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

[maxfactor]

Originally Posted by Ardy
TLM obtained the information on the witness against her, through access to the discovery documents her lawyer had in his possession. She considered it important enough to keep it.

Ardy is correct ... TLM pleaded guilty, likely upon the advice of her lawyer. If you recall some time ago her lawyer noting that there was much information that she needed to go through - that would have been the Crown's "disclosure" - setting out the evidence that they had against her. TLM would have reviewed all of this material with her lawyer - some of the evidence would also have related to MR ... so she knew damn well what they had on him before she ever took the stand to testify against him. It likely wasn't too difficult for her to modify her story to co-incide with the evidence ...

For example, TLM would have known from the discover docs that there was blood found on the front of the car - she she tailors her story that MR tossed TS in front of the car, and that is where the kicking etc. took place.

She would have had access to the discovery materials before she entered a plea of guilty - evidently from the Crown's discovery materials n her case, there was nothin in there that could prove that TLM was the murderer .... so she blamed it on MR.


So yes, TLM's charges and her entering a plea of guilty has everything to do with MR's trial .... she might be the devil but she isn't stupid - she is cunning and vengeful.

JMO

Thanks Cha, but I understand about discovery and all that, it's the part I've bolded above that I'm not sure about.

She considered it important enough to keep it.

IMO TLM had already confessed to LE May 2009, before she had seen the discovery documents her lawyer had, the majority of her story stayed the same, so I don't see how her lawyer's discovery documents were used by her to cook up a story. KWIM? She told the same story on the witness stand as she did on that day when Jim Smyth interviewed her. What really niggles at me about her changing her story about who actually killed Tori is that she passed a lie detector after her interview with Jim Smyth. Also her statement to him January 2012, where she tells him she doesn't want to testify. On the inside it's not a good thing at all to testify against anyone. That may be what the assault charge she got in January is all about. She would now be considered a rat.

 

[ChaChaCha]

What is being suggested here about TLM's counsel, is not to be taken lightly, IMO.

I would consider it speculation at best, that TLM was attacking people based on information given to her by her lawyer, through disclosure.

There are numerous references for this subject, but, I will quote this one on the matter.

<modsnip>They are to be reviewed and disclosed to the accused while preparing for her trial. There is no insinuation about anybody's lawyer revealling information to whom - their own client???- at least not from me. What was the lawyer to say? Oh, sorry Terri-Lynn, but a took a quick look at the stuff and you are scr@d, so you better plead guilty and hope to get out in fifteen years? What? You wanna know what they got - nope, sorry, can't tell you that. Nope, just take my word for it - oh and put down that pen!!!

Give me a minute here and I will find the rest of the info for you...

 

[kmclaren]

Originally Posted by Ardy
TLM obtained the information on the witness against her, through access to the discovery documents her lawyer had in his possession. She considered it important enough to keep it.

Ardy is correct ... TLM pleaded guilty, likely upon the advice of her lawyer. If you recall some time ago her lawyer noting that there was much information that she needed to go through - that would have been the Crown's "disclosure" - setting out the evidence that they had against her. TLM would have reviewed all of this material with her lawyer - some of the evidence would also have related to MR ... so she knew damn well what they had on him before she ever took the stand to testify against him. It likely wasn't too difficult for her to modify her story to co-incide with the evidence ...

For example, TLM would have known from the discover docs that there was blood found on the front of the car - she she tailors her story that MR tossed TS in front of the car, and that is where the kicking etc. took place.

She would have had access to the discovery materials before she entered a plea of guilty - evidently from the Crown's discovery materials n her case, there was nothin in there that could prove that TLM was the murderer .... so she blamed it on MR.


So yes, TLM's charges and her entering a plea of guilty has everything to do with MR's trial .... she might be the devil but she isn't stupid - she is cunning and vengeful.

JMO

Actually she pleaded guilty AGAINST the advise of her lawyer...

>>An experienced defence lawyer with many high profile murder cases, LeRoy had never entered a guilty plea to first-degree murder.

"She really convinced me to let her plead," LeRoy says. "Her motivation was to accept responsibility for what she did."<<

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/12/08/16485536.html

 

[Kamille]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the original post about TLM threatening someone, in a letter to her friend, whose name she got from information about her case, regarding the charge when she stabbed that guy? Nothing to do with the present case? She was ranting to her friend in a letter about something to do with her old case wasn't she?

I'm confused. :waitasec:

 

[brighidin]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the original post about TLM threatening someone, in a letter to her friend, whose name she got from information about her case, regarding the charge when she stabbed that guy? Nothing to do with the present case? She was ranting to her friend in a letter about something to do with her old case wasn't she?

