The Incinerator

[Alethea Dice]

No condescension written, you seem to have trouble understanding and or following what was/ is being laid out. So simply trying to help you understand.

I listed in the examples of using or not using the incinerator discussion the possibility(in answer to a question posted) that they were punks enough to jump a man from behind but not man enough to do what it took to use the incinerator? or very similar, and it was a given as a reason to a poster's question. Once again you are not following what was posted and it makes it difficult to constantly reply to what you think you read.

Again...in a logical manor, if a person is desensitized to horrific events. When a situation arises that needs, suggests or mandates getting one's hands bloody, that person would likely and logically be way more inclined than a squeamish, not ever exposed person. Does that make sense? No one is talking about "risk" concerning like boxers, paramedics, etc. We are talking probability on an event that has already occurred and their back against a wall.

That's ridiculous and incorrect to say that a sworn affidavit(charges) cannot be used in court. I personally KNOW for a FACT if the affidavit is wrong and or the charges are wrong, that the charged person walks. For example: The arresting officer allowed the detective to do the paperwork and the paperwork used the code for "burglary of a dwelling house" in the affidavit. The guy was caught "red handed" in a BUSINESS, so right smack dab in the middle of court, with me on the stand about to testify, they let the guy walk, and proceeded to start the next case.

I do however agree that the politics of policing in Canada stink, and I do agree an innocent man was charged, tried, and punished via litigation and defense fees in the Ian Thompson case of self defense of his home. No definite, certain exculpatory evidence was available.

I also have told you if DM & MS are the wrong folks, the evidence will show that and they will be set free. You do understand the concept of exculpatory evidence right? The Crown cannot suppress it nor refuse to give it. If the DNA comes back in a few days(8-9 weeks? from May 14thish?)it could turn them back into choir boys.:floorlaugh:

Regardless, you are either failing to understand, or refusing to acknowledge one of the main points being made because it doesn't "fit". In this situation, and IMO, it is ridiculous to suggest that the body may have been burned/dismembered because they thought there might be a trail leading to them (an eyewitness in fact), and that simply completing that action would remove the trail and make it safe for them to keep both the remains and the truck on their property.

Also, exculpatory evidence does not always set the person free. We KNOW that because of previous history, Guy Paul Morin being perhaps one of the more well known instances in the past.

JMO

 

[bessie]

Mod Note: It's becoming tiresome, not to mention ridiculous, to read the same details misrepresented over and over again. If you note a post which does not include links, and you question the veracity of the information -- or know it to be false -- please don't respond. Instead, alert the post so that a mod can remove it.

*Random reminder intended for everyone, and for no one in particular*

 

[Archangel7]

Regardless, you are either failing to understand, or refusing to acknowledge one of the main points being made because it doesn't "fit". In this situation, and IMO, it is ridiculous to suggest that the body may have been burned/dismembered because they thought there might be a trail leading to them (an eyewitness in fact), and that simply completing that action would remove the trail and make it safe for them to keep both the remains and the truck on their property.

Also, exculpatory evidence does not always set the person free. We KNOW that because of previous history, Guy Paul Morin being perhaps one of the more well known instances in the past.

JMO

Why would someone burn and or dismember a body in your opinion?

Wouldn't it likely be an attempt to destroy any evidence that might implicate them? Other than that reason it is pretty much down to a sickly motivated thrill or extreme hatred.

By this point in the posting, if you can't understand it, I'm not sure I can explain it to you.

If a stranger stole your purse and you saw him briefly, while doing it. Then the stranger was through with the purse and was going to destroy it completely by fire to eliminate any of his evidence attached to the purse.

Without some other corroborative evidence, the eyewitness(you) might not be enough and usually isn't, given the time that has passed and the fact that many people potentially fit your description.

 

[Blomquist]

Why would someone burn and or dismember a body in your opinion?

Wouldn't it likely be an attempt to destroy any evidence that might implicate them? Other than that reason it is pretty much down to a sickly motivated thrill or extreme hatred.

By this point in the posting, if you can't understand it, I'm not sure I can explain it to you.

If a stranger stole your purse and you saw him briefly, while doing it. Then the stranger was through with the purse and was going to destroy it completely by fire to eliminate any of his evidence attached to the purse.

Without some other corroborative evidence, the eyewitness(you) might not be enough and usually isn't, given the time that has passed and the fact that many people potentially fit your description.

Do we know for a fact that TB was dismembered? I don't remember hearing this JMO

 

[dizzy1]

Do we know for a fact that TB was dismembered? I don't remember hearing this JMO

Dismembered or not, the body was "burned beyond recognition", which is cruel and evil enough IMO. It is bad enough to kill an innocent victim, but to burn the body or otherwise maim or destroy it is so disrespectful and cruel to the victim, and the victims family, MOO. I think what Archangel is trying to point out is that there are only a few reasons why a killer will burn a body. Either a sick/twisted mind, extreme hate for the victim, or to destroy evidence that will link them to the crime. I can't think of any other reasons why a killer would burn the victim either...

