Tim Bosma: Dellen Millard & Mark Smich chgd w/Murder; Christina Noudga, Accessory #3

[Tamarind]

IMHO, there are things TB's widow knows that we won't know until the trial. I haven't seen one single bail hearing for any of the accused. I haven't seen one ounce of MSM coverage indicating that there are other suspects. IMHO, with DM's money, if the evidence was not strong, or if in fact LE didn't have the right guy, we would have seen a pretty big fuss over the AG's ruling and DM would be sitting at Maple Gate awaiting his trial. We're talking several police forces here. We're talking eye witness reports seeing the truck in Brantford. CCTV footage, forensics, DM's burner phone- the list goes on. IMHO, SB knows the faces she saw that fateful night and she knows they're the ones behind bars today. IMO, suggesting that SB needs to be exposed to far reaching theories in an effort to satisfy herself that LE have the right people charged seems a tad bit cruel and I don't know who benefits from it all. MOO

I am aware of what they say they have. I am more interested in what they don't have.

Eye witness of a truck matching that description in Brantford. How does that incriminate anyone?

CCTV footage of truck going down street at a particular time. Does it follow them along the way?

Forensics - fingerprints are going to be in truck if the truck went for a test drive, no surprise there.

Incinerator bought by someone we don't know.

Burner phone bought by someone we don't know and used by someone we don't know, but allegedly belonging to DM.

Regardless of who SB saw she did not see anything after the truck left her driveway. Her testimony is only as good as the moments she remembers. I do not see it as cruel to have a widow open to all possibilities. She obviously wants the right individual and not just anyone who can , fill in. Nothing cruel about it at all. It would be cruel if the accused were innocent and the one who isn't is free to roam. If I were SB, I would want ALL cards on the table.

 

[Carli]

Unsupported? Seriously? I have a personal interest in my comment and you do you not have to tell me how important this issue is to me. . I work with an organization that councils just such cases. ..MY DAUGHTER IS A FIRST RESPONDER and I stand behind what I said 100%. I DID NOT MARGINALIZE OR GUESS OR MISINTERPRET THE ISSUES AND DO NOT TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK YOU KNOW!

My apologies for the anger...but you don't know! JMO MOO

In your comment #251 you stated "here is a another very serious problem with all of these "grisly" crimes happening. you only have to look at the suicide stats for first responders for confirmation of this fact. These people are seeing far more grisly and "deranged" crimes than ever before. And that is a problem!"

The bold highlights are your own. I felt it important to point out that the tragic suicides of first responders is not confirmation of any "fact" about attending grisly crimes or about any increase in grisly and "deranged" crimes but arises from a broad spectrum of disturbing crises and the general lack of support for PTSD and other emotional and psychological stresses that result. MOO. As you are undoubtedly aware, Canada's homicide rate has steadily and dramatically reduced year by year for decades. At the same time fatal motor vehicle accidents have increased in many provinces. With respect to the potential for emotional overload, there is little consequential difference between attending at the scene of a grisly murder or at the scene of a grisly car accident. IMO. MOO. IMHO.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/legal12a-eng.htm

 

[Carli]

Carli, as to your questions:

1. It isn't going to happen.

2. It isn't going to happen.

3. Where's your third question?

DM and MS are still charged with TB's murder.

LE don't tell people their loved ones are dead and then turn around and say "oops". LE charged DM with the murder of his father and LB because there is evidence to support it. The AG believes there is sufficient evidence to seal a conviction for TB's murder.

Wishful thinking though. All MOO.

No point in asking the third question because nobody is willing to respond to either of the first two. MOO.

 

[Carli]

I'm all ears, or eyes. There is no need to name names. We don't need to go there. Hope you have contacted LE with your scenarios or speculations.

Seriously, you should leave it up to LE to sleuth out people outside the current scope of investigation. But then again, how do you know what they have and have not investigated? I for one would want to see anyone persecuted for murders they didn't commit. MOO.

Anyone with tips is asked to call Hamilton police’s information hotline, 905-546-2100, or Crime Stoppers.

