Laura Babcock Murder Trial 12.08.17 - Charge to the Jury - Day 2

[Jasper52]

seems like such long pauses between tweets...

Maybe Justice Code should just write his instructions in tweet format...would take much less time to present

Haha, was just thinking, this is like watching paint dry !!!

 

[Kamille]

In another part of the testimony, Code is telling the jury that one of Babcock's friends had said she wanted to start her own escort agency, and that she was also interested in travelling to Disney, or Las Vegas.
by Adam Carter 3:36 PM

While code is running through this recap of evidence, Millard and Smich are both sitting at different tables, looking at the charge being displayed on screens, and typing on laptops. Neither are really showing any emotion. Babcock's parents are here in the front row, sitting through this, as they have been the whole trial. Other than that, there aren't many people here -- only a couple of spectators.
by Adam Carter 3:39 PM

We're now taking the afternoon recess.
by Adam Carter 3:40 PM

 

[Nosey Parker]

Poor Justice Code. First the jury declined to spend the weekend listening to him, and now the gallery has dropped down to two. :tears:

 

[andreww]

Thank you for your response. I realize that my wording does not meet the test of proof beyond reasonable doubt. I should have worded it much better than I did. [emoji4]

This might be better (or perhaps not): I have no frivolous, speculative, non-evidence based doubt that MS is guilty of M1 based upon the totality of the evidence presented in this trial.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm going to disagree with that. I just think that if there was a plan or prior knowledge on Smich's part, the texts between him and Millard simply don't make sense. First, DM texts Smich to be out of sight when he gets home. You can interpret that in several different ways. Not long after, Smich is texting Millard for food money. To me that doesn't make sense at all. If he indeed knew what was happening upstairs, why would he send that text? There is no contact between their phones for the next few hours when the crown alleges the crime was being committed. Might make sense but Smich then texts Millard just after midnight as when Smich texts Millard asking if he's around. Doesn't make sense if they were working together. On the 4th Millard is gone before 9:00AM without Smich. Smich sleeps till about 3:00PM. Again, it doesn't make sense if they were acting together.

Yes, Smich knew about the incinerator and its purpose, but I think that he may have been under the impression that it was for future missions (TB). I think he became aware of LBs murder at some point that night. I think he was all in on disposing of the body. But I think this was all Millard's plan.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

as an idea: https://shop.alivingtribute.org/products/plant-a-tree-canada

Oh, what a perfect idea ... thank you so very much for thinking of this. Would love to contribute.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

My thoughts exactly. The evidence against MS are thin. Rap, admission and incinerator photos are not enough IMO. AATF it is, as it's all after the fact.

There is this one SMS from DM to MS about "No go" because the incinerator is not ready. That's probably the main one that points to MS having prior knowledge and participating in planning. But then, it's not a statistical exercise. One evidence should be enough. Can it even be admitted against MS?

I would be grateful if you would please explain why you think that the rap and timing of the rap, admissions and photos are “thin” evidence? What about all the texts between MS and DM about the incinerator, etc.? Do these not show planning/knowledge shared between the two of them?

To me, the totality of all the evidence combined is extremely strong evidence. Would love to hear an explanation as to how it is perceived to be “thin” or weak. Thank you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Kamille]

I'm going to disagree with that. I just think that if there was a plan or prior knowledge on Smich's part, the texts between him and Millard simply don't make sense. First, DM texts Smich to be out of sight when he gets home. You can interpret that in several different ways. Not long after, Smich is texting Millard for food money. To me that doesn't make sense at all. If he indeed knew what was happening upstairs, why would he send that text? There is no contact between their phones for the next few hours when the crown alleges the crime was being committed. Might make sense but Smich then texts Millard just after midnight as when Smich texts Millard asking if he's around. Doesn't make sense if they were working together. On the 4th Millard is gone before 9:00AM without Smich. Smich sleeps till about 3:00PM. Again, it doesn't make sense if they were acting together.

Yes, Smich knew about the incinerator and its purpose, but I think that he may have been under the impression that it was for future missions (TB). I think he became aware of LBs murder at some point that night. I think he was all in on disposing of the body. But I think this was all Millard's plan.

As much as I'd like to see MS convicted for this, just for his likely knowledge that murder and mayhem were in their future and he probably didn't care who became a victim, I don't want it to be based on assumptions because of a murder that he was definitely in on that happened almost a year later. IOW, I don't want to see him granted a new trial, or walking altogether eventually on this one, by winning on appeal.

I would still like for those who believe that the circumstantial evidence against him in this murder only is obvious, to post up their version of the evidence that stands against him for M1.

