Trial Thread 10 May 2012 - Judge's Instructions and maybe deliberations!

[giantalkinghead]

You are misunderstanding my point. I did NOT say it is waste of time educating jurors about their responsibilities. I said it IS a waste of time to recap witnesses.

I think the it's more about consistutional law and his right to a fair trial. It's the Judge's job to ensure that the trial is conducted fairly .... we WANT that - because we don't want him to have any grounds for slip up or errors in law that could lead to a mistrial. So in other words the judge is dotting the "I"'s and crossing the "T"s so to speak. You know... the legal fine print... that makes things well.... Legal.... we just have to be patient

then we can lock him away for the rest of his life.... just sayin'

 

[Sailor Bug]

RaffertyLFP: Heeney is reading McClintic's testimony of arrival at crime scene near Mount Forest

RaffertyLFP: Court is now hearing summary of McClintic's cross-examination by Derstine

Heeney reviewing McClintic's account of April 8th.

Heeney decides to drop a portion of his charge about blackberry evidence. Notes there were gaps in usage in April 8th.

 

[nursebeeme]

general info on aiding and abetting:

Q: What constitutes "aiding and abetting?"
A: Aiding and abetting is a theory of criminal liability under federal and most state laws. You can be guilty of a crime either as a principal perpetrator - the "main" actor - or as an aider and abettor.
Aiding and abetting applies to someone who assists or helps one or more other people commit a crime. To be held accountable as an aider and abettor, you must know of the criminal objective and do something to make it succeed. For example, if you drive your friend to a meeting where you know your friend is going to buy drugs, you may be an aider and abettor in the drug transaction.

The key here is knowledge. While the level of participation of the aider and abettor may be relatively minor, the prosecution must show more than presence in a vehicle carrying drugs or association with conspirators known to be involved in a crime.

In other words, mere presence at the scene of a crime, even with guilty knowledge that a crime is being committed, isn't enough to make you liable for the crime itself, unless and until you do something to help the crime succeed.

http://criminal.lawyers.com/Criminal-Law-Basics/Criminal-Law-Crime-Definition-FAQs.html#7

 

[Tahorn]

Was TLM also charged with kidnapping ?

No, the kidnapping charges were dropped.

 

[snoofer]

This has always peeked my curiousity....three people? who is the other persons dna? Was it cross checked by LE in their database?

it would not surprise me that after sex with Tori he had sex with TLM. MOO

 

[Kamille]

BBM

I'm confused... so he could be found not guilty of the murder charge if the jury believes he was just there as a spectator?

But may be found guilty of kidnapping if they believe that Tori was confined or concealed in the car?

But if he knew she was kidnapped, would it matter if he was just a spectator? wouldn't he still be guilty on the murder charge?

If he knew at any point that Victoria was being held against her will then he is guilty of kidnapping. And his lawyer pretty much suggested that he did know when he suggested that Victoria was offered up as a sexual gift to him, and that after that he was directed to a rural area. And instead of calling the police right then and there he did drive to the rural area. I believe he also suggested that Victoria was being held for a drug debt and something about a safe house? All suggestions from his client?

Now none of this can be considered evidence but it was a strange thing to suggest if you want this jury to believe that MR had no idea that they weren't just driving Victoria to some friend's place in Mt Forest on behalf of her parents. Maybe he should have tried that one.

MOO

 

[Sailor Bug]

Rafferty much less reactionary today than during the crown's closing arguments

 

[Flossie JMO]

BBM

I'm confused... so he could be found not guilty of the murder charge if the jury believes he was just there as a spectator?

But may be found guilty of kidnapping if they believe that Tori was confined or concealed in the car?

But if he knew she was kidnapped, would it matter if he was just a spectator? wouldn't he still be guilty on the murder charge?

I agree it's a lot for the jurors to consider imo

 

[Thinkzerz]

No, the kidnapping charges were dropped.

How the heck did that happen? She clearly kidnapped TS???

 

[greenthumb]

it would not surprise me that after sex with Tori he had sex with TLM. MOO

Oh, no... that never crossed my mind... what a horrid thought.

 

[CarrieBean]

Another example. Why is it necessary for the judge to recap how Rafferty and McCLintic met? That's all in testimony.

Is he giving his closing arguments or what? This is weird.

I think it's important to make clear what kind of relationship they had. If they had met at church and got together every Sunday to pray, then it would make a difference.

 

[~n/t~]

Steven D'Souza ‏ @cbcsteve
Heeney skips over some of the Blackberry evidence in his summary, says jury has info at their disposal. Was quite extensive




Oh thank God.

 

[Sailor Bug]

RaffertyLFP: The court is breaking for lunch until 1:55 pm

 

[Flossie JMO]

it would not surprise me that after sex with Tori he had sex with TLM. MOO

re the sources, during Mclean's testimony:

"...if I find DNA from two individuals on one item, it doesn't necessarily mean it was deposited at the same time," McLean agreed.

===

Doesn't mean another person was there at the time, could have been on the bag earlier imo is what she was stating

 

[CA Lady]

The manner that the Court is going over all the evidence appears to have begun the deliberation process for the jury. Each piece requires their attention and decision. At the end the jury should have marked off each item before reaching a decision.

Maybe not a bad idea to start the process going in the right direction, by following the law!!

 

[CarrieBean]

Rafferty much less reactionary today than during the crown's closing arguments

I can only hope it's because he feels defeated.

 

[~n/t~]

I think it's important to make clear what kind of relationship they had. If they had met at church and got together every Sunday to pray, then it would make a difference.

It was in testimony (they met at the pizza place). No need for the judge to remind the jury or recap how they met, imo

This is useless. Get to the charges already!

 

[giantalkinghead]

But how often is anybody ever denied after serving their 25 years?

It depends on what they did to get there in the first place and what they have done since they have been in prison. Let's take TLM for example... I don't think that her odds on qualifying for parole would be too great. Firstly because of what she is in prison for.. then add to that her past record and add to that the current assault charges that she is facing = not a great prisoner. Having said that, it is my belief that the reason she decided to change her statement about the actual murder of little Tori to herself is because she would be just as happy if she were named a dangerous offender. I think she would not only wear that as a badge of honour in her books... but, secure the fact that she didn't get out of prison. I think she is more than happy to stay there... it's her life. She most likely feels more secure in the prison system - than out of it. How would she look after herself ? She has no family to speak of to go home to... was living on food stamps with no job. Let's face it... she had a tough life...not that I feel sorry for her at all because a lot of people have tough lives and don't kill little girls.... JMO

 

[KMouse]

Serial killers and child murderers are usually denied. Clifford Olsen was. No doubt Paul Bernardo will be. Not sure how TLM and hopefully MR will fair in their parole hearings.

MOO

Yeah Olson unfortunately was a serial killer and also had some psychiatric issues. He was denied the faint hope parole and then denied parole in 2010.

Lets hope Picton, Bernardo, Williams, TLM, and MR will be too. They can all die in prison like Olson.

 

[~n/t~]

Steven D'Souza ‏ @cbcsteve
Lunch break, back at 1:55 p.m