Why would anyone contact LE with speculations??? They have the professional expertise, the legal capacity and the public duty to carry out in-depth investigations and, presumably, are more than capable of determining the names and addresses of business and personal associates and employees as well as families, friends and acquaintances of both arrestees and victims. That being said, "tunnel vision" is a well known and documented policing problem, especially is so-called "high profile" cases and, as we well know, once arrests have been made in any crime, the pressure relaxes in respect to seeking out other suspects. However, you point is very well taken. How can any of us guess what LE may have or have not investigated? (Hopefully you did not intentionally leave out the word "not" in the succeeding sentence, though.) MOO. IMHO. etc.

 

[Carli]

Carli, as to your questions:

1. It isn't going to happen.

2. It isn't going to happen.

3. Where's your third question?

DM and MS are still charged with TB's murder.

LE don't tell people their loved ones are dead and then turn around and say "oops". LE charged DM with the murder of his father and LB because there is evidence to support it. The AG believes there is sufficient evidence to seal a conviction for TB's murder.

Wishful thinking though. All MOO.

Do you hold the view that all persons charged with capital crimes in Canada are guilty as charged?

 

[Tamarind]

The Internet is not just Websleuths. There's a whole big wide world out there.

You're free to post your theories on Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, your own website and more.

You also might want to contact Amnesty International about all the injustice you've uncovered. Or the media.

Why stay on Websleuths and have your freedom of speech limited?

Thanks for the suggestions, but I have already made my decision to wait and watch. Maybe the defense already has the answers. If I change my mind and decide to reveal any thoughts I have on the case, is your blog open for my suggestions under under a relevant title in the comments section? TIA

 

[Tamarind]

No point in asking the third question because nobody is willing to respond to either of the first two. MOO.

Should LB turn up and WM's case be proven by the defense or by further investigation, that he did commit suicide or was murdered with a very strong motive, opinions that are fixed will not change IMO. It will become a case of 'we didn't have certain information so we couldn't possibly have known', which brings us back to the fact that some here have been trying to say this for quite some time. MOO

 

[Alethea Dice]

BBM - Would you assume LE would make it public knowledge if there was another arrest made in this case? PB was in effect when CN was arrested almost a year after DM and MS's arrest. They still notified the public and even gave her name. MOO.

Wonder if RP stated this (bold in article) as his response? It's broken up by the picture of SB and TM and no quotation marks and to be grammatically correct, it would be all one paragraph. So did he figuring the AG had based her decision on evidence? Hmm. MOO.

Ravin Pillay, one of Millard’s lawyers, says that the Crown is proceeding by direct indictment in the case, a rare move that means there will be no preliminary inquiry. Preliminary hearings are held to test evidence and determine whether there is enough to commit the case to trial.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/0...-degree-murder-charges-in-death-of-tim-bosma/

I'm not sure why you're asking me this because there is nothing in my post suggesting that another arrest may have been or has been made. But to answer your question, yes, I imagine and would hope that it would be made public if another arrest was made.

As for your second question, IMHO those are the reporters words. RP said they were proceeding by direct indictment and the reporter is informing the reader that it is rare, what it means, and the purpose of a preliminary hearing. There are no quotation marks because it's not a quote and there's nothing grammatically incorrect there. RP's feelings and words are in the third and fourth paragraph following your quote. I'm not sure if you're trying to suggest that RP was in some way saying that there is enough evidence that doesn't need testing, but a defense lawyer would not state that publicly even if he felt that way. In any event, all your bolded sentence is is a description of why preliminary hearings are held.

JMO

 

[Tamarind]

I'm not sure why you're asking me this because there is nothing in my post suggesting that another arrest may have been or has been made. But to answer your question, yes, I imagine and would hope that it would be made public if another arrest was made.

As for your second question, IMHO those are the reporters words. RP said they were proceeding by direct indictment and the reporter is informing the reader that it is rare, what it means, and the purpose of a preliminary hearing. There are no quotation marks because it's not a quote and there's nothing grammatically incorrect there. RP's feelings and words are in the third and fourth paragraph following your quote. I'm not sure if you're trying to suggest that RP was in some way saying that there is enough evidence that doesn't need testing, but a defense lawyer would not state that publicly even if he felt that way. In any event, all your bolded sentence is is a description of why preliminary hearings are held.

