The Incinerator

[Arnie M]

Somehow I missed this early picture taken of the incinerator at the farm ... turns out it is portable , powered by propane (instead of typical diesel ) ... hard to tell if 250 or 500 model .... most of them have a small "door" plus the whole top can open for larger items .... but this one appears to only have the smaller door .... thus the possibility some dismembering would be required (as someone speculated earlier) ... it also has the afterburner attachment (apparatus on the top) .... this is a secondary burner compartment in the chimney that "burns the smoke" and most of the odor ... (no emissions , smoke , or smell goes into the environment)

Hopefully that clarifies a few things. thanks.
AM


http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BKQFAWBCAAEYSAs.jpg

edit :thanks for including the link (coldpizza)

 

[Juballee]

True but the previous posts were about why DM isn't actively helping DM if he's wrongly charged, with the results of that being his release or bail.

There is simply no legitimate reason for a person to sit in jail without bail with all the evidence and the accused's own "story" indicating his innocence. Even the completely involved and justly charged get bail.

And don't tell me a Justice System is going to keep a complete and obviously innocent person in jail just to appear reputable or for DM's own good. If that's true there is a much bigger Charter issue at hand than theft, confinement and murder.

Maybe being "remorseful" has a lot to do with DM's continued incarceration or the real estate hasn't sold yet.:floorlaugh:

By now DM and Team would know or at the very least know how the Crown will pursue their prosecution via the discovery process. Thus how to present their "story" in order to get bail.

DP has one last hurrah at Judicial Pretrial to layout how uninvolved, innocent and wrongly accused DM is. DM better hope that 4.1 Mil property closes before Sept. 12th.:floorlaugh:

Isn't the date in September to set a date for pre-trial?

Have we heard yet if the crown has completed their disclosure yet, because I thought he couldn't apply for bail until disclosure was complete, and I think the last we heard was that they were still waiting for more disclosure.

And to the posts about speaking up and helping LE, again, perhaps you have not been charged with a crime you did not commit before, but they really do take anything you say and use it against you, so for example, if you said "I didn't buy it" they might turn that around to mean that you obviously had someone buy it for you. And then when you try to clarify that, they take what you say there and twist that into something that you also didn't mean, so that you can clarify that too, and before you know it, they have concocted a completely different version of what you have said to use against you in court, where you then pretty much have to testify in your own defence to contradict what the crown is alleging that you said. Which is why any lawyer will tell you that it is always in your best interests to maintain your right to remain silent, whether you are innocent or guilty.

 

[Blomquist]

Somehow I missed this early picture taken of the incinerator at the farm ... turns out it is portable , powered by propane (instead of typical diesel ) ... hard to tell if 250 or 500 model .... most of them have a small "door" plus the whole top can open for larger items .... but this one appears to only have the smaller door .... thus the possibility some dismembering would be required (as someone speculated earlier) ... it also has the afterburner attachment (apparatus on the top) .... this is a secondary burner compartment in the chimney that "burns the smoke" and most of the odor ... (no emissions , smoke , or smell goes into the environment)

Hopefully that clarifies a few things. thanks.
AM

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BKQFAWBCAAEYSAs.jpg

edit :thanks for including the link (coldpizza)

Don't recall the body was reported as being dismembered. Have you seen any MSM that suggest this....?

 

[Blomquist]

Thinking of the Eliminator SN250 and DM maintaining his constitutional right to remain silent, IMO, it would do him no harm to clear up all the speculation about this unique piece of farm equipment and let LE know what he did make this purchase. Whether that be "I didn't buy it", "I only ever used it to burn branches", "had a problem with coyotes". JMHO, but if there wasn't a trace of human DNA or remains in the machine and it was only used for burning wildlife and non-animal items, what harm would it do for DM or DP to clear this up immediately?

Are you suggesting they bring the matter of an incinerator back into the realms of MSM? It's a hard job to get anyone to focus on the presumption of innocence imo....even if DP were to say it was used for wayward or decomposing wildlife...do you think he would be believed by the naysayers who already believe DM is guilty? IMO they will come out guns a blazin' and claim that either DP is 'just defending his client so he has to say that' or ' well if it wasn't the incinerator he must have used ....." ... I hardly think anything anyone says at this point will be anything less than total media fodder...that will be interpreted to the negative by those who already have the accused hung drawn and quartered...JMO

 

[dizzy1]

Don't recall the body was reported as being dismembered. Have you seen any MSM that suggest this....?