MOO

 

[andreww]

I would be grateful if you would please explain why you think that the rap and timing of the rap, admissions and photos are “thin” evidence? What about all the texts between MS and DM about the incinerator, etc.? Do these not show planning/knowledge shared between the two of them?

To me, the totality of all the evidence combined is extremely strong evidence. Would love to hear an explanation as to how it is perceived to be “thin” or weak. Thank you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The rap never talks about killing her. He see's her outside the home, then he see's her dead. The admission? Could have been bravado or Smich taking more credit than he was actually due. For instance, if a buddy shows up army door with a car that he just stole, and we go out for a night on the town, I might later brag that "WE stole a car and went out on the town". You are right that when looking at the totality of the evidence it is a key piece, but I don't think that the rest of the evidence is damning enough to make that connection.

 

[Kamille]

I would be grateful if you would please explain why you think that the rap and timing of the rap, admissions and photos are “thin” evidence? What about all the texts between MS and DM about the incinerator, etc.? Do these not show planning/knowledge shared between the two of them?

To me, the totality of all the evidence combined is extremely strong evidence. Would love to hear an explanation as to how it is perceived to be “thin” or weak. Thank you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

IMO, the incinerator evidence is definitely evidence that DM, at least, had plans to incinerate something other than garbage, and that MS was aware that what he planned to incinerate involved flesh and bone. And that MS was okay with this and was helping him to achieve that goal. Does this constitute aiding and abetting in the murder of LB? I guess since the charge is laid, the jury can infer that?

I don't see any evidence that MS was aware that DM was planning to murder and incinerate LB in particular and I wonder if the jury will see it that way. Or do they have to?

Everything else is definitely evidence of his knowledge that LB was murdered and that he actively helped to dispose of her body and cover it up.

MOO

 

[JuneBug67]

I would be grateful if you would please explain why you think that the rap and timing of the rap, admissions and photos are “thin” evidence? What about all the texts between MS and DM about the incinerator, etc.? Do these not show planning/knowledge shared between the two of them?

To me, the totality of all the evidence combined is extremely strong evidence. Would love to hear an explanation as to how it is perceived to be “thin” or weak. Thank you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If you don't believe there is sufficient evidence of a plan to kill Laura specifically, at least not one MS was in on, then after the fact evidence doesn't matter to a murder charge. It's thin in the sense that it says little about his knowledge and intent beforehand, which is critical to a conviction for murder.

 

[andreww]

As much as I'd like to see MS convicted for this, just for his likely knowledge that murder and mayhem were in their future and he probably didn't care who became a victim, I don't want it to be based on assumptions because of a murder that he was definitely in on that happened almost a year later. IOW, I don't want to see him granted a new trial, or walking altogether eventually on this one, by winning on appeal.

I would still like for those who believe that the circumstantial evidence against him in this murder only is obvious, to post up their version of the evidence that stands against him for M1.

MOO

Hey, I agree. I think he might have known about it, but the evidence just isn't there. After the fact he talks about "that girl out back", so he wasn't careful about his texts, but if we had one mention of Laura, a girl, or a murder before the crime, I'd be all in for M1. You just can't convict him based on what has been presented.

That said, the jury can't consider the TB murder, so in their minds the fact that Smich was all in on the incinerator project might be evidence enough that he was in on the plan. I actually think Dungey blew it and should have had his client testify that he knew nothing and only helped Millard dispose of the body. Not sure that he could explain that the Eliminator was destined for the TB murder without causing a mistrial though?

 

[Kamille]

We're back in session, just waiting on the jury.
by Adam Carter 4:11 PM

Jury is back in, we're underway again.
by Adam Carter 4:13 PM


Code asks the jury if they "have a bit more stamina left in them," they laugh. We're on page 163, Code says we're going to page 186 today. Again, this is a 300-page charge, so we're just over halfway.
by Adam Carter 4:14 PM

Code is recapping the evidence of Megan Orr. Orr testified that Babcock was "using cocaine daily," and was doing escort work at this time.
by Adam Carter 4:16 PM

 

[andreww]

IMO, the incinerator evidence is definitely evidence that DM, at least, had plans to incinerate something other than garbage, and that MS was aware that what he planned to incinerate involved flesh and bone. And that MS was okay with this and was helping him to achieve that goal. Does this constitute aiding and abetting in the murder of LB? I guess since the charge is laid, the jury can infer that?

I don't see any evidence that MS was aware that DM was planning to murder and incinerate LB in particular and I wonder if the jury will see it that way. Or do they have to?

Everything else is definitely evidence of his knowledge that LB was murdered and that he actively helped to dispose of her body and cover it up.