 

[Archangel7]

Do we know for a fact that TB was dismembered? I don't remember hearing this JMO

I don't know for a fact, that's why I asked why a person would burn AND OR dismember. {mod snip}

 

[Alethea Dice]

Why would someone burn and or dismember a body in your opinion?

Wouldn't it likely be an attempt to destroy any evidence that might implicate them? Other than that reason it is pretty much down to a sickly motivated thrill or extreme hatred.

By this point in the posting, if you can't understand it, I'm not sure I can explain it to you.

If a stranger stole your purse and you saw him briefly, while doing it. Then the stranger was through with the purse and was going to destroy it completely by fire to eliminate any of his evidence attached to the purse.

Without some other corroborative evidence, the eyewitness(you) might not be enough and usually isn't, given the time that has passed and the fact that many people potentially fit your description.

I understand the reasons why someone might burn/dismember a body to remove evidence. What has been pointed out several times by various people, is that they did NOT destroy the evidence pointing to them by merely doing that and nothing else.

The only way your comparison would match this discussion would be if the person stealing the purse first removed all the contents (wallet, cards, keys, etc.) and kept them on their person, then destroyed the purse by burning it. In spite of having destroyed all evidence on the actual purse, they still have all the rest of the evidence that points to them (all of the contents of the purse). Likewise, by only destroying the body and keeping the remains and the truck on the property, only a portion of the evidence pointing to the accused has been removed. In both instances, the suspect STILL HAS, in their possession, other corroborative evidence to go along with the eye witness account.

However, as you yourself stated, "By this point in the posting, if you can't understand it, I'm not sure I can explain it to you."

JMO

 

[Blomquist]

I don't know for a fact, that's why I asked why a person would burn AND OR dismember. {mod snip}

Why would someone destroy evidence that would implicate them and leave major evidence that also implicates them. Its a simple concept IMO. IF you want to remove evidence of your own part in a grisly murder by burning a body...WHY would you leave so many other pieces of evidence pointing right to your door. ???????

It does not make sense +++ JMO IMO MOO

The only thing that makes sense of this.IMO ....is that the ones burning the body are trying to remove their own evidence from the body/case whilst then deliberately putting the other evidence pointing directly to someone else. JMO

 

[Alethea Dice]

Why would someone destroy evidence that would implicate them and leave major evidence that also implicates them. Its a simple concept IMO. IF you want to remove evidence of your own part in a grisly murder by burning a body...WHY would you leave so many other pieces of evidence pointing right to your door. ???????

It does not make sense +++ JMO IMO MOO

The only thing that makes sense of this.IMO ....is that the ones burning the body are trying to remove their own evidence from the body/case whilst then deliberately putting the other evidence pointing directly to someone else. JMO

Exactly!! Thank you!

 

[Sillybilly]

Why would someone destroy evidence that would implicate them and leave major evidence that also implicates them. Its a simple concept IMO. IF you want to remove evidence of your own part in a grisly murder by burning a body...WHY would you leave so many other pieces of evidence pointing right to your door. ???????

It does not make sense +++ JMO IMO MOO

The only thing that makes sense of this.IMO ....is that the ones burning the body are trying to remove their own evidence from the body/case whilst then deliberately putting the other evidence pointing directly to someone else. JMO

They wanted the truck and thought it was well hidden inside a trailer. Once the VIN was obliterated/changed, they could simply claim they bought it off some unknown dude (i.e. a la "Chico" in an earlier case that was cited here).

They didn't want Tim and didn't want his body found as it might provide their DNA. By burning it, they thought a pile of ashes out in the boonies would never be discovered. Ye olde "no body, no crime" thought process?

Material possessions are important to creeps like this ... humans that get in the way of their material acquisitions are disposable.

 

[Sillybilly]

Mods, anybody ??? Why does my "signature" re MOO come and go from my posts? I'm not changing anything and my default is set to "show your signature".

 

[Blomquist]

They wanted the truck and thought it was well hidden inside a trailer. Once the VIN was obliterated/changed, they could simply claim they bought it off some unknown dude (i.e. a la "Chico" in an earlier case that was cited here).

They didn't want Tim and didn't want his body found as it might provide their DNA. By burning it, they thought a pile of ashes out in the boonies would never be discovered. Ye olde "no body, no crime" thought process?

Material possessions are important to creeps like this ... humans that get in the way of their material acquisitions are disposable.