I believe ArnieM's statement was as follows:

thus the possibility some dismembering would be required (as someone speculated earlier)

:moo:

 

[redheart]

Isn't the date in September to set a date for pre-trial?

Have we heard yet if the crown has completed their disclosure yet, because I thought he couldn't apply for bail until disclosure was complete, and I think the last we heard was that they were still waiting for more disclosure.

And to the posts about speaking up and helping LE, again, perhaps you have not been charged with a crime you did not commit before, but they really do take anything you say and use it against you, so for example, if you said "I didn't buy it" they might turn that around to mean that you obviously had someone buy it for you. And then when you try to clarify that, they take what you say there and twist that into something that you also didn't mean, so that you can clarify that too, and before you know it, they have concocted a completely different version of what you have said to use against you in court, where you then pretty much have to testify in your own defence to contradict what the crown is alleging that you said. Which is why any lawyer will tell you that it is always in your best interests to maintain your right to remain silent, whether you are innocent or guilty.

BBM Sounds like some of the conversations in here. JMO

 

[Archangel7]

Isn't the date in September to set a date for pre-trial?

rsbm...

Yes the last date I read was Sept. 12th to set a JP date.

On the subject of discovery......I can't imagine what, of any significance would still be left for pretrial discovery at this point in time.

Therefore, say for example, the cops tested and found nothing in, on, or around the incinerator. Also for example if DM was physically unable to have driven the trailer to his mother's and wouldn't likely have known of or noticed it's(the trailer) disappearance, DP could use that as as leverage to bail his client, coupled with other such "proof" exonerating his client.

Or if DM "told" his story reported in MSM by DP.

Or even IF DM said we planned to just beat TB senseless and carjack the truck but not kill him....DM could likely make bail.

Even if DP told the judge the cops didn't charge DM with 1st Deg Murder, it was an automatic upgrade to theft and confinement once a body was found so even they don't think he did it. So allow him bail.......

See, the thing is this, bail is not necessarily dependant on guilt, discovery, etc, etc. Others here have even referenced the homicide on tape of Sammy Yatim in the Dundas streetcar, and bail was reportedly awarded by the court.

Yet DM sits 23 1/2 hours in a jail cell. I do agree that there must be much more to this case than imagined by some.

The Judicial Pretrial Judge will hear what each side tries to present and the Judge will decide to dismiss, carryover to trial, what will be allowed to carry forward to trial and if DP and DM get cold feet, what plea he would accept if formally presented to the Bench.

 

[Alethea Dice]

BBM Sounds like some of the conversations in here. JMO

Couldn't agree more. JMO

 

[Juballee]

rsbm...

Yes the last date I read was Sept. 12th to set a JP date.

On the subject of discovery......I can't imagine what, of any significance would still be left for pretrial discovery at this point in time.

Therefore, say for example, the cops tested and found nothing in, on, or around the incinerator. Also for example if DM was physically unable to have driven the trailer to his mother's and wouldn't likely have known of or noticed it's(the trailer) disappearance, DP could use that as as leverage to bail his client, coupled with other such "proof" exonerating his client.

Or if DM "told" his story reported in MSM by DP.

Or even IF DM said we planned to just beat TB senseless and carjack the truck but not kill him....DM could likely make bail.

Even if DP told the judge the cops didn't charge DM with 1st Deg Murder, it was an automatic upgrade to theft and confinement once a body was found so even they don't think he did it. So allow him bail.......

See, the thing is this, bail is not necessarily dependant on guilt, discovery, etc, etc. Others here have even referenced the homicide on tape of Sammy Yatim in the Dundas streetcar, and bail was reportedly awarded by the court.

Yet DM sits 23 1/2 hours in a jail cell. I do agree that there must be much more to this case than imagined by some.

The Judicial Pretrial Judge will hear what each side tries to present and the Judge will decide to dismiss, carryover to trial, what will be allowed to carry forward to trial and if DP and DM get cold feet, what plea he would accept if formally presented to the Bench.

I was under the impression that all the discovery evidence had to be shared before the suspect could apply for bail, not just most of the discovery, does anyone know the answer to that?

Also, do you (or anyone else) know, does the crown have to (or perhaps just always does) give their strongest evidence first, when it has to be broken down into more than one submission? This could be very interesting to know because perhaps if he has not applied for bail yet, it could be because he got very damaging evidence early in the discovery, or it could be that they are still waiting for the real damaging evidence to be submitted.

Does it all or just mostly have to be submitted to the defendant's council before pretrial as well?

