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

[swedie]

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.”

So to me it sounds like TLM confronted McI, not a big deal. She probably told her to watch her back and quit going around calling her a child killer. It's highly likely McI was the first to make physical contact. There may not have been any witnesses who saw the first physical contact, but TLM ended up getting charged because when she was caught in the act, it was apparent she had the upper hand (foot) over McI. Wish we had all the details on that one. MOO

BTW I thought TLM was in segregration?

 

[swedie]

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

Honestly no I do not believe he would have been a free man then. MR had six weeks to contact LE and explain to them what happened to Tori. An innocent person doesn't wait six weeks and tries to side track LE when they do come calling. MOO

 

[Kamille]

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

Weren't all those cases before the science of DNA? And weren't they all exonerated because of it eventually?

Well MR could have been too...if he had led police to the body and the disposed evidence at the time of his arrest, there would have been no DNA or forensic evidence that he did anything other than drive the car. So his story absolutely would have been more believable and he would have faced accessory and obstruction charges only. IF his story is true. Which I highly doubt it is.

Now there is no DNA evidence to prove his story. And he is directly responsible for that. He still has not provided information on the disposed evidence, including his car seat. Not the behaviour of an innocent man or a good tactic for his defense team.

MOO

MOO

 

[swedie]

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?).

Yes it does matter why Tori was abducted, raped and murdered. There is always a motive and that needs to be clarified so the guilty person(s) get their trial and sentence. Otherwise I agree with the rest of your post. Thank you! :moo:

 

[Kamille]

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?).

It matters a great deal. She was abducted for nefarious and sexual purposes and the man on trial is responsible for that. At least that's what the evidence presented so far states.

MOO

 

[swedie]

Weren't all those cases before the science of DNA? And weren't they all exonerated because of it eventually?

Well MR could have been too...if he had led police to the body and the disposed evidence at the time of his arrest, there would have been no DNA or forensic evidence that he did anything other than drive the car. So his story absolutely would have been more believable and he would have faced accessory and obstruction charges only. IF his story is true. Which I highly doubt it is.

Now there is no DNA evidence to prove his story. And he is directly responsible for that. He still has not provided information on the disposed evidence, including his car seat. Not the behaviour of an innocent man or a good tactic for his defense team.

MOO

MOO

And those other cases were all hunch cases. Crimes done by one individual. There was no partner in crime involved in those cases pointing to the other criminal. There is a neon sign hanging over MR's head which IMO reads guilty. :moo:

 

[Kamille]

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.

And they will be lying. In my opinion of course.

 

[Alethea Dice]

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."

That's correct. They're not admissible as evidence and the Judge pointed that out to the jury.

London Free Press@RaffertyLFPReply
Justice Heeney cautions jurors re polygraph (lie detector) evidence -says polygraph is an investigative tool but not admissible as evidence

Studies have shown that the tests are not reliable. There are ways to alter responses to questions resulting in an incorrect result.

Because the polygraph test measures bodily responses, a data subject can attempt to alter her bodily responses in order to interfere with the test. Several common ways to undermine the test include: taking sedatives to reduce anxiety; using antiperspirant to prevent sweating; and positioning pins or biting parts of the mouth after each question to demonstrate a constant physiological response.

After reiviewing the available data and studies on polygraph testing, the panel concluded: "Almost a century of research in scientific psychology and physiology provides little basis for the expectation that a polygraph test could have extremely high accuracy." Further, there was little hope for advancing polygraph testing. According to the panel's findings: "The inherent ambiguity of the physiological measures used in the polygraph suggest that further investments in improving polygraph technique and interpretation will bring only modest improvements in accuracy."

http://epic.org/privacy/polygraph/

 

[Jezbel]

I don't think the defense theory is going to work as both TM and TLM testified that there was no drug debt between them and that TLM had never met VS and did not know that she was TM's daughter.

Also there was never any mention in TLM's letters while she was in detention in 2008 of TM, JG or VS.
JMO

 

[Alethea Dice]

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.

She passed the lie detector test even though she was clearly lying. She was still maintaining that she was not involved and also stated that she was wearing different clothes that day.

Adrian Morrow@AdrianMorrow
Court is watching video of Detective-Sergeant Jim Smyth giving Terri-Lynne McClintic the polygraph.

Adrian Morrow@AdrianMorrow
In the video, McClintic looks as she did in her famous arrest photos, with corn rows, glasses and a sleeveless black top.

AM980.ca@AM980_Court
McClintic, again, denies involvement in Tori's disappearance.

