Verdict: GUILTY for both Millard and Smich of 1st degree murder #2

[Jen Darme]

RSBM
Not in any way singling you out inspector, however as a retorical question, why did MS testimony and how he presented himself surprise so many people if there wasn't already a character bias in place after 4 months?

I was annoyed by the implications that he was more likely to be guilty because he didn't have a high school education, listened to and performed rap, played video games, didn't have a "real" job, and/or smoked and sold pot. OTOH, despite a firm belief that 99.9% of adults have free will, I was willing to consider he was under DM's thumb. That is, until NS's cross. MS is intelligent and quick-thinking. He's definitely not a pushover or shrinking violet.

ETA: add graffiti, et al, to my first sentence.

 

[Jen Darme]

Lyrics written by Smich in the two weeks after the murder were mentioned because the lyrics are a statement by the accused regarding his state of mind after the murder.

That's not quite accurate. There was no proof he wrote the lyrics after the murder.

It was under NS's cross on May 17. Per the file's timestamp, the rap was started,and perhaps finished, on Feb 16. Also per the timestamp, the file was modified May 21. How it was modified wasn't determined.

MS explaining autosave and how adding a single character to a file would be a modification lead to NS's infamous response: "I don't need to learn the workings of an iPad." Except he should've known about timestamps when using one as evidence in a murder trial.

Most of NS's cross was a mess, Fraser's was not. You can read through the reporters' tweets of the entire trial at the link. They provide far more detail than the news articles did.

 

[Inspector_North]

RSBM
Not in any way singling you out inspector, however as a retorical question, why did MS testimony and how he presented himself surprise so many people if there wasn't already a character bias in place after 4 months?

I also had preconceived characterizations that evolved for most of the other members of the hole in the hanger gang.

SS
CN
and
MS

MS showed he was intelligent and knew his story was key to lowering his verdict. He still chose to try and pull it over IMO.

He had selective amnesia for anything that might incriminate himself.
- he can't remember where he buried the gun
- he can't remember what happened to his SIM cards
- he can't remember what happened to his red hoodie
- he can't remember what he and Millard talked about when Millard visited him for almost an hour on the 10th of May
etc.

But he did remember that AM, BD, CN and MM were all mistaken when they said something incriminating him.

Our perception of each evolved throughout the trial, and when they take the stand it is amplified. Who would of thought CN was that much of a _____?
MOO

 

[Ontario Mom]

While I agree with you that in some cases, reasonable people can disagree on what constitutes reasonable doubt, I don't think this is one of them <modsnip>

Again, we've been through the individual/whole discussion before. It's part of jury instructions and the common law. I think you may be misinterpreting those instructions or I'm not explaining them very well, which is another sign it's time to go.

When folks disagree it's not always because one party is misunderstanding or misinterpreting something. Sometimes, it's simply because folks see things in a different way. So we do disagree. I do believe this is a case of reasonable people disagreeing on what constitutes reasonable doubt.

That said, I'm relieved the jury came back with the verdicts they arrived at. I do believe justice was served in this case.

 

[Ashley96]

Oh, I dunno ... I'd be more scared of a guy with an AK47 than some dude whose history was graffiti and (iirc) driving without a licence

Not sure, maybe ask ABro as she feels MS is more of a danger then isho if you follow the trail of messages back.

MS IS more of a danger IMO...he's a convicted murderer who we know stood by and watched another human being being burned...If I had to choose between a murderer and a gun/drug dealer, I'd pick the dealer...but ideally I'd avoid both

 

[slowsleuthy]

I also had preconceived characterizations that evolved for most of the other members of the hole in the hanger gang.

SS
CN
and
MS

MS showed he was intelligent and knew his story was key to lowering his verdict. He still chose to try and pull it over IMO.

He had selective amnesia for anything that might incriminate himself.
- he can't remember where he buried the gun
- he can't remember what happened to his SIM cards
- he can't remember what happened to his red hoodie
- he can't remember what he and Millard talked about when Millard visited him for almost an hour on the 10th of May
etc.

But he did remember that AM, BD, CN and MM were all mistaken when they said something incriminating him.

