Trial Thread, Weekend Discussion May 4-5, 2012 Waiting for Closing Arguments

[crazyladi]

I always wondered why he made her walk home. If they'd been together most of the day, what difference would it make if he was seen near her house when they got back. Why would he need to distance himself from her if it was all his plan? Surely, under the circumstances, it wasn't to protect her.

Because he didn't really like her you could tell that. He used and threw her away. He went to visit her to make sure she wouldn't talk. It was all about him imo

 

[Thinkzerz]

Anyone else feel that MR had no idea what he was dealing with concerning TLM?

Sure, he thought he was quite the dude.........and had her all set up to provide him with drugs and connections...........but......................

If he really knew of her past, I doubt he would be sleeping in a motel room with her......unless he kept one eye open.

I could imagine getting her angry about some small thing, and see her standing at the end of the bed with a baseball bat in her hand saying......no I'm not tired yet.........you just go ahead and get some sleep.

IIRC, she said something about him saying he just liked to wake up beside her...........maybe he meant he was just happy to wake up at all.

JMO............

This made me laugh. However i do believe he was not an innocent either.

 

[nettie_82]

Snipped for space

Do you have a link for this please? I don't remember reading in any of the tweets or MSM reports that they had found one of his tossed out shoes. I'm astonished that, if the woman had in fact found one of MR's shoes, it wouldn't have been placed in evidence.

I believe one of MR's shoes were found by the woman along with TLM's shoes, however there was only the one shoe and she ended up throwing it out before coming into contact with police...off to find the tweet!!!

 

[crazyladi]

For me all the women that testified they dated MR proves to me that MR knew he did not have the control over women people think he did. They met, they dated, sex, no sex and did not work out. If he was the master manipulator these women would have been walk through fire for him from the testimony I heard that was not the case.

He was able to manipulate her because she was so young had less self esteem than he did. He played mind games when a women rejected him as I can remember from what tooclosefoecomfort said in prior posts jmo

 

[nettie_82]

RaffertyLFP: On her walks Metcalfe picks up litter. On one night she found a pair of running shoes and a single shoe [via Twitter]

 

[Macright]

Anyone else feel that MR had no idea what he was dealing with concerning TLM?

Sure, he thought he was quite the dude.........and had her all set up to provide him with drugs and connections...........but......................

If he really knew of her past, I doubt he would be sleeping in a motel room with her......unless he kept one eye open.

I could imagine getting her angry about some small thing, and see her standing at the end of the bed with a baseball bat in her hand saying......no I'm not tired yet.........you just go ahead and get some sleep.

IIRC, she said something about him saying he just liked to wake up beside her...........maybe he meant he was just happy to wake up at all.

JMO............

too funny........

 

[Macright]

I believe one of MR's shoes were found by the woman along with TLM's shoes, however there was only the one shoe and she ended up throwing it out before coming into contact with police...off to find the tweet!!!

do we know for a fact that it was MR's shoe she picked up...it was thrown out ...right... How many times driving along a highway have I seen shoes thrown out...was it ever stated that the shoes she did keep belonged to TLM..even if they were washed they would be able to pull some DNA...I know the laces were done like she did but hey I bet she is not the only one that laced their shoes that way...JMO

 

[Heliotrope]

Victims don't think clearly when this stuff is going on and neither do the perpetrators. Many victims ask themselves why they didn't run, why they didn't fight back when they look back and see opportunities that might have prevented them from being harmed. If they did fight back, run, or screamed and they were still hurt they wonder if things would have been different if they had not done those things. Many, many, many other victims of horrible crimes feel this way. Young children to adults, low IQs to high IQs, weak and strong. Children and adults who have been taught about stranger danger.

I agree 100%, Daisy.

From the Breivik case, and these were teenagers, mind, not an eight-year-old girl:

"Some of them are completely paralyzed. They cannot run. They stand totally still. This is something they never show on TV," Breivik said. "It was very strange." Some teenagers were frozen in panic, unable to move even when Breivik ran out of ammunition. He changed clips. They didn't move. He shot them in the head.