I'm confused. :waitasec:

I read it the same way you did.

 

[swedie]

If this is the same assault charge against TLM that was discussed in court, TLM signed up for a peer counselling inmate group, asked that a specific inmate by assigned as her peer, and when they were alone savagely beat the other inmate. It was alleged to have happened because TLM didn't like some things the other inmate had said about her.

If this an additional charge besides that one, then TLM just continues on being TLM.

Could you please provide a link to this information? I've never seen that, would be interesting. TIA

 

[Kamille]

Originally Posted by Ardy
TLM obtained the information on the witness against her, through access to the discovery documents her lawyer had in his possession. She considered it important enough to keep it.

Ardy is correct ... TLM pleaded guilty, likely upon the advice of her lawyer. If you recall some time ago her lawyer noting that there was much information that she needed to go through - that would have been the Crown's "disclosure" - setting out the evidence that they had against her. TLM would have reviewed all of this material with her lawyer - some of the evidence would also have related to MR ... so she knew damn well what they had on him before she ever took the stand to testify against him. It likely wasn't too difficult for her to modify her story to co-incide with the evidence ...

For example, TLM would have known from the discover docs that there was blood found on the front of the car - she she tailors her story that MR tossed TS in front of the car, and that is where the kicking etc. took place.

She would have had access to the discovery materials before she entered a plea of guilty - evidently from the Crown's discovery materials n her case, there was nothin in there that could prove that TLM was the murderer .... so she blamed it on MR.


So yes, TLM's charges and her entering a plea of guilty has everything to do with MR's trial .... she might be the devil but she isn't stupid - she is cunning and vengeful.

JMO

I can't think of a better example of a defendant and his defense team tailoring a story around discovery as I've seen in this case. MR did NOT tell this story to his defense attorney at the time of his arrest or he would be a free man today if it was the truth.

MOO

 

[Alethea Dice]

I don't see anything about TLM obtaining information about a witness against her, and her keeping the information that her lawyer gave her about that witness?

Not sure her lawyer would take kindly to that insuation.

Here are some tweets regarding that situation.

London Free Press@RaffertyLFP

Derstine suggests McClintic used info from her lawyer to plan vengence against two people who put her in prison
...
Cynthia Mulligan@CityCynthia

#Rafferty - McClintic says "she had some anger" towards her victims, may have intended to do something to them, "cause them further harm"

Gerry Dewan @GerryDewanCTV

Derstine says the letter was in regards to doing something to the witnesses

Avery Moore@AveryFreeFMNews

In letter McClintic writes one of those kids is going to get "myrked". Derstine asks what that means. McC: "um, murder." #Rafferty

Adrian Morrow@AdrianMorrow

Under questioning, McClintic says she got the victims' addresses from court documents, but said she never passed it on to anyone.

 

[Wondergirl]

Here are some tweets regarding that situation.

London Free Press@RaffertyLFP

Derstine suggests McClintic used info from her lawyer to plan vengence against two people who put her in prison

Cynthia Mulligan@CityCynthia

#Rafferty - McClintic says "she had some anger" towards her victims, may have intended to do something to them, "cause them further harm"

Gerry Dewan @GerryDewanCTV

Derstine says the letter was in regards to doing something to the witnesses

Avery Moore@AveryFreeFMNews

In letter McClintic writes one of those kids is going to get "myrked". Derstine asks what that means. McC: "um, murder." #Rafferty

Adrian Morrow@AdrianMorrow

Under questioning, McClintic says she got the victims' addresses from court documents, but said she never passed it on to anyone.
Wednesday March 21, 2012 3:11
RaffertyLFP: In another violent profanity-laced rant McClintic vows to kill another youth inmate who offended her - more gang tags and slogans at the end [via Twitter]

Wednesday March 21, 2012 RaffertyLFP
3:13 RaffertyLFP: One of her letters has a drawing of a handgun with names addresses phone numbers of people she has targeted [via Twitter]

Wednesday March 21, 2012 3:13 RaffertyLFP
3:14 RaffertyLFP: Derstine suggests McClintic intended to hunt down and kill witnesses who would testify against her - after a long pause she agrees [via Twitter]

Thanks, guys, great minds think alike!

So, it was Derstine who obviously had an "inside line" on what TLM was up to. Very interesting.

Wonder how Dersitne got a hold of this info? Makes you wonder. It was he who suggested that TLM used info obtained from her lawyer.

