charged in Canada: What to Do" at http://canadian-lawyers.ca/Legal-Help-and-Resources/Being-Charged-in-Canada-What-To-Do.html written by Ralph B Steinberg, who is certified by the Law Society of Upper Canada as a specialist in criminal law.

"All persons in Canada have the Right to Silence - that is, the right to choose whether to speak or not to speak to agents of the state. The right is engaged upon detention, but it is not absolute. Questioning of people in Canada before or after arrest is still permitted. Statements from accused persons form an important part of any police investigation, and therefore persons being investigated for or charged with a criminal offence in Canada are best advised to remain silent. Although statements can be volunteered, it is usually against the interest of an accused person to do so, especially while evidence is still being gathered during the investigation.

Police are allowed to use all sorts of techniques during the investigation to encourage the person charged to talk about the circumstances of the alleged criminal offence. Accused persons in Canada must be resolute and steadfast in responding to continued questioning by repeatedly saying they wish to exercise their right to silence. Doing so may prove difficult for a variety of reasons, such as the natural desire to respond to suggestions of wrongdoing. Nevertheless, speaking to police during the investigation of the alleged offence at the least involves the disadvantage of giving the prosecution advance notice of your defence, and, more importantly, can provide evidence that will be used against you at your criminal trial."

IMO it does not follow that exercising one's constitutional right to remain silent, when being interrogated by police, implies either the guilt or innocence of the accused. MOO.

 

[Archangel7]

Much has been made about DM's "lack of co-operation" with police investigators, on these pages, imo, with the suggestion that his unwillingness to talk implies his guilt, imo. There is an informative link of the subject entiteld "Being Charged in Canada: What to Do" at http://canadian-lawyers.ca/Legal-Help-and-Resources/Being-Charged-in-Canada-What-To-Do.html written by Ralph B Steinberg, who is certified by the Law Society of Upper Canada as a specialist in criminal law.

"All persons in Canada have the Right to Silence - that is, the right to choose whether to speak or not to speak to agents of the state. The right is engaged upon detention, but it is not absolute. Questioning of people in Canada before or after arrest is still permitted. Statements from accused persons form an important part of any police investigation, and therefore persons being investigated for or charged with a criminal offence in Canada are best advised to remain silent. Although statements can be volunteered, it is usually against the interest of an accused person to do so, especially while evidence is still being gathered during the investigation.

Police are allowed to use all sorts of techniques during the investigation to encourage the person charged to talk about the circumstances of the alleged criminal offence. Accused persons in Canada must be resolute and steadfast in responding to continued questioning by repeatedly saying they wish to exercise their right to silence. Doing so may prove difficult for a variety of reasons, such as the natural desire to respond to suggestions of wrongdoing. Nevertheless, speaking to police during the investigation of the alleged offence at the least involves the disadvantage of giving the prosecution advance notice of your defence, and, more importantly, can provide evidence that will be used against you at your criminal trial."

IMO it does not follow that exercising one's constitutional right to remain silent, when being interrogated by police, implies either the guilt or innocence of the accused. MOO.

However, DP isn't bound to do that, he is mandated to aggressively defend his client.
Is DM innocent and doesn't want to wave his right and make a statement for fear of it being taken out of context? Tell his lawyer and let him talk to the Crown attorney. If he's innocent the Crown would realize it, and drop the charge.

The problem is likely that DM is not that innocent and his only hope is to seat a jury. He can always wait and "look" at the jury and then plea after evaluating his chance of fooling that jury.
moo

 

[Sillybilly]

Much has been made about DM's "lack of co-operation" with police investigators, on these pages, imo, with the suggestion that his unwillingness to talk implies his guilt, imo ...

<snip>


IMO it does not follow that exercising one's constitutional right to remain silent, when being interrogated by police, implies either the guilt or innocence of the accused. MOO.

<rsbm>

You are absolutely right that it is his constitutional right. We, the "court of public opinion" however, also have a right to interpret that position, discuss it, and express our opinions about it. The good news is that at trial, in the judge's instructions to the jury, the judge will instruct the jurors they are not to infer anything wrt the defendant's silence or not having taken the stand in his own defence.

 

[Blomquist]

A defendant IMO should never talk to the Crown Prosecutor. The CP is there to win the case JMO.

Also IMO anyones hope is to request a jury.... especially if they have half a clue about the justice system... JMO

IMO If I were innocent and charged wrongfully in a murder I would let them carry on until the trial.... get the acquittal and sue them for all its worth. After all it is their job to be diligent... I would even host yet another memorial fund for the stricken family with the proceeds of my lawsuit. LE's failure to charge the right guy falls on them...they are mandated to find the actual murderer (but don't always succeed)...MOO

 

[Carli]

However, DP isn't bound to do that, he is mandated to aggressively defend his client.
Is DM innocent and doesn't want to wave his right and make a statement for fear of it being taken out of context? Tell his lawyer and let him talk to the Crown attorney. If he's innocent the Crown would realize it, and drop the charge.

The problem is likely that DM is not that innocent and his only hope is to seat a jury. He can always wait and "look" at the jury and then plea after evaluating his chance of fooling that jury.
moo

Respectfully, it is not up to the Crown to decide on the guilt or innocence of an accused - only to determine if there is sufficient evidence to assure the likelihood of a conviction and/or if it is in the public interest to proceed. At this early point, the Crown could drop some charges but is far more likely, IMO, to await Discovery/Preliminary hearing in which all of the prosecutorial evidence against the accused is available. (That stage has not yet been reached in this case, as we know.)

See Para 3 in http://www.gov.mb.ca/justice/prosecutions/stepbystep.html (This is a Manitoba site but this aspect of Canadian law does not differ from that of other provinces.)