Others pretended to be dead. He said he shot them, too.

 

[Wondergirl]

Here is a useful reference with respect to the duties and guidelines for a Judge instructing a Canadian Jury with a charge at the end of trial.

It may shed some light on why Judge Heeney has taken more time to deal with the issues currently being discussed in the court.

This statistic here, is certainly troubling.

3.4 Jury instructions

On the initiative of the Heads of Prosecution Conference, a Canada-wide analysis was made of 108 cases relating to murder, attempted murder and manslaughter giving rise to new trials between 2001 and 2005. The review revealed that 68% of the cases involved errors in the judge's instructions.48

The required elements for a trial judge's final charge to the jury, as imposed by The Supreme Court of Canada:

A wide consensus has emerged on the excessive length and complexity of jury instructions and on a desire that model instructions be developed and formalized in order to reduce the numerous pitfalls that can lead to orders for a new trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada recently restated the required elements of a trial judge's final charge to the jury in Daley,49 in which the Supreme Court assessed the accuracy and adequacy of the trial judge's instructions on the defence of voluntary intoxication:

• "(1) instruction on the relevant legal issues, including the charges faced by the accused;
• (2) an explanation of the theories of each side;
• (3) a review of the salient facts which support the theories and case of each side;
• (4) a review of the evidence relating to the law;
• (5) a direction informing the jury they are the masters of the facts and it is for them to make the factual determinations;
• (6) instruction about the burden of proof and presumption of innocence;
• (7) the possible verdicts open to the jury; and
• (8) the requirements of unanimity for reaching a verdict."

Principles to guide the Judge's charge to the Jury:

At the same time, the Court recalled the principles that should govern trial judges in the preparation of their instructions:

• The trial judge must set out in plain and understandable terms the law the jury must apply when assessing the facts. This is what is meant when it is said that the trial judge has an obligation to instruct on the relevant legal issues. (para. 32)

• [...] does not stand for the proposition that all facts upon which the defence relies must be reviewed by the judge in the charge. (para. 55)

• The pivotal question upon which the defence stands must be clearly presented to the jury's mind. (para. 55)

• [...] it is not the case that the trial judges must undertake an exhaustive review of the evidence. Such a review may in some cases serve to confuse a jury as to the central issue. (para. 56)

• Brevity in the jury charge is desired. (para. 56)

• The extent to which the evidence must be reviewed [...] will depend on each particular case. (para. 57)

• [T]he task of the trial judge is to explain the critical evidence and the law and relate them to the essential issues in plain, understandable language (para. 50

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/esc-cde/scje-cdej/p7.html

 

[Macright]

The defence seemed odd to many, however it does not seem odd to me. I would bet my last dollar that they could only afford this one witness, as this witness could not testify to MR's character. Anyone else brought forward to testify for him could have possibly opened the whole character issue and I believe this would have put the final nail in MR's coffin. I say this because his lawyer has fought very hard for evidence to be excluded based on it being related to character. The defence would open a door that they fought so hard to keep shut. Makes you wonder what kind of bombshells we are going to hear when the jury is sequestered. JMO

not sure who it was now that questioned my post about "tooth and nail" (my words) but this poster above states that MR's lawyer fought very hard for evidence to be excluded....I sort of changed my wording somewhat but regardless it all means the same in the short and long of it... I asked if she could provide some link that Dirk did just that..fought "tooth and nail" to have evidence excluded. maybe you could answer the question for me though...

respectfully......JMO JMO JMO

 

[antiquegirl]

For me all the women that testified they dated MR proves to me that MR knew he did not have the control over women people think he did. They met, they dated, sex, no sex and did not work out. If he was the master manipulator these women would have been walk through fire for him from the testimony I heard that was not the case.

I actually believe that he did try to manipulate women, but not the way most people may think. He didn't use force, or threats, or violence. He did it by sweet talking them, begging, looking for sympathy, buying them gifts, and being persistent. He didn't give up easily, as we heard when he went to TLM's house to ask why she didn't call him and to Staples for the same reason with another woman. He sent this same woman (name under publication ban) several texts where he sounded upset after she told him she didn't want to see him anymore.

But you're right. In most cases, he wasn't very successful. Very few of his "relationships" lasted long and it seemed to be that it was always the women who dropped him. One of the very few exceptions was the escort, CS. I think it didn't take long before that coupling became less of a romantic one and more a business venture involving drugs and money.

Personally, I'm not convinced that all this manipulation was a conscious effort. I think he was desperate for a serious relationship, but sabotaged himself with a sex addiction and the inability to be faithful.

JMO

 

[Macright]

Can you find me the statement that says derstine has fought tooth and nail for mtr? I don't recall seeing that

See my post #152 for your answer....respectfully.....

 

[Alison]

<modsnipped>

Also they were not allowed to testify to anything derogatory about him because they would be testifying to his character which has not been allowed. Therfore that is why the Defence did not offer up character witnesses becuase this would open up a can of worms that they fought to remain sealed and I believe so much more would have came to light. IMO And that is what my first post was pertaining to. Not hidden witnesses.Also I believe that I included a JMO which means I do not have to verify anything as fact, as it is my inference as to what is/has happened.

 

[Macright]

I think the <modsnip> corroborated their timeline. So they testified to alot more than just him being a 'cad'

mais qui...

 

[otto]

The Crown didn't call 2 eye witnesses to the trial?

Weird..............

It is true there is lots of information contained in MSM articles, that wasn't testified to in the trial..........and only some of those have been referred to on the form..............but eye witness testimony to an abduction would be considerably more important...........in my opinion.

JMO

There was eye witness testimony. TLM testified to MRs participation in the abduction/assault/murder and that testimony was confirmed by video evidence, phone records, evidence in MR's car and the relationship between MR and location where Victoria was found.

The trial is only for the purpose of convicting the accused ... only those facts are introduced at trial. What other evidence is necessary to connect the accused to the charges?

 

[roseofsharon]

I always questioned why MR had to go to the USA to buy another pair of the PUMA brand running shoes. They are available in Canada.

 

[Heliotrope]

Snipped for space Do you have a link for this please? I don't remember reading in any of the tweets or MSM reports that they had found one of his tossed out shoes. I'm astonished that, if the woman had in fact found one of MR's shoes, it wouldn't have been placed in evidence.

Again, I think this is hindsight. She tossed it the trash, didn't she, as she thought a single was no good even for charity?

I found a glove at the bottom of my driveway this morning, I threw it in the trash. I frequently see running shoes tied together and tossed over power lines. (I don't get that at all, BTW - I must be old)

It's really not that ominous to find an article of discarded clothing. Unless it was bloodstained or something, why would you think anything of it? People are slobs.

 

[otto]

I believe the grandfather saw Tori before she was with TLM, so he wouldn't be considered an eye witness to the crime. You're right that a lot of information contained in MSM hasn't been brought up at trial. I think the defense has argued to keep a lot of information out, hence a great deal of legal arguments. I remember a lot of things we found out that IMO go to motive, those things also went to character and were not admissible in court. IMO a lot of nasty details are going to come out when the jury deliberates.

I'm so lost ... what information has been released in the media that is relevant to the conviction of the accused but wasn't introduced during trial?

 

[OhSoCurious]

Let's face it, a girl is taken to the rural with a 28 year old man with no permission from parents, and LE says for nefarious and sexual purposes. TS blood is found mixed with semen. Case is solved. He did it. Anything else is just silliness. JMO

I always wondered if LE wished they could retract their initial use of the word "nefarious", as it seems LE was mislead and misinformed from the "get go" JMO

 

[Macright]

I always questioned why MR had to go to the USA to buy another pair of the PUMA brand running shoes. They are available in Canada.

outlets...I go there all the time...shopping that is....JMO much cheaper in some things....better prices.. even at that time with the exchange rate...now it is like winning the lottery with the savings because of the drop in US $$$$$ JMO JMO