JMO

When we realize that LE will lay charges on the most limited of 'evidence' it helps understand why they feel they have enough for trial. By not having a preliminary hearing it says to me that defense are not willing to divulge anything at this stage. So a preliminary judge wouldn't have much to go on insofar as deciding whether or not the case had extreme validity or was simply enough to try a case. MOO. I agree with you, RP was stating a simple fact with no implication as far as the case is concerned.

 

[Sillybilly]

When we realize that LE will lay charges on the most limited of 'evidence' it helps understand why they feel they have enough for trial. By not having a preliminary hearing it says to me that defense are not willing to divulge anything at this stage. So a preliminary judge wouldn't have much to go on insofar as deciding whether or not the case had extreme validity or was simply enough to try a case. MOO. I agree with you, RP was stating a simple fact with no implication as far as the case is concerned.

Preliminary hearing was not held because the Crown decided to go with direct indictment and the defence had no say in that decision-making process.

 

[Tamarind]

Preliminary hearing was not held because the Crown decided to go with direct indictment and the defence had no say in that decision-making process.

Yes I know, point I am making is that IF defense had been willing to offer up anything prior to trial, the judge would have been considering it at pre-liminary hearing. The crown feels they will do well on what they have, although it is unchallenged at this point other than the not guilty stance of the accused. That does not mean it will not be challenged at trial.

 

[Carli]

Interesting article. What do other posters think? Is solitary confinement an acceptable way of containing those serving time? What about solitary confinement for those accused of crimes but not yet tried as in the TB case and several more. As we know, solitary confinement has been rejected as torture by most nations of the UN. Do we care? Do we fully accept torture nowadays? What is the purpose of solitary confinement anyway? In the TB case we have at least one individual in solitary confinement for nearly two years. Statistically he's probably mad as a hatter by now. Is that ok? Is it ok to torture people to the point of madness and beyond so long as they are guilty? Is it ok to torture people if they are not guilty? In Canada we have tortured mentally ill persons to death by holding them in solitary confinement and not interfering while, in at least one case, a suicide was carried out. Is that ok? What does our nation find so important about our right to torture that we can't sign on to a UN initiative to limit the practice ? Let's be candid. Let's be honest. At some fundamental level, do we actually like / enjoy torturing people whether personally or by proxy?

http://solitaryconfinement.org/uploads/SpecRapTortureAug2011.pdf

https://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=40097

http://antitorture.org/new-solitary-confinement/

 

[bessie]

Carli, with all due respect, the subject of the article is off topic in this forum. Perhaps you should start a thread in the Jury Room.

 

[Carli]

Carli, with all due respect, the subject of the article is off topic in this forum. Perhaps you should start a thread in the Jury Room.

Good suggestion, Bessie. I just thought the thread was running up on the shoals again with endless repetitive points. Anyway, I probably won't take up the suggestion (mostly because I'm not sure how to start a thread.) Probably simplest if I just delete. Qu'en pensez vous?

 

[Arnie M]

Carli, with all due respect, the subject of the article is off topic in this forum. Perhaps you should start a thread in the Jury Room.

Great Idea , so I started a thread for Alternate views and off topic opinions

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...s-amp-Off-Topic-Stuff&p=11597936#post11597936

It will help fill in the looooong wait until the trial starts



.

 

[Arnie M]

Good suggestion, Bessie. I just thought the thread was running up on the shoals again with endless repetitive points. Anyway, I probably won't take up the suggestion (mostly because I'm not sure how to start a thread.) Probably simplest if I just delete. Qu'en pensez vous?