Our perception of each evolved throughout the trial, and when they take the stand it is amplified. Who would of thought CN was that much of a _____?
MOO

i think DM's lawyers pulled smich apart on the stand, that one long purposeful pause while drilling the testimony, right at a moment when he knew what the next word smich was wanting to say, then smich just couldn't hold it back anymore and blurted out "i was shocked", and the lawyer said "ya, i knew you were going to say that", that was keystone! Smich's lies fooled no one on the jury, taking the stand and conveniently omitting himself criminally from everything involving first degree murder to save his own butt, he lied like a crackhead up there, all while being polite, clean cut, dressed up nice, just scary man! jmo

 

[canadiangirl]

And they were mentioned on the news at the time of the verdict because they speak to Smich's state of mind after the murder. I suppose they help the community understand the viciousness of the personalities behind the murder of Tim Bosma.

They were mentioned well before the verdict.

 

[FastLikeLight]

He had selective amnesia for anything that might incriminate himself.

His testimony was holed by these amnesia moments, compromising the rest of his story.

 

[otto]

I was annoyed by the implications that he was more likely to be guilty because he didn't have a high school education, listened to and performed rap, played video games, didn't have a "real" job, and/or smoked and sold pot. OTOH, despite a firm belief that 99.9% of adults have free will, I was willing to consider he was under DM's thumb. That is, until NS's cross. MS is intelligent and quick-thinking. He's definitely not a pushover or shrinking violet.

ETA: add graffiti, et al, to my first sentence.

I am stunned! Did the prosecution actually argue that an accused is more likely to be guilty of a criminal act because that accused has minimal education and plays video games?

 

[Ashley96]

They were mentioned well before the verdict.

all those bad character references were presumably dealt with in legal arguments and a judgement made that they were admissible...you don't have to agree with the judgement but I think we can agree there is a judicial process in place that addresses these concerns, yes?

If you aren't familiar with the procedure, I found this link from Noodles VERY helpful.

http://jmortonmusings.blogspot.ca/20...t-defence.html

 

[otto]

They were mentioned well before the verdict.

If the lyrics could not be considered by the jury, who introduced that evidence and why? Were the lyrics introduced by the crown to counter Smich's testimony?

 

[canadiangirl]

all those bad character references were presumably dealt with in legal arguments and a judgement made that they were admissible...you don't have to agree with the judgement but I think we can agree there is a judicial process in place that addresses these concerns, yes?

If you aren't familiar with the procedure, I found this link from Noodles VERY helpful.

http://jmortonmusings.blogspot.ca/20...t-defence.html

All I'm saying is Dellen's were well kept from the jury in regards to drug dealing etc
You don't have to agree with me, that's just how I see it. Not sure why it's OK to put it out there one party was dealing drugs and a high school drop out, trying to exploit a girl, but yet the other party was exactly the same. Just as an example MOO

 

[redheart]

When folks disagree it's not always because one party is misunderstanding or misinterpreting something. Sometimes, it's simply because folks see things in a different way. So we do disagree. I do believe this is a case of reasonable people disagreeing on what constitutes reasonable doubt.

That said, I'm relieved the jury came back with the verdicts they arrived at. I do believe justice was served in this case.

BBM. I agree and disagree.

I think that the people who see reasonable doubt as to Smich's guilt are a mix of people, same as those who believe DM and MS have been correctly convicted. Some of the people who think Smich might not be guilty of 1st degree are thoughtful, caring posters who I respect. (And this is in reference to everywhere online, not just here.) Some of the people who think Smich might not be guilty are just stubborn, argumentative types. Some are probably friends of his. Some enjoy the sound of their own online voices and post diatribes in other cases too about reasonable doubt.

And the same goes for those who agree with the jury that MS and DM are guilty of 1st degree. Some of those are thoughtful, caring people. Some are vicious, hang 'em before we hear the evidence types, etc. etc.

There's just no putting everyone in a neat box, good or bad. I think the frustration seen online comes from both camps dealing with the less than reasonable people from either side.

MOO

 

[canadiangirl]

If the lyrics could not be considered by the jury, who introduced that evidence and why? Were the lyrics introduced by the crown to counter Smich's testimony?

