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

[lclabtech]

There are lots of reports about LE seizing the incinerator - which, incidentally, is a model well sleuthed on these pages as having the capacity to incinerate small (hopefully) dead animals and brush. To stuff a whole person down the relatively small shute would require a good deal of dismemberment etc. None of the accused have been charged, so far as I know, with indignity to a dead body etc. etc. There were many reports, at the time, that the police had removed the incinerator from the property but, to my knowledge, no followup confirming it was used in the crime(s). There was also a later report that more ashes had been found at the farm than could be attributed to the 5 pounds are so each of us can produce, but forensics were attempting to determine if these remains were human or those of animals. Then, later still, as we know, police combed through the barn and adjacent farm property but later reported they'd found nothing related to the disappearance of LB. (Whether they may have found other evidence related to the other crime(s), wasn't mentioned.) Anyway, it all comes back to the Coroner's reports. We were originally told that poor TB's "unidentifiable" remains were found at the farm. Some reporters referred to "charred remains". Nonetheless, sadly, his body was identified within hours. In either case, given the prompt identification, the Coroner must have had something to go on and, given LE's confidence that a murder had occurred, an autopsy must have been conducted. I'm just incredibly surprised that MSM hasn't been all over this, but maybe I missed something along the way?

Why does any of this matter? Well, the fact is, that murder convictions without evidence of a dead body are exceedingly rare. When they do take place, it's often because of circumstantial or heresay evidence - easy enough for any competent lawyer to overcome. In DM's case, at this point, we seem to be missing not just one murdered body, but three of them. I wonder how the extraordinarily clever sleuths here respond to that challenge?

At the risk of ignoring my own wish that everybody would stay only with the case at hand, WIKI, as usual, has some interesting background on the missing victims subject at Murder conviction without a body - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In particular, I note the case cited ....

Long-time lurker...

Wow. Hopefully you didn't mean for the bolded to be as snarky as it sounded...

In regards to the "missing bodies", I'm not really sure what you mean. You acknowledged they'd said they found Bosma's remains on DM's farm, and they would've had WM's body after his "suicide" too. It's only LB's remains that would apply to the "murder conviction without a body" examples that you brought up - and even that is only to the best of our knowledge.

 

[Carli]

Long-time lurker...

Wow. Hopefully you didn't mean for the bolded to be as snarky as it sounded...

In regards to the "missing bodies", I'm not really sure what you mean. You acknowledged they'd said they found Bosma's remains on DM's farm, and they would've had WM's body after his "suicide" too. It's only LB's remains that would apply to the "murder conviction without a body" examples that you brought up - and even that is only to the best of our knowledge.

Oh my goodness, absolutely no snarkiness was intended. Quite the opposite. My intention was to ask obviously knowledgeable posters to consider their approach to the challenge of obtaining a conviction where no actual bodies are available that could prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that murders had taken place. One imagines this might be particularly difficult in the case of LB where, if MSM reports are correct, no body has been found. Quite difficult in the case of WM where, again if MSM reports are accurate, the sudden death was originally attributed to suicide and subsequently cremated, thus removing forensic evidence that could confirm murder. Finally, MSM reported SB as saying that the remains of poor TB were delivered to her in a "small box" which, I presume would definitely account for the original LE statement that his remains, when found, were unidentifiable. The next hurdle, after confirming that all three persons were both a) deceased and b) murdered, there still remains the issue of determining precisely who took each of their lives, again problematical in the the absence of examinations of intact physical remains. This would seem to lead to a very heavy reliance on circumstantial and heresay evidence, IMO. As I understand it, that has rarely led to convictions in murder cases (and has also been cited as responsible for serious miscarriages of justice.) In this instance a jury or juries, so far as we've been told so far, will need to decide, beyond reasonable doubt, that such evidence is sufficient to correctly attribute blame in not one but three murders.

Anyway, in the absence of news, I was wondering how other sleuthers would organize prosecution strategy in a case like this. Or, alternatively, in playing devil's advocate, what strategy would make sense for the defense. Most posters here are, I understand, quite familiar with the details of numerous investigations and trials and might have some interesting insights.

Apropos of this, I'm really impatient to hear the Attorney General's decision regarding Preliminary Hearing.

