Long Easter Weekend Thread (Apr. 5, 6, 7, 8, & 9, 2012)

[Alice Ramnit]

I don't know if this has any significance or not, but found it odd that MR would have two pairs of identical shorts. Or, they look identical to me, at least. One that he allegedly gave TLM to wear home following the crime and seized by LE when they raided her house on May 19:

http://www.am980.ca/Other/McClintic.pdf (#56 and #57)

and another pair found in his car a few hours before:

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/05/19599961.html (#53)
JMO

Maybe, in collusion, she gave them back for laundering. I did not see a washing machine in her home.

 

[Alethea Dice]

I believe that the Crown accepts TLM's testimony and has presented it as evidence against MR. Therefore, the Crown also accepts TLM's testimony that she committed the murder is true.

Given that, the Crown must prove that MR had the intent to commit an unlawful action that would result in the death of VS. The charges of either kidnapping or sexual assault would qualify as such unlawful acts.

IMO if MR is convicted on either kidnapping or sexual assault, he will be found guilty of murder as well.

If he is found not guilty on those two charges, he would be found not guilty of the third charge of murder.

Thus far, beyond TLM's direct testimony, there is very little evidence to prove MR kidnapped or sexually assaulted VS............but that could change with one single piece of new evidence............JMO

Sorry JP.........it seems I repeated what you already posted...........

My impression is that the Crown does not accept her testimony that she committed the murder. Hence why they asked her, a few times, if she wanted to change it and why they wanted her original confession admitted as evidence. JMO

 

[Ardy]

What I would like to know is why they haven't arrested BA for drug trafficking? It's illegal to sell personal scripts, guess they exchanged that for testimony that we haven't heard yet? Apparently CM had her own personal scripts as well. Wonder if MR was giving furniture pieces to them for CM's scripts? I find it bizarre to just meet TLM and than give them tables, chairs, lamps etc...maybe a chair ot two but all that furniture? Maybe MR knew his mother would feel bad for them and used that as an excuse to do his exchange. Lots of drug dealing and drug activity in this scenerio. Makes me wonder what else is going on, usually when there's drugs, there's trouble and people with lots of it. Oxycontin is big business apparently.

I doubt LE can charge someone for admitting they sold drugs in the past, but I think we can be assured that the local drug dealers whose names were discovered are being closely watched for illegal activity in the future.

There have been some drug busts in the past few years.

I also wonder if LE is finding an unusual number of oxy prescriptions issued by the same doctor(s).

 

[Oldsoul2]

My impression is that the Crown does not accept her testimony that she committed the murder. Hence why they asked her, a few times, if she wanted to change it and why they wanted her original confession admitted as evidence. JMO

I totally agree, IMO her first confession was the truth no doubt in my mind. I think she only went back on it because she didn't want to testify against him for whatever reason.

 

[Alethea Dice]

Back to the condoms. What kind of man keeps them in his car? I am wondering if MR ever picked up sex trade workers or traded drugs for sex etc.
I would think guys, the "playah" kind, would keep one or two in their wallet. Not in the car.

Re: Money in a plastic bag
Rut roh?
People who work for a living usually get paid by cheque or direct deposit. They also usually don't cash those cheques for large sums of money or withdraw large amounts. Most people also keep money in their wallet.

There's no doubt in my mind MR was a small time drug dealer.

MR's past fascinates me.

There are a couple of predator/sex offender books by Aanna Salter that were recommended to me. Thought I would pass that on to others here.
I found two of them at my local library.

Happy Easter weekend everybody. May we take a moment on Sunday to remember our angel Tori who has brought us all together to stand strong behind her family with justice as our common goal.