MOO

It is tricky isn't it? I think Smich is handcuffed that he can't talk about the TB crime. I wonder if Dungey tried to argue those texts out?

 

[Nosey Parker]

This is where I stand:

1. Laura is deceased. The Crown's evidence and my own, very long, life experience, has convinced me of that
2. DM is guilty of M1. The evidence, albeit it mostly circumstantial, has convinced me of that.
3. MS is not guilty (and it sticks in my craw to say that). The Crown just couldn't collect enough evidence to show that he had prior knowledge. IMO. I wish he could be found guilty of assisting in the disposal of a body, just as I wish CN could be charged with perjury and aiding and abetting.

This is all my opinion only and not intended to inflame any subsequent debate.

 

[andreww]

This is where I stand:

1. Laura is deceased. The Crown's evidence and my own, very long, life experience, has convinced me of that
2. DM is guilty of M1. The evidence, albeit it mostly circumstantial, has convinced me of that.
3. MS is not guilty (and it sticks in my craw to say that). The Crown just couldn't collect enough evidence to show that he had prior knowledge. IMO. I wish he could be found guilty of assisting in the disposal of a body, just as I wish CN could be charged with perjury and aiding and abetting.

This is all my opinion only and not intended to inflame any subsequent debate.

Its frustrating that if maybe one more text could have been recovered it could have been a nail in the coffin of Smich. Maybe CN for that matter too.

 

[CJPRINCESS]

This is where I stand:

1. Laura is deceased. The Crown's evidence and my own, very long, life experience, has convinced me of that
2. DM is guilty of M1. The evidence, albeit it mostly circumstantial, has convinced me of that.
3. MS is not guilty (and it sticks in my craw to say that). The Crown just couldn't collect enough evidence to show that he had prior knowledge. IMO. I wish he could be found guilty of assisting in the disposal of a body, just as I wish CN could be charged with perjury and aiding and abetting.

This is all my opinion only and not intended to inflame any subsequent debate.

Wouldn’t that make MS guilty of manslaugher at the least going by your thoughts? Or did I not follow the judges charges properly?

 

[andreww]

Wouldn’t that make MS guilty of manslaugher at the least going by your thoughts? Or did I not follow the judges charges properly?

Not the way I understood the charge. However the judge did not specify if the "aid" came before or after the crime, so I guess technically it could?

 

[don_quixote]

I would be grateful if you would please explain why you think that the rap and timing of the rap, admissions and photos are “thin” evidence? What about all the texts between MS and DM about the incinerator, etc.? Do these not show planning/knowledge shared between the two of them?

To me, the totality of all the evidence combined is extremely strong evidence. Would love to hear an explanation as to how it is perceived to be “thin” or weak. Thank you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No. They do not show planning or prior knowledge because all these evidence that you listed are post-murder (if we agree that she was murdered on the night of July 3rd). He could have taken pictures with her body on 5th and it still doesn't mean that he killed her, and/or planned the murder with DM.

These are strong evidence. But evidence of what? That he benefited from proceeds of the crime and that helped to dispose of the body?

There are some messages that are in line with planning, but do they give enough confidence to convict him of M1? I'm sincerely not sure.

The reality is that there are very few things that link him to all this prior to the murder of LB. That's why I call it thin. Or, may be, thick at the wrong end. Also, there is this question about planning a murder and the murder that I do not know the answer to.

I despise the guy but if he is found not guilty of the murder, I'll understand why the jury decided so.

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

Thank you all for your responses. I appreciate the differing perspectives. Lightbulbs are being lit up in my brain.

Maybe I am misunderstanding a few things.

In my mind, so many of the texts between DM and MS allude to early collusion indicating planning deliberate murder(s), beginning with the texts that said words to the effect of being ruthless enough to take things to a new level. From that point forward I believe it was their combined plan to murder and/or dispose of bodies as a thrill and/or business venture. Therefore, in my mind, if this was the case, is that not enough for a 1st degree murder conviction, or does that sort of planning have to be specifically meant for a specific individual, for example Laura specifically? Isn’t it enough that they were planning to kill and dispose of a human being, regardless of who that was?

Hope I am making some sort of sense here.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[don_quixote]

I would be grateful if you would please explain why you think that the rap and timing of the rap, admissions and photos are “thin” evidence? What about all the texts between MS and DM about the incinerator, etc.? Do these not show planning/knowledge shared between the two of them?

To me, the totality of all the evidence combined is extremely strong evidence. Would love to hear an explanation as to how it is perceived to be “thin” or weak. Thank you.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Andreww and JuneBug explain this much better than I ever could