RaffertyLFP: In the video she described the clothes she was wearing that day

Gerry Dewan @GerryDewanCTV
During the interview, is sketching on a pad the area her location near the school saying she saw a woman walking with Tori

Gerry Dewan @GerryDewanCTV
She tells police in the video she was there between 3:30 and 4
...

Gerry Dewan @GerryDewanCTV
The police refer to a white jacket

Adrian Morrow@AdrianMorrow
McClintic also says in polygraph she was wearing clothes different than the woman in the white puffy coat, including a dressy coat

RaffertyLFP: In the video she tells police about the pink jacket she was wearing, She is laughing and relaxed

AM980.ca@AM980_Court
Video is now over. Derstine asks if McClintic seems relaxed and confidant in the video. She says she's not.

RaffertyLFP: McClintic admits she lied easily in the video about going home that day and doing drugs with her mother

 

[ChaChaCha]

http://www.mykawartha.com/news/news/article/81269

Article regarding the "older woman" that TLM allegedly assaulted at Grand Valley in Decemer. The woman is serving a life sentence for instructing two men to kill her former lover. Hmmmmm .... mildly vindictive of her.

In any case, I would think that given TLM's propensity for violence, she likely threw the first punch - the older woman appears to be more of a mastermind than a violent do-it-yourself type of gal.

They (the jury) considered three options: They could have found Ms. McIntyre guilty of the first-degree murder charge she had been indicted on, or opt for the lesser offences of second-degree murder or manslaughter.During the trial, prosecutors Kent Saliwonchyk and Indy Kandola portrayed Ms. McIntyre as the driving force behind the brutal killing of Mr. O’Reggio, with whom she had been involved in a relationship. Jurors were told that as that relationship deteriorated, hard feelings developed between the two and that Ms. McIntyre enlisted Mr. Kelly, at the time her 18-year-old boyfriend, and his buddy, Mr. Ebanks, to kill Mr. O’Reggio.

Interesting portrayal of Mc as the driving force .... the engine. Sounds familiar huh? The men apparently had already pleaded guilty and been sentenced before she came to trial.

 

[Sillybilly]

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.

I was a witness to an armed robbery a few years ago, and when the supboena arrived, it had my full name and address on it. When I called to enquire (can't remember if i called the Crown or LE) if the defendent would have access to that informatioln, i was told they have a right to know who will testify in their case.

Turned out she pled guilty so I didn't have to appear.

 

[Kamille]

Easter Sunday marks 3 years without Tori

On April 8 three years ago, the eight-year-old Woodstock girl disappeared while walking home from school. One person pleaded guilty to her murder. The second is on trial in London now, and it’s only a matter of calendar luck that evidence of the crime will not spill out in a courtroom on such a hard day for family.

snip

Tori, it seems, cannot be forgotten. Her father was asked why he thinks that’s so.

“She was the perfect definition of childhood innocence,” Stafford said.

“She was eight years old, little, blond-haired, blue-eyed, very lovable, very caring. She was a little tomboy but at the same time she could be a little girl, a little diva. There are just so many different things about her that people have come to adore.”

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/04/06/19602471.html

 

[Ardy]

Just returning back............I would like to thank members who posted the links and quotes to the information about the latest inmate assault and how TLM had previously obtained information, without the consent of her lawyer no doubt, from the disclosure documents.

I assumed there was no need to post links........as the information had already been well documented on the forum.

As I understand it, a defendant is allowed to review the disclosure evidence against them, but are not allowed to photcopy or copy directly from the documents. TLM was probably looking for that specific information.

TLM also revealed her determination, when she manipulated a self help program to enable her assault on the other inmate.

I also struggle to understand the reasons for her sudden recantation.

Her claim that she wanted to ensure MR was not on the streets, rings a little hollow when compared to all her other statements and actions over time.

As posted, her lawyer said TLM wanted to plead guilty to accept responsibility for her actions, but she didn't accept responsibility for the murder.....she lied and said MR did it.

She stood on the witness stand and knowingly lied to VS family during her Agreed Statement of Facts. She did not accept responsibility then either.

And then..........and I believe this is going to be an important piece of information for the jury.......after she was sentenced, she told her Godmother that she DIDN'T regret the killing, except for the young age, AND would do it again.

She isn't telling her fellow inmates this.......to bolster her standing in jail.

She is telling this to her own relative.

TLM is capable of things...........we fear to even dream about.

 

[Alethea Dice]

Weren't all those cases before the science of DNA? And weren't they all exonerated because of it eventually?

Well MR could have been too...if he had led police to the body and the disposed evidence at the time of his arrest, there would have been no DNA or forensic evidence that he did anything other than drive the car. So his story absolutely would have been more believable and he would have faced accessory and obstruction charges only. IF his story is true. Which I highly doubt it is.