There have been alot of very "last-minute" developments in 2012 for this case. Makes you go hmmmmmm

JMO

 

[Kamille]

London Free Press@RaffertyLFP

Derstine suggests McClintic used info from her lawyer to plan vengence against two people who put her in prison

Cynthia Mulligan@CityCynthia

#Rafferty - McClintic says "she had some anger" towards her victims, may have intended to do something to them, "cause them further harm"

Gerry Dewan @GerryDewanCTV

Derstine says the letter was in regards to doing something to the witnesses

Avery Moore@AveryFreeFMNews

In letter McClintic writes one of those kids is going to get "myrked". Derstine asks what that means. McC: "um, murder." #Rafferty

Adrian Morrow@AdrianMorrow

Under questioning, McClintic says she got the victims' addresses from court documents, but said she never passed it on to anyone.
Wednesday March 21, 2012 3:11
RaffertyLFP: In another violent profanity-laced rant McClintic vows to kill another youth inmate who offended her - more gang tags and slogans at the end [via Twitter]

Wednesday March 21, 2012 RaffertyLFP
3:13 RaffertyLFP: One of her letters has a drawing of a handgun with names addresses phone numbers of people she has targeted [via Twitter]

Wednesday March 21, 2012 3:13 RaffertyLFP
3:14 RaffertyLFP: Derstine suggests McClintic intended to hunt down and kill witnesses who would testify against her - after a long pause she agrees [via Twitter]

Sometimes TLM is just too honest for her own darn good isn't she. :waitasec:

Point being...she didn't take revenge on any of those people. Nor did her gansta friends because she didn't put the word out for a hit. Because her "gansta" friends are just one other messed up chick she met in juvi and likely had no contact with other than those stupid letters. Which ended a year before this crime took place. She "writes" a big game but she doesn't follow through...it's all for shock and awe and some street cred with her gangsta friend. So now we are to believe that she took revenge on Victoria for...what exactly? A non existant drug debt? A dog breeding plan gone bad?

Okay then.

MOO

 

[Alethea Dice]

Could you please provide a link to this information? I've never seen that, would be interesting. TIA

Here's the information about the January assault:

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1157891--terri-lynne-mcclintic-charged-with-assault-after-prison-brawl

On Jan. 14, McClintic changed her statement and told detectives it was she who kicked and stomped on Tori, and she who wielded the hammer.

She reiterated that during her testimony at Rafferty’s trial in a London court.

An account of McClintic’s altercation with McIntyre was first heard on March 23 during the trial when Dirk Derstine, Rafferty’s lawyer, told the jury that McClintic got into a vicious fight with a fellow inmate. He said McClintic asked to see the other woman ostensibly for peer support but quickly got into a brawl.

“I confronted her about some things and things escalated,” McClintic admitted. “And we got into a scrap.” Derstine reminded her it was more than a scrap. “You were kicking and stomping on her.”

“Yes, I did assault her.”

 

[Juris_Prudence]

Oh that. Since we are dicussing the case of Victoria Stafford and the trial of Micheal Rafferty, I thought you were refering to something about this case. It's not something the crown or prosecution will use in this case, so I think bringing stuff in like that just confuses things because I thought you meant that she plotted revenge against MR.

Well, if TLM will plot against a fellow inmate, then I think its entirely possible that TLM plotted against MR. Even without her lawyer's inadvertent help in doing so, I think TLM is/was more than capable of making a plan and carrying it out, all on her own, just to hurt people. :twocents:

 

[Kamille]

Well, if TLM will plot against a fellow inmate, then I think its entirely possible that TLM plotted against MR. Even without her lawyer's inadvertent help in doing so, I think TLM is/was more than capable of making a plan and carrying it out, all on her own, just to hurt people. :twocents:

Wait...so now the theory is that TLM abducted and killed Victoria, confessed and put herself in prison likely for the rest of her life to get back at MR?!?

My head is spinning. :waitasec:

MOO

 

[ChaChaCha]

Sometimes TLM is just too honest for her own darn good isn't she. :waitasec:

Point being...she didn't take revenge on any of those people. Nor did her gansta friends because she didn't put the word out for a hit. Because her "gansta" friends are just one other messed up chick she met in juvi and likely had no contact with other than those stupid letters. Which ended a year before this crime took place. She "writes" a big game but she doesn't follow through...it's all for shock and awe and some street cred with her gangsta friend. So now we are to believe that she took revenge on Victoria for...what exactly? A non existant drug debt? A dog breeding plan gone bad?

Okay then.

MOO

Nope ... the post had nothing to do with TLR revenge against TM or JG!!! We were just discussing Derstine's allegation that TLM used informatiion provided as part of her discovery materials ... (it wasn"t my idea, I promise to insinuate that TLM's lawyer did anything wrong in reviewing the materials with her... that came out of Derstine's questioning)

But if she was willing to use other court materials on her prior charges to retain names and addresses of witnesses, then it is likely that she retained info from the techie disclosure docs.