I am confused by where you say "if DM 'told' his story reported in MSM by DP". Are you saying that DM would make bail if he told his side of the story to the media?

Did you not earlier post that he hasn't made bail because he has too much incriminating evidence against him, are you now suggesting that if he did one of the things on your list that he could then make bail? Or that he has applied for bail but has been denied already? I am not trying to twist your words, just trying to follow you and I'm confused but what point you are trying to make.

I don't think that the 'he is in jail, therefore he must be guilty' theory holds water, unless you can ignore all evidence that occasionally some (not implying you!) LE and some courts are fallible. Even if we knew for certain that he had applied for bail and been denied because of one reason or another, there is still no rule that says that if you are in prison awaiting trial you must be guilty and therefore that in itself will be now used as evidence of your guilt. It's a very Orwellian concept in my mind. Isn't that one of the rights our veterans fought for that make our country a great place? To me that is a right, like the freedom of speech or the right not to be discriminated against, that I do not just appreciate on paper, but I practice it in my everyday life.

 

[Alethea Dice]

See, the thing is this, bail is not necessarily dependant on guilt, discovery, etc, etc. Others here have even referenced the homicide on tape of Sammy Yatim in the Dundas streetcar, and bail was reportedly awarded by the court.

Yet DM sits 23 1/2 hours in a jail cell. I do agree that there must be much more to this case than imagined by some.

That's not really comparing apples to apples though. Did you really expect there was any chance that the Sammy Yatim killer would not get bail?


Denied bail - Michael Schweitzer, Adam Picard, Jaycee Mildenberger, Aleisha Block. It was a year after the killing that Adam Picard even applied for bail.

JMO

 

[Blomquist]

There simply is no good reason for DM to have had that incinerator. At least none that I've heard mentioned on here. The "reasons" I've heard discussed on here just don't make sense. MOO

They don't make sense to some on here from what I can see.....in fact there are several who do see having one as making sense. So speaking for what I have seen posted I would say that there are as many who see reason as don't imo.

 

[Snoofo]

:groucho:

True but the previous posts were about why DM isn't actively helping DM if he's wrongly charged, with the results of that being his release or bail.

There is simply no legitimate reason for a person to sit in jail without bail with all the evidence and the accused's own "story" indicating his innocence. Even the completely involved and justly charged get bail.

And don't tell me a Justice System is going to keep a complete and obviously innocent person in jail just to appear reputable or for DM's own good. If that's true there is a much bigger Charter issue at hand than theft, confinement and murder.

Maybe being "remorseful" has a lot to do with DM's continued incarceration or the real estate hasn't sold yet.:floorlaugh:

By now DM and Team would know or at the very least know how the Crown will pursue their prosecution via the discovery process. Thus how to present their "story" in order to get bail.

DP has one last hurrah at Judicial Pretrial to layout how uninvolved, innocent and wrongly accused DM is. DM better hope that 4.1 Mil property closes before Sept. 12th.:floorlaugh:

(BBM)
Who ever said there wasn't??
:groucho:

 

[Archangel7]

That's not really comparing apples to apples though. Did you really expect there was any chance that the Sammy Yatim killer would not get bail?


Denied bail - Michael Schweitzer, Adam Picard, Jaycee Mildenberger, Aleisha Block. It was a year after the killing that Adam Picard even applied for bail.

JMO

The issue isn't so much that allegedly there is a murder on tape in the Yatim case and then bail awarded, as the issue that there is no evidence of bail in DM's case. The fact is, that the bail for the first, makes the lack of bail for the second even look worse in the public's eye.

I actually can't reconcile why 1) there is no bail so far if DM is innocent, 2) there is an alleged story(inferring that DM is uninvolved) which is alluded to his supposed innocence and thus should present a bail opportunity, but not yet apparently.

Why would a completely innocent, uninvolved, duped man not yet seek bail?
Or is it that the Court has deemed there is justification for continued detention?

 

[Archangel7]

:groucho:

(BBM)
Who ever said there wasn't??
:groucho:

I agree. Any time there is fine print in the Charter about Parliament reigning supreme over the Charter WRT suspending the right to habeas corpus.........