Just a little health lesson for those who may have sons growing up, guys "in the know" don't carry condoms in their wallets. Most men carry their wallets in their pockets and the friction from walking, as well as the friction from opening and closing their wallets, creates tiny holes in the condom. Not very safe.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/004001.htm

My thoughts on the money and the note - they go together. Someone gave him a lot of money to buy back "something" and pay for the Oxy's. It seems to me that MR is more of a drug "buyer" than a "seller". JMO

 

[Ardy]

My impression is that the Crown does not accept her testimony that she committed the murder. Hence why they asked her, a few times, if she wanted to change it and why they wanted her original confession admitted as evidence. JMO

Accepting your impression, would it be the Crown's contention that TLM lied in part of her testimony but told the truth in other parts?

IMO that would be very dangerous ground for the Crown.

That would risk having the jury dismiss all of TLM's testimony.

No doubt in my mind, that TLM changing her story at that late date, caused a lot of problems for the Crown.

 

[antiquegirl]

What I would like to know is why they haven't arrested BA for drug trafficking? It's illegal to sell personal scripts, guess they exchanged that for testimony that we haven't heard yet?

(RSBM)

We have discussed this before. I wrote that in MOO, LE can't arrest someone without proof for a crime that occurred weeks/months before. (Well, they could, but good luck getting the charges to stick in court without evidence.) Lots of people confess to crimes, but if there's nothing to back up that confession, the charges would get thrown out. I'm not saying that BA lied, not at all, only that LE had no basis on which to get a conviction for drug trafficking. The Percs MR allegedly bought from her came in a baggie - nothing to identify her with. I also don't remember those drugs ever having been found, but that's neither here nor there.

As for testifying, they didn't have to exchange anything for testimony. They might have made empty threats to get her to confess to selling those drugs, but all they had to do was serve her with a subpoena after that to get her on the stand. It is illegal to ignore a subpoena and I'm sure BA would not want to have that charge against her, especially considering what she had already confessed.

I also wrote that while she got off on this charge, I have a strong suspicion that LE would be keeping a close eye on her in the future.

JMO

ETA: Sorry, Ardy, for duplicating. I was typing my post before I saw your similar reply.

 

[robynhood]

.....just catching up with posts and read Mystic post ...think it was #335 ...IMO only I TOTALLY agree.and think it is an excellent POST !...I personally agree as it seems very logical.......that he was obviously involved as they do have videos ( defense has admitted it too ).......HOWEVER ........ I do see the need for some more evidence about MR and what really occurred way back in Apr. 2009..as the charges are laid and OUR JUSTICE system again requires more evidence to sort this mess out properly to convict and sentence totally ACCORDINGLY so Tori gets JUSTICE ! .. ...I like dilberts post too and agree ...it is heart wrenching what occured and PRAY such a brutal murder never occurs again....Poor Tori her final hours were a nightmare! ....I would like to see a a HIGH alert for JUVENILE OFFENDERS IN ONT who especially show signs of violence .....PLUS ....IMO I wish they would get stiffer penalties in place for people who Warm CHILDREN& Teens in such a VIOLENT manner ....I believe they should never be back in society ....again my OPINION ....PLease Keep ONTARIO safe for our children ...a concerned MOm who has worked with kids that have severe deviant behaviour issues !....robynhood...thanks I felt a need to POST ...Rip Tori a very warm support to Tori's Family and friends....must be a very hard weekend for them all !

 

[AbbeyR]

I hope this works! Interesting legal opinion.

http://jmortonmusings.blogspot.com/2012/04/tori-stafford-trial-if-michael-rafferty.html?m=0

I may need some advice on how to link articles here!

Interesting article, thank you for sharing.

(And thanks to Swedie too, for your nice post!)

 

[antiquegirl]

Maybe, in collusion, she gave them back for laundering. I did not see a washing machine in her home.

Nope. The "second" pair of shorts were seized from MR's car during the early afternoon of May 19, 2009. The "first" pair were supposedly found and photographed in TLM's room a few hours later on the same day. TLM had been jail for weeks prior to that.

Supposedly two pairs of identical shorts with identical stains found hours apart in two different places by LE. A mix-up in LE labeling? A mix-up by the presentation of evidence in court? A "plant" putting MR's shorts into TLM's house? I'm very confused.