Eventually the actual trial(s) will take place that will bring the details of these tragic stories into focus. Meanwhile I again apologize for my poor choice of words if anyone was offended and again, absolutely no snark or insult was intended.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

I have nothing to contribute, but showing you my first avatar.
Websleuths is becoming "nagelnew" (as we Germans say for fun) and now my styling also.

 

[Snoofo]

Long-time lurker...

Wow. Hopefully you didn't mean for the bolded to be as snarky as it sounded...

In regards to the "missing bodies", I'm not really sure what you mean. You acknowledged they'd said they found Bosma's remains on DM's farm, and they would've had WM's body after his "suicide" too. It's only LB's remains that would apply to the "murder conviction without a body" examples that you brought up - and even that is only to the best of our knowledge.

Hi there! Glad you came out of lurker status to share your thoughts.

You pointed out something very important. Most of what we think we know in this case is, as you acurately stated, to the best of our knowledge. In fact either we know just about all there is to know and each person has drawn what seems to be the closest to a conclusion as possible or we collectively know an iota, really just a speck, of what has really happened.

To those on one side of the fence or the other, and to those perched atop the fence pending trial, I say thanks. I took an interest in this case the second I saw Tim's warm smile on my Facebook feed and it is my first time following a case on WS where I've coasted (and often roller-coasted) along with others sharing such an interest in this bizarre case. It's been a very interesting experience so thank you one and all. A part of me feels guilty expressing such intrigue and even enjoyment following the case when in fact so many people have suffered and continue to suffer as a result of whatever the hell went on. So I am remorseful for that. But otherwise I'm happy to be part of the interest and the debate.

 

[swedie]

Lots of court appearances. Four of them today. Wonder what we will find out. Thanks Ann.

July 7 Dellen Millard and Mark Smich will appear via video for the first degree murder of Laura Babcock. The charges against Millard for the murder of his father Wayne Millard will also be addressed.

July 7 Matthew Odlum and Matthew Wawrykiewycz on weapons trafficking charges allegedly related to the death of Wayne Millard. Unlike their co-accused, Matthew Ward-Jackson who is in custody, the other two Matthews are out on bail.

 

[lclabtech]

Oh my goodness, absolutely no snarkiness was intended. Quite the opposite. My intention was to ask obviously knowledgeable posters to consider their approach to the challenge of obtaining a conviction where no actual bodies are available that could prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that murders had taken place. One imagines this might be particularly difficult in the case of LB where, if MSM reports are correct, no body has been found. Quite difficult in the case of WM where, again if MSM reports are accurate, the sudden death was originally attributed to suicide and subsequently cremated, thus removing forensic evidence that could confirm murder. Finally, MSM reported SB as saying that the remains of poor TB were delivered to her in a "small box" which, I presume would definitely account for the original LE statement that his remains, when found, were unidentifiable. The next hurdle, after confirming that all three persons were both a) deceased and b) murdered, there still remains the issue of determining precisely who took each of their lives, again problematical in the the absence of examinations of intact physical remains. This would seem to lead to a very heavy reliance on circumstantial and heresay evidence, IMO. As I understand it, that has rarely led to convictions in murder cases (and has also been cited as responsible for serious miscarriages of justice.) In this instance a jury or juries, so far as we've been told so far, will need to decide, beyond reasonable doubt, that such evidence is sufficient to correctly attribute blame in not one but three murders.

Anyway, in the absence of news, I was wondering how other sleuthers would organize prosecution strategy in a case like this. Or, alternatively, in playing devil's advocate, what strategy would make sense for the defense. Most posters here are, I understand, quite familiar with the details of numerous investigations and trials and might have some interesting insights.

Apropos of this, I'm really impatient to hear the Attorney General's decision regarding Preliminary Hearing.

Eventually the actual trial(s) will take place that will bring the details of these tragic stories into focus. Meanwhile I again apologize for my poor choice of words if anyone was offended and again, absolutely no snark or insult was intended.

Usually when people refer to "Murder conviction without a body" they're talking about cases where there's been no remains found at all, not just cases where the body has been altered or manipulated in some way. It only really applies to LB here not TB or WM - at least that we know of. I think it's inaccurate to say that prosecutors have three murders, no bodies here. We have three murders, one body - cremated after investigation, and one set of remains. Seems like a significant difference to me.

 

[SnooperDuper]

There is much circumstantial evidence to suggest that LB is dead.