Section 10 of the Charter states that “every one has the right on arrest or detention…to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.”[1] This right can be suspended by legislation.[2] While a law suspending habeas corpus can be challenged on constitutional grounds, the courts can uphold such a law if it finds that law to be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”[3] However, even if a law suspending habeas corpus is declared to be unconstitutional by a court, that decision can be overridden by Parliament if it expressly declares that the impugned law shall operate notwithstanding the provisions of the Charter.[4] This provision was inserted in the Charter to preserve the principle of Parliamentary supremacy, but it has never been invoked on the federal level.

http://www.loc.gov/law/help/habeas-corpus/canada.php

 

[swedie]

:welcome6: 2Hope4 and Arnie M! Thank you for your posts and valuable insight. Nice to have different theories, opinions and new information to go on.

Just one think I would like to make perfectly clear to those assuming TB was reduced to ashes. This article which I also posted here 710, but possibly over looked,TB WAS NOT REDUCED TO ASHES; THERE WAS A BODY. HTH.

As some posters have stated, whether the incinerator was used or not, TB was burned beyond recognition as reported by LE. It is highly speculative IF the incinerator was used, TB was found inside thus leaving DM and MS with the secure thought TB was hidden within the incinerator, and until things settled down or they felt the heat was off, they could return to the farmland and finish the disposal of TB. Being it was on DM's own private farmland, evidence hidden, the assume no one was to the wiser. Out of sight, out of mind. But the nose knows kwim. Thankfully for that concerned neighbour, I believe this is how TB was discovered.

Being as the rightfully concerned neighbour or worker who took a picture(s) of the incinerator, makes me believe they were close enough to it to smell decomposing body. IMO he was the one who lead LE to TB's body. This is a huge indication as to why LE asked the picture taker(s) not to speak to media about their findings. They were trying to protect evidence and not release the horrible news to the MSM.

So with TB's body inside the incinerator, TB's truck hidden inside DM's trailer, the guilty believe they had covered their trail. Little did they realize LE cleverly tracked their trail with other evidence such as the burner phone, witnesses, video surveillance and a whole wealth of evidence which will be presented during trial MOO.

Police confirmed for the first time on Tuesday that his remains were found at the sprawling Waterloo farm purchased by Millard in May 2011.
At the rolling, grassy property partly covered in dense woods, a search was concluded on Tuesday, said Hamilton police Const. Debbie McGreal.

A spokesperson for the coroner’s office said Bosma’s body had not been released as of Tuesday afternoon. The remains will likely be absent at a funeral the family has scheduled for 11 a.m. Wednesday.


http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...ed_police_interest_in_her_disappearance.html#

 

[Snoofo]

:welcome6: 2Hope4 and Arnie M! Thank you for your posts and valuable insight. Nice to have different theories, opinions and new information to go on.

Just one think I would like to make perfectly clear to those assuming TB was reduced to ashes. This article which I also posted here 710, but possibly over looked,TB WAS NOT REDUCED TO ASHES; THERE WAS A BODY. HTH.

As some posters have stated, whether the incinerator was used or not, TB was burned beyond recognition as reported by LE. It is highly speculative IF the incinerator was used, TB was found inside thus leaving DM and MS with the secure thought TB was hidden within the incinerator, and until things settled down or they felt the heat was off, they could return to the farmland and finish the disposal of TB. Being it was on DM's own private farmland, evidence hidden, the assume no one was to the wiser. Out of sight, out of mind. But the nose knows kwim. Thankfully for that concerned neighbour, I believe this is how TB was discovered.

Being as the rightfully concerned neighbour or worker who took a picture(s) of the incinerator, makes me believe they were close enough to it to smell decomposing body. IMO he was the one who lead LE to TB's body. This is a huge indication as to why LE asked the picture taker(s) not to speak to media about their findings. They were trying to protect evidence and not release the horrible news to the MSM.

So with TB's body inside the incinerator, TB's truck hidden inside DM's trailer, the guilty believe they had covered their trail. Little did they realize LE cleverly tracked their trail with other evidence such as the burner phone, witnesses, video surveillance and a whole wealth of evidence which will be presented during trial MOO.

Police confirmed for the first time on Tuesday that his remains were found at the sprawling Waterloo farm purchased by Millard in May 2011.
At the rolling, grassy property partly covered in dense woods, a search was concluded on Tuesday, said Hamilton police Const. Debbie McGreal.

A spokesperson for the coroner’s office said Bosma’s body had not been released as of Tuesday afternoon. The remains will likely be absent at a funeral the family has scheduled for 11 a.m. Wednesday.


http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...ed_police_interest_in_her_disappearance.html#

If TB's body was found in the incinerator there would be hardly any question as to whether or not it was used at all. I mean, why burn him elsewhere then hide him in there? So if, as you suspect he was found in there, he was presumably burned in there. Then Kavanagh could not have said he did not know whether or not it was used, as he did in this link:
http://read.thestar.com/#!/article/...nerator-found-at-farm-owned-by-dellen-millard

So I think that whatever else we can sleuth about the charred remains and the eliminator, it is fairly safe to say the body was not found inside.