Note also Para 7. When the Preliminary Hearing stage is complete, the Crown could determine then after reviewing all the prosecutor's evidence that it is insufficient to proceed to trial and only then order that the accused be released from custody.

Again, there is no possibility in Canadian law, imo, that would permit a Defense Lawyer to get together privately with the Crown Attorney to effect the dropping of criminal charges and the release of a prisoner. IMO the possible abuses of such an arrangement should be self evident. Most importantly, an accused of a criminal act has a right to be tried by a jury of peers who will determine guilt or innocence, based on the evidence available as presented. Both MHO and, well, the law.

 

[Carli]

<rsbm>

You are absolutely right that it is his constitutional right. We, the "court of public opinion" however, also have a right to interpret that position, discuss it, and express our opinions about it. The good news is that at trial, in the judge's instructions to the jury, the judge will instruct the jurors they are not to infer anything wrt the defendant's silence or not having taken the stand in his own defence.

Am I right in understanding, then, that you think that the right to remain silent is an aspect of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms that should be changed?

If that is your view, you're certainly not alone. See R. v. Singh (163 C.R.R. (2d) 280), the police continued to aggressively question an accused, even after he invoked his right to silence 18 times, telling him each time that his claim to silence made no difference. The evidence the police obtained was admissible after the Canadian Supreme Court ruled that this police behaviour didn't violate the prisoner's right to silence.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2007/11/01/scoc-singh.html

Some rights, it appears are hard won and easily lost, imo, even without the use of waterboards. MOO.

 

[Sillybilly]

Am I right in understanding, then, that you think that the right to remain silent is an aspect of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms that should be changed?

No, not at all, and I don't know how you got that out of what I said.

Let's say I have a right to paint my house purple .. my house, my paint, my choice to exercise that right. My neighbours also have a right to think that my choice of purple paint is just fine or absolutely ridiculous.

Nothing needs to change in the court of public opinion and nothing needs to change in our legal system which will ensure that those rights are protected.

 

[expat cdn]

Aren't high school records public information? Maybe not test scores, but the Grade 12 graduation diplomas. How does a university or college confirm graduation and averages?

Son applied to university last year, his school provided confirmation of his marks and that he had completed high school. I bet DM went to school in France for a while. Looks like he has friends and family there, so would make complete sense for him to attend school there.

 

[Blomquist]

No, not at all, and I don't know how you got that out of what I said.

Let's say I have a right to paint my house purple .. my house, my paint, my choice to exercise that right. My neighbours also have a right to think that my choice of purple paint is just fine or absolutely ridiculous.

Nothing needs to change in the court of public opinion and nothing needs to change in our legal system which will ensure that those rights are protected.

IMO I believe a lot needs to change in the justice system...I have received the same conclusion from lawyer friends of mine. Family Law courts for one...are way out of control IMO and the Criminal Courts are right up there too. IMO. I believe there is 'public opinion' not so much a court than a general way of thinking that has based itself firmly at the door of MSM. This is JMO of course....

With all the new legislation's and rights infringements coming along daily IMO it won't be too long before many will get a taste of being wrongfully charged. JMO

 

[Archangel7]

Respectfully, it is not up to the Crown to decide on the guilt or innocence of an accused - only to determine if there is sufficient evidence to assure the likelihood of a conviction and/or if it is in the public interest to proceed. At this early point, the Crown could drop some charges but is far more likely, IMO, to await Discovery/Preliminary hearing in which all of the prosecutorial evidence against the accused is available. (That stage has not yet been reached in this case, as we know.)

See Para 3 in http://www.gov.mb.ca/justice/prosecutions/stepbystep.html (This is a Manitoba site but this aspect of Canadian law does not differ from that of other provinces.)

Note also Para 7. When the Preliminary Hearing stage is complete, the Crown could determine then after reviewing all the prosecutor's evidence that it is insufficient to proceed to trial and only then order that the accused be released from custody.

Again, there is no possibility in Canadian law, imo, that would permit a Defense Lawyer to get together privately with the Crown Attorney to effect the dropping of criminal charges and the release of a prisoner. IMO the possible abuses of such an arrangement should be self evident. Most importantly, an accused of a criminal act has a right to be tried by a jury of peers who will determine guilt or innocence, based on the evidence available as presented. Both MHO and, well, the law.

The crown decides whether to lay charges or not. When the police submit the Report to Crown Council it would be apparent if DM was wrongfully charged. There is no way if, DM is innocent and told DP, and he told Crown counsel that DM was totally un involved and they had the wrong man, the Crown would proceed.

There was a case of an American found with a gun boarding plane in London, ON and the crown decided not to prosecute and dropped charges. Just to show how the Crown can choose to lay or not lay criminal charges at their discretion. http://www.am980.ca/news/local/story.aspx?ID=1915594

The bottom line is if DM was innocent and proved it to DP, DP could go to the Crown attorney and say hey look, and the Crown could say yep, based on the police report and what you say, shows we have the wrong man.

Why do you believe the Crown would knowingly prosecute a man they know to be innocent if they were shown him to be innocent?

Only case like that was political and was Ian Thompson.

 

[expat cdn]

Yes. We know all about this. Just look up Karla Homolka.

moo

Re: her deal with the crown?

 

[Pink Panther]

Re: her deal with the crown?

You don't think the lawyers discussed before dealing?

 

[expat cdn]

You don't think the lawyers discussed before dealing?

yes, of course they do. I was replying to another post. (and trying to provide some proof)

 

[Pink Panther]

yes, of course they do. I was replying to another post. (and trying to provide some proof)

Sorry. You quoted my post so I felt compelled to respond.

: )