She had been calling her parents regularly, and stopped calling. She had been in daily contact with friends and borrowed (and promised to return) SL's iPad and did not. She lost contact with everyone, all at once.

She had been receiving regular medical attention for her psychiatric problems, but her health card has not been used since she disappeared. Perhaps she even had outstanding medical appointments that she missed. There was no activity on her phone, bank cards, and so forth after she completely disappeared.

She had been associating with someone (in fact her last phone contact was with someone) who stands accused of two other murders; who had the means to kill (gun) and dispose of a body (incinerator) and these means were obtained close to the time LB completely disappeared and is assumed to have been killed.

There seems to be no evidence (card use, contacts made, border crossings, etc.) to suggest that she is alive at all.

It's possible that LE have DNA or body fluid evidence relating to LB, but that is not necessary to prove that she is dead and that a murder has taken place.

In WM's case, while WM has been cremated, the coroner's report on his death/autopsy has certainly not been burned along with him. An autopsy is best done soon after death, and it is not common for people to be dug up and re-autopsied. We do not need to have the corpse standing by like a pocket reference in the courtroom. However, some of WM's tissue, blood samples (toxicology) and perhaps even brain (under the coroner's organ retention policy http://www.mcscs.jus.gov.on.ca/english/DeathInvestigations/OrganRetention/DI_organ_retention.html) may still exist as the coroner's case remained open long after WM's death, and so these items would not have been disposed of until his file was closed.

While LE "classified" WM's death as a suicide, the coroner did not make that determination. Can you imagine how cooperative WM's family would be to LE investigators if they classified WM's death as a murder? Changing the classification from "suicide" to "homicide" is likely close to the very last thing that LE does in these cases.

In TB's case, the evidence may also be circumstantial:

“Investigation has now revealed that Tim Bosma was murdered,” Hamilton Police homicide Det.-Sgt. Matt Kavanagh told a news conference Tuesday afternoon. “He was taken to a location in the Waterloo area where his body was burned beyond recognition.”

“They are convinced by the totality of the evidence that these are the remains of Tim Bosma,” DeCaire said. “The evidence indicates the remains have been burned.”

http://www.therecord.com/sports-story/3242980-bosma-found-dead-in-region/

However, TB's remains are not "unidentifiable". The remains were identified as his, perhaps by DNA, perhaps by all of the circumstantial evidence, but they were identified to be TB's.

Convicted of murder where a body was never found

Thomas Moffit (Shelley Mathieu-Read)
David Mostyn Pritchard (Pirkko Skolos)
Ricky Ray Doodhnaught and Nadia Ayyad (George Doodhnaught)
Robert Baltovich (Elizabeth Bain) Overturned after 8 years of imprisonment.

Currently charged with murder where a body was never found

Richard MacInnes (Michael Scullion)

 

[Carli]

Has the Attorney General's ruling on Direct Indictment come down yet?

 

[artemis17]

Is it not weird we haven't heard one thing about today's court appearances ??

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[swedie]

Thank you Ann for attending and keeping us in the loop. :blowkiss:

Dellen Millard and Mark Smich, the accused murderers of Laura Babcock and Tim Bosma, both made video appearances related to the Babcock charges just before noon. Millard looked awful and now has a beard and moustache. Smich appeared okay, but the camera wasn’t in as close as it was for Millard. Both are scheduled to appear again on August 11th. Millard’s lawyer was given disclosure. No one was in court on behalf of Smich to accept disclosure. Both Millard and Smich have pleaded not guilty to all charges against them.

http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/201...used-murderers-of-tim-bosma-and-laura-babcock

 

[swedie]

http://www.chch.com/millard-makes-video-court-appearance/

 

[artemis17]

Link is dead anyone know what it says or what happened ?

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[artemis17]

Getting annoyed with the lack of reporting by canadian journalists on this story. The amazing Ann Brocklehurst has posted a article in regards to yesterdays court proceedings. Not findable by google unfortunately. http://www.annrbrocklehurst.com/201...murderers-of-tim-bosma-and-laura-babcock.html

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[artemis17]

Totally missed swedies post to the same link lol thanks Swedie!

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[Carli]

There is much circumstantial evidence to suggest that LB is dead.

She had been calling her parents regularly, and stopped calling. She had been in daily contact with friends and borrowed (and promised to return) SL's iPad and did not. She lost contact with everyone, all at once.