 

[Snoofo]

I agree. Any time there is fine print in the Charter about Parliament reigning supreme over the Charter WRT suspending the right to habeas corpus.........

Section 10 of the Charter states that “every one has the right on arrest or detention…to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.”[1] This right can be suspended by legislation.[2] While a law suspending habeas corpus can be challenged on constitutional grounds, the courts can uphold such a law if it finds that law to be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”[3] However, even if a law suspending habeas corpus is declared to be unconstitutional by a court, that decision can be overridden by Parliament if it expressly declares that the impugned law shall operate notwithstanding the provisions of the Charter.[4] This provision was inserted in the Charter to preserve the principle of Parliamentary supremacy, but it has never been invoked on the federal level.

http://www.loc.gov/law/help/habeas-corpus/canada.php

Go on. Tell us more.... :groucho:


.....:detective:....

So would you say there is a slight chance that something pretty heavy-duty is going on?
lease:

(Yes, I am having fun with the smilies tonight)

 

[Arnie M]

.... May I add this for further clarification as to the state in which TB was found. I hope this can put an end to the speculation as it's clearly states there was a BODY not just ashes as some speculate. I assume TB's remains would not have been released in time for the funeral service due to the fact, SB had decided to have his body cremated which of course takes scheduling and time after an autopsy. Sharlene was handed a BOX containing her husband's ashes. Not the way she intended to have Tim upon death. She wanted a hand to hold, a cheek to kiss goodbye. HTH and :moo:. .......

As police probe Laura’s disappearance they appear to be wrapping up the extensive ground search that followed the discovery of Bosma’s charred body. Police confirmed for the first time on Tuesday that his remains were found at the sprawling Waterloo farm purchased by Millard in May 2011. A spokesperson for the coroner’s office said Bosma’s body had not been released as of Tuesday afternoon. The remains will likely be absent at a funeral the family has scheduled for 11 a.m. Wednesday.

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...wed_police_interest_in_her_disappearance.html

thank you swedie

Do you know if SB had the remains cremated ? The way she spoke during an interview was that she got JB back in a box ... as though that was all that was left.

"BODY" could just be a matter of terminology .... a reporter or coroner or police would say "the body" had not been released ..... they would never say .... ''the box of ashes" has not been released.

Also the term "burned beyond recognition" has a wide range .... right from a complete body with extensive exterior burns ... down to a small amount of ashes and bone fragments .... when the detective used those words it seemed purposeful and a discreet way to imply extensive incineration ... he was trying to make that point

thanks
AM

 

[skatergirl]

Sorry, yes, you're correct. I believe it was on a trailer. I wonder where it was earlier, that the neighbours didn't notice it until around the time of the murder.

JMO

I believe the incinerator was noticed previously, and also noted that it had recently been moved from the location it was usually kept

Not sure if this information was posted earlier in regards to the incinerator but here are the tweets regarding it from the CBC reporter who spoke with the neighbour and obtained the picture....

Trevor Dunn‏@trevorjdunn7h
Millard neighbour says incinerator he photographed was moved recently. On Friday, at it's original location, the ground was scorched

Trevor Dunn‏@trevorjdunn7h
Neighbour says forensic investigation tent is now set up over burnt soil he observed Friday - where incinerator was originally located

https://twitter.com/trevorjdunn

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9432188&postcount=62"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Canada - Timothy Bosma, 32, Hamilton Ontario, 6 May 2013 - #4 **ARREST**[/ame]

 

[Blomquist]

thank you swedie

Do you know if SB had the remains cremated ? The way she spoke during an interview was that she got JB back in a box ... as though that was all that was left.

"BODY" could just be a matter of terminology .... a reporter or coroner or police would say "the body" had not been released ..... they would never say .... ''the box of ashes" has not been released.

Also the term "burned beyond recognition" has a wide range .... right from a complete body with extensive exterior burns ... down to a small amount of ashes and bone fragments .... when the detective used those words it seemed purposeful and a discreet way to imply extensive incineration ... he was trying to make that point

thanks
AM

My I respectfully suggest that you read this whole thread.... as this has been debated over and over. You may find some helpful reading and some answers to your questions in there...imo... :seeya: