trial thread: 3/30/2012

[brighidin]

I think the Crown was lucky to get TLM's videotaped confession in as evidence. I believe that the defense was hinging on it not being useable in the jury's deliberations.

This much is clear: TLM is a horrible person, a murderer, and a liar. No one is disputing that. However, quite a bit of what she said, either in person, or on the tapes, has been backed up and verified by other evidence. In this context, I don't think the jury should be able to dismiss her outright as an unreliable witness. I do think that the Crown is going to need cross-reference all her claims with other evidence if they want the jury to take her testimony into consideration.

Then again, I don't have a ton of faith in juries at the moment. I live in MB and a pretty high profile case - the Stobbe case - just wrapped up. The Crown argued that this guy killed his wife in their back yard, then drove her 15 km away to make it look like a robbery. There was quite a bit of evidence against him, but he was acquitted. Interestingly, he maintained his innocence and pleaded not guilty.... AND he took the stand and was cross-examined for several days. Maybe we will see that here.

 

[brighidin]

One question about the rape charge. Is it possible the prosecution does not have any additional evidence there, but if they did not press that charge they would be doubting the credibility of their own key witness? I tend to think if there was real evidence MRs lawyer would not put forward his theory as stated.

It is possible. The Crown knows how much of a loose cannon TLM is and I think they also knew they needed as much evidence as possible beyond her testimony. She changed her story in January, and I really think they would have amended the charges against MR if they didn't have other evidence beyond her story. I don't think there is any way the Crown could have felt confident going to trial with only her testimony, even before she changed her mind.

 

[Macright]

If MR was an innocent bystander as his defense claims, and TLM asked him to walk away so she could talk to Tori and/or Tori was so afraid of MR, why would MR have to drive that long distance down that laneway? To me it's blindingly obvious. It wasn't TLM who wanted him to drive down there, it was his plan. He wanted to rape Tori somewhere secluded where no one would hear Tori scream or see what he was doing to her. MOO

Does anyone have any reasonable suggestions or theories on how the defense is going to try and explain this fact away?

Another thought, why would MR take a chance of possibly getting stuck in snow or muck in the lane way with an abducted child in his car? My best guess is because the prospect of "good things are comming my way" outweighed that risk.



TLM's testimony is the best thing they have to tell the story of what happened that day. So yes it's important IMO for the jurors to have a better picture of what happened on April 8th, 2009, that lead to Tori's death. MOO

from the pictures of the crime scene that have been posted it seems that lane is rather narrow and would be difficult to turn around in so maybe he knew in advance about this area and knew that at the top there would be room to turn..at this time I have no idea why he would turn in here or what his motives were but I am sure we will learn as the trial continues...

 

[Hello_Kitty]

I find it fascinating that some are directing the blame away from the accused kidnapper, rapist, killer.
!

Snipped for space:

Well for my part I'm not shifting blame off anyone. Derstine suggested his client helped clean up the crime scene, and if that isn't an admission his client was there then why even mention it. Yes I do think he was there. But did he abuse Tori, we really don't know that at this point, and TLM says she is the one that delivered the death blows to Tori, so that excludes him (unless she is lying again, she could have bragged about killing Tori just for the sake of bragging to make herself look tough). They are both such liars, if I were a jury, I'd have a hard time figuring out who did what. But their job is to figure out whether they acted together as per Gowdy's opening statement.


I'd really like to know why MTR went back to get TLM the day of the kidnapping. He was supposed to be on his way to Guelph by himself, probably to pick up his drugs. According to BA they had made this arrangement early in the day. But he changed his mind and went to wait for TLM, she found him in his driveway when she arrived from the employment center. I think that is very important, not sure why more emphasis isn't being placed on the why. Hope MTR testifies.

 

[maxfactor]

Snipped for space:

Well for my part I'm not shifting blame off anyone. Derstine suggested his client helped clean up the crime scene, and if that isn't an admission his client was there then why even mention it. Yes I do think he was there. But did he abuse Tori, we really don't know that at this point, and TLM says she is the one that delivered the death blows to Tori, so that excludes him (unless she is lying again, she could have bragged about killing Tori just for the sake of bragging to make herself look tough). They are both such liars, if I were a jury, I'd have a hard time figuring out who did what. But their job is to figure out whether they acted together as per Gowdy's opening statement.


I'd really like to know why MTR went back to get TLM the day of the kidnapping. He was supposed to be on his way to Guelph by himself, probably to pick up his drugs. According to BA they had made this arrangement early in the day. But he changed his mind and went to wait for TLM, she found him in his driveway when she arrived from the employment center. I think that is very important, not sure why more emphasis isn't being placed on the why. Hope MTR testifies.

I'd like to know that too. I wonder if the Crown may be getting to that later, They put out the video of him taking money out of the bank machine earlier in the day( I think I read $400), and brought the witness that sold him the drugs, who testified that she had received a text message from him earlier in the day about the percs. They also showed a video of him driving by the school that morning. I have to wonder if he had the abduction planned and just decided to get TLM to help him near the end. If, as BA testified, she only charged him a few dollars per pill, that's an awful lot of percocets. It has occurred to me that he may have offered TLM the drugs for helping him. If not then I have to think he was either dealing drugs or had a very serious addiction himself.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hello_Kitty
I certainly hope it didn't happen either. However, why would TLM have a conscience enough to recant who killed Tori but not recant the rape. The only reason I can think why she might be blaming MR for the rape is that she is looking for revenge against men for her own sexual abuse she suffered as a child, an abuse that was likely never dealt with properly by authorities. Or that she herself raped Tori and has blocked it out because it's so unthinkable to her that she would do this. Or, third reason is that she didn't recant because MR really did sexually abuse Tori.

This is just my opinion. If when tori was being raped by MR, TLM saw rage from when she was a child why would she kill Tori, Tori is not the one that harmed her, why not go after MR who was harming little Tori??
JMO

Who knows what goes on in crazy people's heads.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

Respectfully, the "rape" is still alleged. That's not to say I don't think it happened; but that info is yet to be brought forward by the Crown.

I don't believe the Crown would include the sexual assault charge vicariously/tentatively in such a high profile case. Imagine how hurtful that would be to the family--insult heaped upon grief and pain. So as much as it hurts to think of it having happened, I think we should all prepare ourselves for hearing the worst. I can't find the link but I believe RS, the father, also mentioned sexual assault in one of his pressers.

I asked myself the same question that you ask. Why didn't TLM attack MTR in her rage ... why a defenceless child. The only way I could explain it to myself was to identify that the response of a normal person would be to protect the child and TLM was far from normal. (By the way, I'm confusedashell too!)

JMO

Exactly. Perhaps in her abnormal mind, TLM thought that by killing TS, she would be protecting TS from the continuing sexual abuse. (At one point, in her testimony, she said 'I knew what was coming'. That was I think just before she said that she killed TS. So... what was coming, something worse than the sexual abuse?

 

[Hello_Kitty]

It's called reasonable doubt. Juries are to keep an open mind and ears during a trial. They are instructed to not make a verdict until all evidence has been heard/seen. Many folks seem unable to do this, which is why they have the jury selection process. The word "accused" must be comprehended with great depth in a trial. A fortune teller does not make a good juror. MOO

Glad I'm not a juror I'm just a WS'er speaking my mind

 

[swedie]

from the pictures of the crime scene that have been posted it seems that lane is rather narrow and would be difficult to turn around in so maybe he knew in advance about this area and knew that at the top there would be room to turn..at this time I have no idea why he would turn in here or what his motives were but I am sure we will learn as the trial continues...

That's an awfully long laneway with quite an incline. Why would he take the chance of getting stuck when he could just as easily back out of it, kwim.:moo:

 

[snoofer]

Yes, Tori's Law, the death penalty for child killers. While most of us would agree, there is one serious problem with that. If a jury has to determine guilt or innocence where the death penalty is involved, they will be much more reluctant to find guilt, even if there really is no shadow of a doubt because what if???

And would you get confessions? Unless taking the death penalty off the table would be part of a deal.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

I'd like to know that too. I wonder if the Crown may be getting to that later, They put out the video of him taking money out of the bank machine earlier in the day( I think I read $400), and brought the witness that sold him the drugs, who testified that she had received a text message from him earlier in the day about the percs. They also showed a video of him driving by the school that morning. I have to wonder if he had the abduction planned and just decided to get TLM to help him near the end. If, as BA testified, she only charged him a few dollars per pill, that's an awful lot of percocets. It has occurred to me that he may have offered TLM the drugs for helping him. If not then I have to think he was either dealing drugs or had a very serious addiction himself.

I thought BA said she sold him a couple of dozen pills, that doesn't make 400$ @3$ a pill. But if it was 400$ then 400$ div. by 3$ would mean she sold him 133 pills. Yeah that is an awful lot of pills, and if he went back a couple days after the murder to get more pills, where did the original 133 pills go? I can't believe in 2 or 3 days he would have ingested 133 pills by himself.; he'd be a complete zombie.

 

[maxfactor]

Isn't 28 kind of late to start a career of depravity against children? I wonder if LE are looking at old cases to see if MR fits? IMO

It may seem to be late, but then again it is alleged that Russell Williams was in his mid forties when he started his depravities. I'm sure LE would be checking into other crimes, I certainly hope so anyway.

 

[Macright]

That's an awfully long laneway with quite an incline. Why would he take the chance of getting stuck when he could just as easily back out of it, kwim.:moo:

why would he get stuck...there was no snow on the ground..I remember that weekend (Easter) and exited from the 401 south down the Guelph line and there was no snow on the ground or on those ski hills..there was a chance there might have been some mud etc. the lane doesn't look that long to me from those aerial shots..besides if they had a motive in mind it was a good safe place to act out that motive and to date all we know is that a young child was murdered there..the charges against MR are stiff as it is whether they get him on rape is immaterial to me..those other charges should put him away for life which is the most important thing IMO...