She had been receiving regular medical attention for her psychiatric problems, but her health card has not been used since she disappeared. Perhaps she even had outstanding medical appointments that she missed. There was no activity on her phone, bank cards, and so forth after she completely disappeared.

She had been associating with someone (in fact her last phone contact was with someone) who stands accused of two other murders; who had the means to kill (gun) and dispose of a body (incinerator) and these means were obtained close to the time LB completely disappeared and is assumed to have been killed.

There seems to be no evidence (card use, contacts made, border crossings, etc.) to suggest that she is alive at all.

It's possible that LE have DNA or body fluid evidence relating to LB, but that is not necessary to prove that she is dead and that a murder has taken place.

In WM's case, while WM has been cremated, the coroner's report on his death/autopsy has certainly not been burned along with him. An autopsy is best done soon after death, and it is not common for people to be dug up and re-autopsied. We do not need to have the corpse standing by like a pocket reference in the courtroom. However, some of WM's tissue, blood samples (toxicology) and perhaps even brain (under the coroner's organ retention policy http://www.mcscs.jus.gov.on.ca/english/DeathInvestigations/OrganRetention/DI_organ_retention.html) may still exist as the coroner's case remained open long after WM's death, and so these items would not have been disposed of until his file was closed.

While LE "classified" WM's death as a suicide, the coroner did not make that determination. Can you imagine how cooperative WM's family would be to LE investigators if they classified WM's death as a murder? Changing the classification from "suicide" to "homicide" is likely close to the very last thing that LE does in these cases.

In TB's case, the evidence may also be circumstantial:




http://www.therecord.com/sports-story/3242980-bosma-found-dead-in-region/

However, TB's remains are not "unidentifiable". The remains were identified as his, perhaps by DNA, perhaps by all of the circumstantial evidence, but they were identified to be TB's.

Convicted of murder where a body was never found

Thomas Moffit (Shelley Mathieu-Read)
David Mostyn Pritchard (Pirkko Skolos)
Ricky Ray Doodhnaught and Nadia Ayyad (George Doodhnaught)
Robert Baltovich (Elizabeth Bain) Overturned after 8 years of imprisonment.

Currently charged with murder where a body was never found

Richard MacInnes (Michael Scullion)

Thanks for citing these interesting cases, but further examination clarifies that:

Mathieu-Read and Skolos murders both involved drug traffickers and money disputes among persons well-known to each other and already very well-known to the police. (Armed robbery, domestic disputes, prostitution, drug offenses, gang affiliations, etc.)

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2009/06/19/9850751-sun.html

http://www.thecourt.ca/2007/11/15/david-mostyn-pritchard-v-her-majesty-the-queen-statutory-interpretation-gone-wild/

Baby George Doodhnaught was not murdered nor were his parents ever so charged. (Such a sad case.) Their convictions arose from their failure to provide necessities of life and the disposal of the infant's body.
http://dematerialize5.rssing.com/chan-4042506/all_p24.html

The Elizabeth Bain conviction was a miscarriage of justice which, upon review, again raised the possibility that she had been a victim of Bernardo, with whom she was acquainted. That case is particularly interesting because Baltovich's prosecutors withheld essential evidence which, had it been provided to the defense or presented at trial, would probably have resulted in his acquittal - as, in fact, it did, many years later.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/lawsuit-uncovers-new-evidence-in-elizabeth-bain-murder-mystery/article17537594/

The Scullion case has not yet come to trial but, again, a drug dealer with gang connections has been charged. Whether there will be sufficient evidence to support the charges is still unknown.

http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2014/03/10/charges-laid-in-2008-agassiz-murder/

Not to put too fine a point on it, but, respectfully, IMO, the fundamental questions are three-fold in any case where a lifeless body has not been found:

1. Is the person dead?
2. If so, was the person murdered?
3. If the person was murdered, then by whose hand?

Taking LB's case, there may be enough circumstantial evidence to posit the answer to Question 1, but, in the absence of a body, Questions 2 and 3 are very illusive. Perhaps at trial there will be witnesses that saw DM and/or MS with LB on the day of her disappearance or witnessed a struggle between them etc. A flurry of telephone calls to DM days before her presumed disappearance, which he may or may not have actually answered, seems a rather long leap away from evidence sufficient to support a charge of murder. IMO. IMHO.

Likewise, in the case of the sudden death of WM, these questions are, so far as we presently are aware, especially difficult to answer in the absence of his remains. IMO. What led to the coroner's determination of suicide in the first place? What prompted a new decision? Is there solid evidence to confirm the answer to Question 2? What evidence confirms the answer to Question 3?

Finally, in the case of TB, while LE very early stated there there were no links between TB and DM, other than the truck test drive, there has been almost no public examination of any links between the accused, his family members or his associates and the victim, his family members or his associates (as there is, for instance, in the present AL family missing persons case in Alberta. We only know that "unrecognizable remains", as originally defined by LE, were delivered to his widow "in a small box". As you pointed out there must have been very significant findings to confirm the answers to questions 1 and 2, to the satisfaction of LE. Whether these responses will lead to the answer to the third question remains to be seen. IMO.

Anyway, thanks for the very interesting information, Snoop. However, again I must stand by my argument. Getting a murder conviction without a physical body to support the charge appears to be exceedingly difficult and very rare. Getting three of them against the same perpetrators will be a triple challenge, imo, and can be expected to drag on in the courts, imho, for many, many years. IMHO. IMO.

 

[lclabtech]

Thanks for citing these interesting cases, but further examination clarifies that:

Mathieu-Read and Skolos murders both involved drug traffickers and money disputes among persons well-known to each other and already very well-known to the police. (Armed robbery, domestic disputes, prostitution, drug offenses, gang affiliations, etc.)

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2009/06/19/9850751-sun.html

http://www.thecourt.ca/2007/11/15/david-mostyn-pritchard-v-her-majesty-the-queen-statutory-interpretation-gone-wild/

Baby George Doodhnaught was not murdered nor were his parents ever so charged. (Such a sad case.) Their convictions arose from their failure to provide necessities of life and the disposal of the infant's body.
http://dematerialize5.rssing.com/chan-4042506/all_p24.html

The Elizabeth Bain conviction was a miscarriage of justice which, upon review, again raised the possibility that she had been a victim of Bernardo, with whom she was acquainted. That case is particularly interesting because Baltovich's prosecutors withheld essential evidence which, had it been provided to the defense or presented at trial, would probably have resulted in his acquittal - as, in fact, it did, many years later.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/lawsuit-uncovers-new-evidence-in-elizabeth-bain-murder-mystery/article17537594/

The Scullion case has not yet come to trial but, again, a drug dealer with gang connections has been charged. Whether there will be sufficient evidence to support the charges is still unknown.

http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2014/03/10/charges-laid-in-2008-agassiz-murder/

Not to put too fine a point on it, but, respectfully, IMO, the fundamental questions are three-fold in any case where a lifeless body has not been found:

1. Is the person dead?
2. If so, was the person murdered?
3. If the person was murdered, then by whose hand?

Taking LB's case, there may be enough circumstantial evidence to posit the answer to Question 1, but, in the absence of a body, Questions 2 and 3 are very illusive. Perhaps at trial there will be witnesses that saw DM and/or MS with LB on the day of her disappearance or witnessed a struggle between them etc. A flurry of telephone calls to DM days before her presumed disappearance, which he may or may not have actually answered, seems a rather long leap away from evidence sufficient to support a charge of murder. IMO. IMHO.

Likewise, in the case of the sudden death of WM, these questions are, so far as we presently are aware, especially difficult to answer in the absence of his remains. IMO. What led to the coroner's determination of suicide in the first place? What prompted a new decision? Is there solid evidence to confirm the answer to Question 2? What evidence confirms the answer to Question 3?

Finally, in the case of TB, while LE very early stated there there were no links between TB and DM, other than the truck test drive, there has been almost no public examination of any links between the accused, his family members or his associates and the victim, his family members or his associates (as there is, for instance, in the present AL family missing persons case in Alberta. We only know that "unrecognizable remains", as originally defined by LE, were delivered to his widow "in a small box". As you pointed out there must have been very significant findings to confirm the answers to questions 1 and 2, to the satisfaction of LE. Whether these responses will lead to the answer to the third question remains to be seen. IMO.

Anyway, thanks for the very interesting information, Snoop. However, again I must stand by my argument. Getting a murder conviction without a physical body to support the charge appears to be exceedingly difficult and very rare. Getting three of them against the same perpetrators will be a triple challenge, imo, and can be expected to drag on in the courts, imho, for many, many years. IMHO. IMO.

I don't think this part is true - I think you're mistaking the rarity of this for cases in which no remains have been found at all, such as the LB case. I don't think it's rare to have a case where the body has been manipulated or altered in some way and still get a conviction - we've seen remains ground up, burned beyond recognition, decomposed, incinerated, etc. The people carrying out all these murders aren't all getting away with it because there isn't an entire, intact physical body. That's what forensics are for.

 

[Carli]

I don't think this part is true - I think you're mistaking the rarity of this for cases in which no remains have been found at all, such as the LB case. I don't think it's rare to have a case where the body has been manipulated or altered in some way and still get a conviction - we've seen remains ground up, burned beyond recognition, decomposed, incinerated, etc. The people carrying out all these murders aren't all getting away with it because there isn't an entire, intact physical body. That's what forensics are for.

Please note that I posed three threshold questions which, IMO, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt in order to obtain convictions of DM and MS in these cases. That forensic challenge would, imo, be much more easily met successfully, if there there were three identifiable (ie intact) bodies. IMO. IMHO. I will cede to your argument about the rarity of such cases, though. Frankly, I have no idea how many convictions are handed out to murderers who have hidden their victims in the horrible ways you mention. I'm not greatly motivated to track them down, either. Just looking into the details of the terrible crimes mentioned was disturbing enough. Anyway, thank you for the correction. I can't support such a blanket statement. The bolded sentence should have read "Getting a murder conviction without a physical body to support the charge appears to be exceedingly difficult." IMO. IMHO.

 

[Juballee]

Weren't we supposed to hear the decision on whether or not this is going straight to trial almost 2 weeks ago? Has the decision not been made or has it been but we are not privy to the decision?

 

[Carli]

Potential issues in the "direct indictment" approach.

http://www.calgary.ca/cps/Pages/Community-programs-and-resources/Crime-prevention/Missing-persons.aspx

But eliminating the preliminary hearing can contribute to further delays, said D'Arcy Depoe, past president of the Criminal Trial Lawyers Association.

“Where you have a preliminary inquiry of two or three or four days, that ends up saving trial time because it narrows issues,” said DePoe, who has tried several direct indictment cases over the past year. “You end up setting, say, four weeks of trial time, whereas if you’ve had a three-day preliminary inquiry, you might set two weeks of trial time. It’s really false to suggest that it’s more efficient.”

At its worst, the strategy could lead to more cases of innocent people being found guilty, he added.

“I expect to see more wrongful convictions arising out of a policy where preliminary inquiries are eliminated,” Depoe said.

 

[Carli]

Another point for discussion - just introduced by me on another thread, too - has to do with "tunnel vision".

See http://www.innocenceproject.org/docs/TunnelVision_WEB.pdf

It can't have escaped anyone's notice that the memorial service for poor TB was televised nationally and, amazingly IMO, actually had LE members in attendance. How will LE justify such unusual association with a crime victim's family? Does LE have sufficient reliable and credible evidence to support its rush to judgement? Where will the jurors be found who have not been swayed by the local, national and international coverage of this tragedy? Given such extensive coverage, can a fair trial even be called. Moreover, is it possible that we may have a classic case of tunnel vision otherwise defined as "confirmation bias" on our hands? Well, we shall see. IMO. IMHO. OMO.

Interestingly, in the Calgary headline case, a good deal of effort has been devoted to dissecting the victim's financial and familiar affairs in an important effort to try to get to the bottom of what happened. Not so in this case. WS is thankfully, of course, victim friendly, but evidently there are degrees of what's permissible. Who knows if, for instance, any examination of TB's extended family, their finances and associations, could lead to important additional or important leads in the case. Just sayin'. Just askin' . IMO. IMHO. We know tons about the Millard dynasty; LB's emotional/psychological issues and absolutely nothing about the B family (except for those possibly critical issues uncovered by those who have taken time to sleuth.) IMO. IMHO. Horribly politically provocative I know, but facts are facts, and we don't get to the truth by skipping over them and pretending they don't matter. IMO. MOO. IMHO. And, just in case, let me add a new acronym "AMSOO" "Absolutely my sole opinion only".