For all that she is a drug-addled monster, TLM has a mind like a steel trap - she remembered so much about the murder scene, what was playing on the CD... so many details - I do not think she is a stupid girl - just very very twisted.

And it is just all JMO anyways.

 

[matou]

Wait...so now the theory is that TLM abducted and killed Victoria, confessed and put herself in prison likely for the rest of her life to get back at MR?!?

My head is spinning. :waitasec:

MOO

The key word is spinning, that's what the defense does. JMO

 

[Alethea Dice]

I can't think of a better example of a defendant and his defense team tailoring a story around discovery as I've seen in this case. MR did NOT tell this story to his defense attorney at the time of his arrest or he would be a free man today if it was the truth.

MOO

Do you really believe that he would be a free man if he had told his attorney when he was arrested? Telling the truth didn't work for Guy Paul Morin or Donald Marshall or David Milgaard, to name a few.

We don't know when, or if, or what he told his attorney. JMO

 

[Juris_Prudence]

Thanks Cha, but I understand about discovery and all that, it's the part I've bolded above that I'm not sure about.
IMO TLM had already confessed to LE May 2009, before she had seen the discovery documents her lawyer had, the majority of her story stayed the same, so I don't see how her lawyer's discovery documents were used by her to cook up a story. KWIM? She told the same story on the witness stand as she did on that day when Jim Smyth interviewed her. What really niggles at me about her changing her story about who actually killed Tori is that she passed a lie detector after her interview with Jim Smyth. Also her statement to him January 2012, where she tells him she doesn't want to testify. On the inside it's not a good thing at all to testify against anyone. That may be what the assault charge she got in January is all about. She would now be considered a rat.

Bolded text in quote for clarity:
Just wondering if we know what questions specifically she was asked in the lie detector test? Regardless, I didn't think that lie detector tests and their results were admissible as evidence in court because of the issues that exist concerning their reliability?

Quote below is from:
http://www.defencelaw.com/printversion-police-questioning.html

"Should I take a lie detector (polygraph) test?

Do not take part in such tests. The results are not admissible at trial. Police know this but use these tests to get you to confess. Unlike the test results, your statements may be used in evidence."

 

[Juris_Prudence]

Sometimes TLM is just too honest for her own darn good isn't she. :waitasec:

Point being...she didn't take revenge on any of those people. Nor did her gansta friends because she didn't put the word out for a hit. Because her "gansta" friends are just one other messed up chick she met in juvi and likely had no contact with other than those stupid letters. Which ended a year before this crime took place. She "writes" a big game but she doesn't follow through...it's all for shock and awe and some street cred with her gangsta friend. So now we are to believe that she took revenge on Victoria for...what exactly? A non existant drug debt? A dog breeding plan gone bad?

Okay then.

MOO

Does it even MATTER why Tori was murdered? Whether it was over a drug debt, whether it was over dog breeding that never happened... whatever the reason is, it is not good enough! There is NO reason ever to abduct and murder a child! No reason whatsoever! I'm not even going to put JMO here because I think we all agree on this point (right?).

 

[brighidin]

Does it even MATTER why Tori was murdered? Whether it was over a drug debt, whether it was over dog breeding that never happened... whatever the reason is, it is not good enough! There is NO reason ever to abduct and murder a child! No reason whatsoever! I'm not even going to put JMO here because I think we all agree on this point (right?).

I agree with you in principle, but it does matter in the context of the defense's argument. Derstine is saying that it was over a drug debt and that Rafferty just kind of stumbled into it. Many believe that wasn't the case. So in the context of the trial (and of this being a discussion board where interested parties discuss the minute details of such cases) then yes it does matter.

Take the Casey Anthony trial: a precious two year old was murdered. That could be the end of it, but much virtual ink has been spilled and bandwidth used up trying to figure out why...was it to get back at Cindy Anthony, to be able to have a carefree life, to be free to be with her boyfriend, because she was a sociopathic monster...etc. etc.

jmo

 

[Juris_Prudence]

Wait...so now the theory is that TLM abducted and killed Victoria, confessed and put herself in prison likely for the rest of her life to get back at MR?!?

My head is spinning. :waitasec:

MOO

I don't know if that is what she did or not, or even why she might have done such a thing. But, from the way this trial has been going so far, it certainly seems Derstine might take it in this direction. He has already gone ahead and shown the history of violent thoughts, gangster friend she kept, lurid music she listened to (though I realize the songs he pointed out and played in court were not found on the ipod - to my knowledge, and I can also agree that music does not a murderer make!)... I'm thinking that next we'll hear the defense say it was some kind of tiff between her and MR that set the wheels of horror into motion... jmo.