JMO

 

[matou]

I think TLM testified to wearing the shorts and these shorts were found in his car in his gym bag at the time of his arrest. I think it was our misunderstanding that these items were found in her house after the arrests. Can anyone find a tweet or MSM report that these items were found in her home? I believe these photo exhibits were shown to verify that these items she described were found. JMO

 

[tmhco]

If Karla hadn't confessed, perhaps she would still be in jail. PB's lawyer claimed that he planned to use the tapes to discredit her. Had that happened, there would have been no plea bargain. I believe it was the day after he picked up the tapes that KH made her deal with the Crown, before he had even viewed them. So, even though he should have turned them over immediately, it would have been too late.

If Karla hadn't confessedto the murders, I wonder if they would have ever revealed those tapes. I believe the lawyer sat on them for a reason.

 

[matou]

She and Rafferty then drove to a nearby variety store where he went in, changed his clothes in the washroom and left a change of clothes in the washroom for McClintic.
“I put on the clothes . . . a pair of shorts,” she said. He also left her a white American Eagle sweater, a white T-shirt and a pair of boxer briefs. The clothes came from his Goodlife Fitness bag, she said.
McClintic changed but put her clothes back over so it would not look weird when she left the variety store.
“When I got into the car, I took my clothing off,” she said. They threw the clothing out the window as they cruised down Hwy. 401 on way back to Woodstock.

http://www.thestar.com/news/article...tic-describes-how-they-covered-up-murder?bn=1

So did she give him back the shorts and tshirt and American Eagle sweater or did he go to her room and take them back? JMO
Rafferty dropped her off a couple of blocks away from her home, McClintic said.

 

[antiquegirl]

This totally confused me too. I'm wondering if this is another error by the press and they weren't found at TLM's house at all. She was arrested 3 days later so she must have returned them pretty quickly. I wonder why she didn't return the shoes as well.

It can't be an error by the press because the pics supposedly found in TLM's room were shown as evidence in court by the Crown on March 14th, and reported by the media as such.

.James Armstrong‏@jamesarmstrong7

Next photo shows a good life fitness gym bag with white an green shorts inside. #Rafferty

Adrian Morrow‏@AdrianMorrow

Court viewing photos of clothes McClintic says Rafferty gave her that night: size 9 mens Puma runners, white track shorts, white hoodie

The above Tweets are from March 14, 2012.

The "second" photo was shown on Thursday, April 5, and presented as one of the items found in MR's car in the gym bag. This was found a few hours before TLM's house was raided and is labeled as having been found in MR's vehicle. It came out in the press yesterday.

I have yet to compare the pics of the gym bag, but suspect that it will also be the same ... supposedly found in two different locations.

I think the most logical explanation is that either LE or the Crown mixed up some pictures. Those shorts, with their distinctive stains, could only have been found in one of those locations.

JMO

 

[Ardy]

Wow AG..........masterful websleuthing at work.

You are right. The shorts are identical. The same pair of shorts could not have been in MR's trunk and also been discovered at TLM's home. The evidence from both locations was seized by LE.

Hmmmm.

People have wondered what MR is writing on his notepad. Maybe this type of contradiction to point out to his defense team?.........just a thought IMO

 

[Alison]

Oh, but it does have bearing on this case and trust me, I know very well about the Bernado "debacle"... in fact, I know up close and personal - as I'm related to one of Bernardo and Homolka's victims. I've lived it. That's the problem. That's why I hope beyond hope that *IF* MR is guilty of 1st degree murder it will be proven BEYOND A SHADOW OF DOUBT. **IF** he's guilty - I pray there will be solid DNA evidence that will keep him in jail for the rest of his life. It's not enough under our laws to put him away and keep him there based on circumstancial evidence. <modsnip> - even without the all of the facts. <modsnip>... only to see the killer serve a partial sentence and then be set free to enjoy the rest of her life... as we have with KH. This is why I sincerely hope that **IF** MR is guilty - there has been enough sharing of information between the forces that they get the job done right and keep in in jail... but so far I'm afraid it just isn't there.... not yet