Thanks for your opinion.....but in my opinion we still have no idea exactly what they wanted. You could have hidden the truck inside a trailer and put it anywhere. There are enough derelict looking areas in and around Brantford to leave a trailer for a few days IMO. Why on earth would DM WANT the remains of a dead body on his own property? This was not the '''boonies''' to him...it was his own land. Plonking a burned corpse on ones own land does not seem credible to me. JMO So ye olde No body , no crime thought process is rather redundant IMO...when said body is lying there as quite the reminder of a crime IMO.

As for material possessions being important '''to creeps like this'''' it is known that DM had all the material possessions he could possibly want and even bought such for friends judging by the reports from friends they we have seen posted here.

The ''humans that get in the way of their material acquisitions are disposable.'' comment could well be designated as relating to those who wanted DM out of the way as well as TB ??? JMO

 

[lanman]

They wanted the truck and thought it was well hidden inside a trailer. Once the VIN was obliterated/changed, they could simply claim they bought it off some unknown dude (i.e. a la "Chico" in an earlier case that was cited here).

They didn't want Tim and didn't want his body found as it might provide their DNA. By burning it, they thought a pile of ashes out in the boonies would never be discovered. Ye olde "no body, no crime" thought process?

Material possessions are important to creeps like this ... humans that get in the way of their material acquisitions are disposable.

Exactly! If they killed TB as part of stealing his truck, then it would be rather stupid to destroy the truck afterwards. That would be like a robbing a convenience store and then burning the money they took.

 

[Blomquist]

Exactly! If they killed TB as part of stealing his truck, then it would be rather stupid to destroy the truck afterwards. That would be like a robbing a convenience store and then burning the money they took.

But what if that wasn't the reason..... JMO

 

[lanman]

But what if that wasn't the reason..... JMO

With 2 prior test drives of the same type of truck, and the fact that DM owned the same type of truck, then they were most likely after the truck. There is possibility they were not, but some might say its also possible that aliens from outer space played a role in this

 

[Blomquist]

With 2 prior test drives of the same type of truck, and the fact that DM owned the same type of truck, then they were most likely after the truck. There is possibility they were not, but some might say its also possible that aliens from outer space played a role in this

I believe there is allegedly only one prior test drive and they didn't murder him !

Either wrong guy or wrong truck IMO

 

[redheart]

http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/06/05/hamilton-bosma-third-test-drive.html

Hamilton police confirm a third man was contacted for a test drive of a truck he was selling with the same cellphone that was used to call Tim Bosma the day before he died.

....

Kavanagh told CBC News Wednesday that the Etobicoke man and the Toronto man were interviewed by police. He said it's possible Millard may have contacted other truck owners.

"Down the road, there may be more people," Kavanagh said. "We've seized a lot of computer equipment that we have to go through."

 

[Alethea Dice]

Mods, anybody ??? Why does my "signature" re MOO come and go from my posts? I'm not changing anything and my default is set to "show your signature".

Your signature is showing on all your posts from my view, sillybilly. I haven't noticed it missing from any.

 

[Blomquist]

http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/06/05/hamilton-bosma-third-test-drive.html

Hamilton police confirm a third man was contacted for a test drive of a truck he was selling with the same cellphone that was used to call Tim Bosma the day before he died.

....

Kavanagh told CBC News Wednesday that the Etobicoke man and the Toronto man were interviewed by police. He said it's possible Millard may have contacted other truck owners.

"Down the road, there may be more people," Kavanagh said. "We've seized a lot of computer equipment that we have to go through."

I take it the third guy is still alive?

Either they were looking for a specific truck or a specific guy. IMO I have no idea why .... its always possible that someone saw/overheard something they were not mean't to. JMO

How would Kavanagh know who actually spoke on the burner phone ?? I suppose he is just assuming it was DM.... I mean if Etobicoke guy says that DM actually told him his name then we pretty much know the whole thing was a set up JMO... Who would be out there telling someone their name if they planned on either stealing their truck or murdering them or both ??? JMO

 

[Alethea Dice]

I take it the third guy is still alive?

Either they were looking for a specific truck or a specific guy. IMO I have no idea why .... its always possible that someone saw/overheard something they were not mean't to. JMO

How would Kavanagh know who actually spoke on the burner phone ?? I suppose he is just assuming it was DM.... I mean if Etobicoke guy says that DM actually told him his name then we pretty much know the whole thing was a set up JMO... Who would be out there telling someone their name if they planned on either stealing their truck or murdering them or both ??? JMO

The third test drive never happened. The owner missed the call.

“There was a third test drive initiated by [Dellen] Millard,” said Sgt. Debbie McGreal, spokesperson for Hamilton police.
<snip>
The third man who was allegedly contacted by Millard lives in the Toronto area, McGreal said. He had a Dodge Ram 2500 diesel truck listed for sale on Kijiji and AutoTrader. He missed the phone call and a test drive was never arranged.