Here ya' go Carli .... alternate views and daily thoughts are welcome here http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...s-amp-Off-Topic-Stuff&p=11597936#post11597936

best wishes

 

[Tamarind]

Interesting article. What do other posters think? Is solitary confinement an acceptable way of containing those serving time? What about solitary confinement for those accused of crimes but not yet tried as in the TB case and several more. As we know, solitary confinement has been rejected as torture by most nations of the UN. Do we care? Do we fully accept torture nowadays? What is the purpose of solitary confinement anyway? In the TB case we have at least one individual in solitary confinement for nearly two years. Statistically he's probably mad as a hatter by now. Is that ok? Is it ok to torture people to the point of madness and beyond so long as they are guilty? Is it ok to torture people if they are not guilty? In Canada we have tortured mentally ill persons to death by holding them in solitary confinement and not interfering while, in at least one case, a suicide was carried out. Is that ok? What does our nation find so important about our right to torture that we can't sign on to a UN initiative to limit the practice ? Let's be candid. Let's be honest. At some fundamental level, do we actually like / enjoy torturing people whether personally or by proxy?

http://solitaryconfinement.org/uploads/SpecRapTortureAug2011.pdf

https://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=40097

http://antitorture.org/new-solitary-confinement/

Staying with the thread topic, I have to say that in regard to DM and his solitary confinement, I do think it puts a lot of pressure on an accused to be placed in such a restricted place. If he can stay focused on things that contain his thoughts he may be able to see it through, without going completely nuts. I remember he did say to a reporter ( Molly Hayes?) that he did a lot of reading and read books on Law. Books do have a way of passing time and also if books are read to educate oneself it could have a benefit in that regard.

I also think his visits from his mother would be very precious to him and no doubt she helps keep him focused on proving his innocence. I would imagine she visits at least twice a week depending on the visiting schedule at the jail.

Thats not to say that two years is a very long time to be confined and as far as we can tell DM also seems to have limited access to showers and hair products ( although not fully proven).

But to stress a point that I do not think the situation surrounding his or anyone else s solitary confinement is in the best interest of anyone. IMO

 

[Tamarind]

Great Idea , so I started a thread for Alternate views and Stuff and off topic opinions

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...s-amp-Off-Topic-Stuff&p=11597936#post11597936

It will help fill in the looooong wait until the trial starts



.

Unless something unexpected happens in the meantime.
I'm sure we can all use your new thread if we decide to discuss 'alternate views'.( I agree with your first post in your new thread SC is far from acceptable ) But I am not sure what is meant by alternate views as with the title. Do you mean opinions about the case that are not the opinion of the those who believe the accused are guilty? Or opinions about incarceration and solitary confinement?

Relegating peoples valid opinions to another thread titled Alternate Theories and Off Topic Stuff seems rather discriminatory in my opinion. I think the title should be ' Solitary Confinement and Other Tortures deemed acceptable in Canada'. Carli did post about Solitary Confinement not about Stuff and Theories. Just my own valid opinion, I don't consider my opinion of lesser value than any other, and to be fair everyones opinion on here comes down to a theory, as we do not have knowledge right now of the actual truth of the situation in this case (TB).

 

[bessie]

Unless something unexpected happens in the meantime.
I'm sure we can all use your new thread if we decide to discuss 'alternate views'.( I agree with your first post in your new thread SC is far from acceptable ) But I am not sure what is meant by alternate views as with the title. Do you mean opinions about the case that are not the opinion of the those who believe the accused are guilty? Or opinions about incarceration and solitary confinement?

Relegating peoples valid opinions to another thread titled Alternate Theories and Off Topic Stuff seems rather discriminatory in my opinion. I think the title should be ' Solitary Confinement and Other Tortures deemed acceptable in Canada'. Carli did post about Solitary Confinement not about Stuff and Theories. Just my own valid opinion, I don't consider my opinion of lesser value than any other, and to be fair everyones opinion on here comes down to a theory, as we do not have knowledge right now of the actual truth of the situation in this case (TB).

I've changed the thread title to "Related Issues and Food for Thought", though I'm certain it was not Arnie's intent to undermine anyone's opinion. This is what I posted on the new thread:

Arnie, I've changed the title to the thread. We had an "alternative theory" thread, and it didn't go over well. :sigh: This thread can be used to discuss "spin off" topics, general issues not specific to the Bosma/Babcock/Millard murders. We'll give it a try for now, anyway.

 

[Tamarind]

I've changed the thread title to "Related Issues and Food for Thought", though I'm certain it was not Arnie's intent to undermine anyone's opinion. This is what I posted on the new thread:

Thank you Bessie.