I would have to go back to trial tweets to confirm, and I'm on my phone at the moment and I wouldn't want to misquote here. (people ask for links)

IMO it doesn't matter who introduced them, the fact they were even allowed when the jury was advised not to consider and played for the courtroom some people here even put a lot of weight onto those lyrics. It helps form opinions I'd say.

 

[Mscree]

Further to this, it was said MS took Oxy on the test drive. What was DM on? Would this have supported the DM was a lunatic and celebratory? Lifting TB into the incinerator being under the influence of hard drugs? The side effects of coke and steroids support just that IMO.

But the jury thought choir boy DM did what? Weed? Even that was unclear to me. I am not sure we heard of any drug use for DM. Just MS.

I don't remember him stating he was on oxy do you have a link? I would also like to point out the man that they missed for the test drive his truck was parked outdoors in the driveway. If they wanted to steal it they could. They could have scoped it to see if it had gps. The sticker would have been on the window

 

[otto]

All I'm saying is Dellen's were well kept from the jury in regards to drug dealing etc
You don't have to agree with me, that's just how I see it. Not sure why it's OK to put it out there one party was dealing drugs and a high school drop out, trying to exploit a girl, but yet the other party was exactly the same. Just as an example MOO

Did the crown introduce evidence to counter Smich's testimony; to prove that he is not who he claims to be?

 

[canadiangirl]

Did the crown introduce evidence to counter Smich's testimony; to prove that he is not who he claims to be?

Do character references matter when one is told to disregard them anyways?

 

[Ashley96]

All I'm saying is Dellen's were well kept from the jury in regards to drug dealing etc
You don't have to agree with me, that's just how I see it. Not sure why it's OK to put it out there one party was dealing drugs and a high school drop out, trying to exploit a girl, but yet the other party was exactly the same. Just as an example MOO

I'm not a lawyer...but read that link, it helped ME understand more.

I'll try to summarize, but don't hold me to my legal accuracy...

Smich had all those bad character references allowed because he took the stand and opened himself up to cross exam. The Crown couldn't have got those things allowed, but when smich took the stand and blamed Millard, Millard's lawyer had the right to bring up those bad character references ONLY as a way to produce reasonable doubt for Millard (ie maybe he IS innocent)...unfortunately that also would seem to make Smich appear MORE guilty, but that is what is hashed out in legal arguments.

If Millard had taken the stand, I presume Smich's lawyer could have brought a lot more bad character references for Millard than the crown did...but they couldn't except through the offhand remarks of Smich on the stand about Millard.

At least that's how I interpret all this...a more legal mind could maybe do a better job than I

 

[RandomName479]

All I'm saying is Dellen's were well kept from the jury in regards to drug dealing etc
You don't have to agree with me, that's just how I see it. Not sure why it's OK to put it out there one party was dealing drugs and a high school drop out, trying to exploit a girl, but yet the other party was exactly the same. Just as an example MOO

Smich's lawyers introduced his criminal record IIRC. They must have thought that because his past convictions were for non-violent crimes, it may actually help his case. When MS decided to take the stand and testified to his GOOD character, he opened the door for character evidence to be admissible. DM didn't take the stand......

Even so, I don't see a huge discrepancy in what was allowed as character evidence for DM vs MS. DM did NOT come across as a choir boy. In fact, the character evidence against him that WAS allowed IMO was worse than MS. The thefts/missions.....multiple women....drug use/supplying friends with drugs/supplying MS with oxy....how MM felt about him....etc.

I understand why you see doubt, but IMO there was no miscarriage of justice as far as what was allowed into evidence. MS's violent and gory snuff film wasn't allowed (assuming bc it would have been too prejudicial). They were both bad apples.....the jury just wasn't privy to exactly how bad they were.

all MOO

 

[canadiangirl]

I don't remember him stating he was on oxy do you have a link? I would also like to point out the man that they missed for the test drive his truck was parked outdoors in the driveway. If they wanted to steal it they could. They could have scoped it to see if it had gps. The sticker would have been on the window

I was referencing the test drive with IT. The reason they said they never stole that one was because he was sick from mixing Oxy and alcohol.