Now there is no DNA evidence to prove his story. And he is directly responsible for that. He still has not provided information on the disposed evidence, including his car seat. Not the behaviour of an innocent man or a good tactic for his defense team.

MOO

MOO

We don't know yet if there's DNA to prove that he did anything other than drive the car now either, and he still could very well be found guilty. I do agree that it would have been better to have come clean right at the beginning, but I can also understand why he may have been afraid to do that.

Only Guy Paul Morin was eventually released due to DNA testing. David Milgaard's conviction was set aside 5 years before the DNA confirmed his innocence. DNA didn't even come into it for Donald Marshall. His case was reviewed by the RCMP and he was cleared by the Court of Appeal. The Royal Commission found that racism contributed to his wrongful commission.

 

[ChaChaCha]

Anybody with a bit of spare time on their hands this weekend may want to read the factum in this Appeal. There are many, many parallels to the MR trial.


http://www.advocatedaily.com/2012/03/r-v-aimee-mcintyre-appeal-factum/

 

[Juris_Prudence]

I don't think the defense theory is going to work as both TM and TLM testified that there was no drug debt between them and that TLM had never met VS and did not know that she was TM's daughter.

Also there was never any mention in TLM's letters while she was in detention in 2008 of TM, JG or VS.
JMO

Actually, TM testifed that JG owed a drug debt, but never specified to whom the debt was owed in her testimony. moo.
RaffertyLFP:

She said she never owed anybody money for drugs, James Goris did [via Twitter]


http://www.canada.com/news/Tori+Sta...home+daughter+killer+video/6265400/story.html

McDonald told the court that she did not have any drug debts but Goris had at that time recently "ripped" someone off for 20 or 30 OxyContin pills worth about $400. She also denied that the family had received any type of ransom call the night Stafford went missing.

 

[Jezbel]

Actually, TM testifed that JG owed a drug debt, but never specified to whom the debt was owed in her testimony. moo.
RaffertyLFP:

She said she never owed anybody money for drugs, James Goris did [via Twitter]


http://www.canada.com/news/Tori+Sta...home+daughter+killer+video/6265400/story.html

McDonald told the court that she did not have any drug debts but Goris had at that time recently "ripped" someone off for 20 or 30 OxyContin pills worth about $400. She also denied that the family had received any type of ransom call the night Stafford went missing.

They both testified that there was no drug debt between them = meaning between the two of them.

JMO

 

[Sillybilly]

Anyone know where Tori's memorial thread is? Tx

 

[Alethea Dice]

http://www.mykawartha.com/news/news/article/81269

Article regarding the "older woman" that TLM allegedly assaulted at Grand Valley in Decemer. The woman is serving a life sentence for instructing two men to kill her former lover. Hmmmmm .... mildly vindictive of her.

In any case, I would think that given TLM's propensity for violence, she likely threw the first punch - the older woman appears to be more of a mastermind than a violent do-it-yourself type of gal.

They (the jury) considered three options: They could have found Ms. McIntyre guilty of the first-degree murder charge she had been indicted on, or opt for the lesser offences of second-degree murder or manslaughter.During the trial, prosecutors Kent Saliwonchyk and Indy Kandola portrayed Ms. McIntyre as the driving force behind the brutal killing of Mr. O’Reggio, with whom she had been involved in a relationship. Jurors were told that as that relationship deteriorated, hard feelings developed between the two and that Ms. McIntyre enlisted Mr. Kelly, at the time her 18-year-old boyfriend, and his buddy, Mr. Ebanks, to kill Mr. O’Reggio.

Interesting portrayal of Mc as the driving force .... the engine. Sounds familiar huh? The men apparently had already pleaded guilty and been sentenced before she came to trial.

Here are some extra tweets regarding that assault. It doesn't sound to me like she denied starting the "beating". Sadly, something else sounds familiar too.

London Free Press@RaffertyLFPReply
Derstine asks McClintic about altercation she had with another inmate on Jan. 31 of this year.

AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReply
In January of this year, McClintic got into a fight with another inmate. There's a peer support program. Older inmates help younger inmates.

AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReply
McClintic asked for an inmate, then started beating on her. McClintic was "confronting her" about things she had said.

AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReply
"Things escalated," McClintic says. Agrees that she kicked and stomped the other inmate.

Adrian Morrow@AdrianMorrowReply
McClintic says the other inmate had been "saying things about her."

Adrian Morrow@AdrianMorrowReply
"This wasn't a scrap, this was a beating," Derstine says. "She was on the ground in a fetal position, you were kicking and stomping her."

London Free Press@RaffertyLFPReply
Agreed she kicked and stomped other inmate who was on the ground in a fetal position.