I agree I hope there is enough DNA evidence to prove something. However, I do have my blinders on, and I do feel he is a guilty party in her death, somehow. The reason I feel this way is he admitted to being there and assisting in the hiding of her body. Most people who have morals and a value systems, even if freaked out by TLM at the time, would have not been able to function a normal life after witnessing what he supposedly witnessed IMO. If he was innocent he would have done the right thing IMHO. It is also pretty scary to think of him being free to walk the streets again.
BTW I would have never been picked for jury duty because I am admitidly bias.

 

[antiquegirl]

Wow AG..........masterful websleuthing at work.

You are right. The shorts are identical. The same pair of shorts could not have been in MR's trunk and also been discovered at TLM's home. The evidence from both locations was seized by LE.

Hmmmm.

People have wondered what MR is writing on his notepad. Maybe this type of contradiction to point out to his defense team?.........just a thought IMO

Thanks, but I think Alethea may be right. It could easily be explained as a media error, now that I've done more research. They likely assumed, due to the order of the pics shown on March 14th (including the shoes found in the back room), that the gym bag and shorts were found in TLM's home, but in reality were probably just shown as those loaned to her by MTR.

Here is where the confusion got started:

Page 52-58: Photos from inside McClintic’s former home. Includes pictures of the box of hair dye and the shoes, sweater and shorts she says Rafferty gave her after Tori was killed.

http://www.am980.ca/channels/news/local/Story.aspx?ID=1670440

"McClintic testifed that Rafferty gave her his white Puma shoes, basketball shorts and t-shirt to change into, packed into a blue gym bag. Police found items matching those descriptions in McClintic's home when they executed a search warrant after her arrest (pictures 2 and 3)."

http://www.newstalk1010.com/blog/raffertyevidence/blogentry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10360097

The court proceedings obviously did not make this distinction during the testimony. So, once again, we have wasted valuable time and effort due to a misconception that was propagated by the media. :banghead:

JMO

ETA: I apologize to everyone for misleading. As you can see from the above media articles, the mistake was an easy one to make. I think a lot of people (including the media) misunderstood that all those pictures were from TLM's house. And Alice, she must have returned MR's clothing, but not for laundering - just because they were his. Or, more likely, he picked them up after she was jailed. He must have missed the shoes because they were in the back room. Or, possibly they aren't his?

 

[paris_paris]

I think the most logical explanation is that either LE or the Crown mixed up some pictures. Those shorts, with their distinctive stains, could only have been found in one of those locations.

JMO

I think they've mixed up the pictures. There are 2 pairs of shorts. They used the same photo for both pairs. The 2 photos you are showing (that they showed) are the same, but cropped and labelled differently.

 

[maxfactor]

Nope. The "second" pair of shorts were seized from MR's car during the early afternoon of May 19, 2009. The "first" pair were supposedly found and photographed in TLM's room a few hours later on the same day. TLM had been jail for weeks prior to that.

Supposedly two pairs of identical shorts with identical stains found hours apart in two different places by LE. A mix-up in LE labeling? A mix-up by the presentation of evidence in court? A "plant" putting MR's shorts into TLM's house? I'm very confused.

JMO

It's the same pair of shorts, IMO. They were found in Rafferty's gym bag. IMO they were shown with the evidence found at TLM's house because she was going to testify to him letting her wear them.

 

[antiquegirl]

It's the same pair of shorts, IMO. They were found in Rafferty's gym bag. IMO they were shown with the evidence found at TLM's house because she was going to testify to him letting her wear them.

Yep, you are right. As per my follow-up post, the media led us all astray. The order of presentation of the pics by the Crown left everyone believing that the bag and shorts were found in TLM's house. (Wasted most of today for nothing! :banghead