 

[dilbert]

The only things that would be under a publication ban in MR's trial would be any legal arguments that take place, the jury is not in the courtroom when these arguments occur. Other than that, there are no publication bans, if there were, you can be sure reporters would be explaining that they cannot report on certain proceedings because a ban prevents them from doing so.

Sometimes (not yet in this trial) there are publication bans put in place to protect the identity of certain witnesses, if they are underage for example, or certain pieces of evidence may be placed under a ban to prevent the public from viewing it, ie; the video of Kristen French being assaulted and murdered, but so far in this trial there hasn't been a need for such a ban.

There is still a ban on the pretrial hearings as well as a partial ban on TLM's plea hearing.

MOO

 

[maxfactor]

I thought BA said she sold him a couple of dozen pills, that doesn't make 400$ @3$ a pill. But if it was 400$ then 400$ div. by 3$ would mean she sold him 133 pills. Yeah that is an awful lot of pills, and if he went back a couple days after the murder to get more pills, where did the original 133 pills go? I can't believe in 2 or 3 days he would have ingested 133 pills by himself.; he'd be a complete zombie.

I think TLM said that he bought a baggie full of percs. I think she testified that she took a handful of percs before they got to Mount Forest,The amount of times he went back to buy pills from BA between April and July was I think around a dozen. That's an awful lot of pills IMO.

 

[Macright]

I think TLM said that he bought a baggie full of percs. I think she testified that she took a handful of percs before they got to Mount Forest,The amount of times he went back to buy pills from BA between April and July was I think around a dozen. That's an awful lot of pills IMO.

did BA actually testify that the purpose for those dozen or so visits was indeed to purchase more drugs...they were good friends who at one time had been in a relationship, as she testified so maybe he just wanted someone to talk to...if he did purchase drugs on each visit then it is not difficult to imagine what he was doing with them...

 

[swedie]

Isn't 28 kind of late to start a career of depravity against children? I wonder if LE are looking at old cases to see if MR fits? IMO

At this time, and we may never know if this was MR's first sexual assault.

Hordes of information on the link. Sex Offenses and Offenders: An Analysis of Data on Rape and Sexual Assault

Age of rapist
Just over 40% of the rapists were age 30 or older, about twice the percentage of victims of this age (20%). About 1 in 8 rapists was under 18. In 9 out of 10 rapes in which the offender was under 18, so was the victim.

Injuries
About 40% of rape victims suffered a collateral injury--5% suffered a major injury such as severe lacerations, fractures, internal injuries, or unconsciousness.

http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/sexoff/sexoff.html#id576638

 

[Hello_Kitty]

did BA actually testify that the purpose for those dozen or so visits was indeed to purchase more drugs...they were good friends who at one time had been in a relationship, as she testified so maybe he just wanted someone to talk to...if he did purchase drugs on each visit then it is not difficult to imagine what he was doing with them...

She did actually testify that she saw him a couple days after the murder and he did purchase more drugs from her, that's where she noticed he was 'stressed out and haggard' and mentioned TLM, etc. I don't know about the other times.

 

[swedie]

I thought BA said she sold him a couple of dozen pills, that doesn't make 400$ @3$ a pill. But if it was 400$ then 400$ div. by 3$ would mean she sold him 133 pills. Yeah that is an awful lot of pills, and if he went back a couple days after the murder to get more pills, where did the original 133 pills go? I can't believe in 2 or 3 days he would have ingested 133 pills by himself.; he'd be a complete zombie.

Maybe he was dealing? I'm sure he would want to be pretty doped out after doing what he is being accused of doing? The reason why he went back to BA for more, because he couldn't take the reality of what he had done, if he did it? BA did say he was a mess or however she worded it.

 

[dilbert]

why would he get stuck...there was no snow on the ground..I remember that weekend (Easter) and exited from the 401 south down the Guelph line and there was no snow on the ground or on those ski hills..there was a chance there might have been some mud etc. the lane doesn't look that long to me from those aerial shots..besides if they had a motive in mind it was a good safe place to act out that motive and to date all we know is that a young child was murdered there..the charges against MR are stiff as it is whether they get him on rape is immaterial to me..those other charges should put him away for life which is the most important thing IMO...

London Free Press@RaffertyLFPReply
McClinitic said Rafferty then put his pants back on. Drove down the lane and told her to follow on foot and erase the tire marks.

London Free Press@RaffertyLFPReply
Court is shown views of sideroad when it is covered with snow

AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReply
Showing shots of the scene with snow on the ground.

AM980.ca@AM980_CourtReply
There was some snow on the ground in the area on April 8th, 2009.