Wayne Millard: Dellen Millard Charged With Murder In The First Degree #1

[Sillybilly]

The picture of the seal was in WM's obituary, not EG's.

:blush: Ahh, memory falters here .. thanks for the correction cansleuther. I just might go back to bed

 

[ABro]

Insofar as the baby seal goes, if WM was clubbing the seals then I'd say the photo choice would have been bizarro. But WM spent a good deal of time in his life on the plight to save the seals from clubbing. To me it's the equivalent of any devoted advocate getting a symbol of their cause acknowledged upon their death. It represents something WM stood for, probably in his better days (from what I can tell of his history). MOO!

Sure, sometimes a seal pup is just a seal pup.

On the other hand, if you've just offed your father, and you choose a picture of the animal he fought to save from death to accompany his obit, well, hey, there's probably a little bit more going on there.

Obligatory disclaimer: Dellen Millard has pled not guilty to the murder of his father. Obviously, if he didn't kill him, the picture choice is not sinister.

 

[Alethea Dice]

The name of the charity first appeared in the Blumberg list published in 2014. So while it appears to exist now, there is nothing to indicate when it was registered.

Knowing the full details about it is the only way a meaningful discussion about it may or may not support any suspicions of wrongdoing.

I guess I'm a little confused why the date it was registered is important. It was obviously around when EG's obituary was posted, whether registered or not, since it was mentioned in that. If it's legitimacy is suspicious, wouldn't WM's involvement also be in question? I don't see why DM would want to register a foundation, that was set up by someone else, so many years later.

 

[Sillybilly]

Sure, sometimes a seal pup is just a seal pup. On the other hand, if you've just offed your father, and you choose a picture of the animal he fought to save from death to accompany his obit, well, hey, there's probably a little bit more going on there. This is why family therapists will often ask you to bring in a picture of your parents. Because sometimes the picture you choose tells a lot about how you see them.

Obligatory disclaimer: Dellen Millard has pled not guilty to the murder of his father. Obviously, if he didn't kill him, the picture choice is not sinister.

Sadly, some of the seal hunt also involves shooting them in the head so as not to affect the value of the pelt.

 

[Sillybilly]

I guess I'm a little confused why the date it was registered is important. It was obviously around when EG's obituary was posted, whether registered or not, since it was mentioned in that. If it's legitimacy is suspicious, wouldn't WM's involvement also be in question? I don't see why DM would want to register a foundation, that was set up by someone else, so many years later.

It was contained in the obit, but was not found on the internet so we have questioned if it was a bona fide charity at the time. IF it has been registered since DM's arrest and our initial questioning, it could suggest that someone was wishing to make it appear legitimate after the fact.

 

[Alethea Dice]

Sure, sometimes a seal pup is just a seal pup. On the other hand, if you've just offed your father, and you choose a picture of the animal he fought to save from death to accompany his obit, well, hey, there's probably a little bit more going on there. This is why family therapists will often ask you to bring in a picture of your parents. Because sometimes the picture you choose tells a lot about how you see them and your relationship to them.

Obligatory disclaimer: Dellen Millard has pled not guilty to the murder of his father. Obviously, if he didn't kill him, the picture choice is not sinister.

And sometimes, someone who is honouring their father in an obituary might include a representation of something that meant a lot to their father. I'm not sure how a therapist asking someone to bring in a picture of their parent relates to a picture in an obituary of a cause that was important to the deceased.

JMO

 

[ABro]

And sometimes, someone who is honouring their father in an obituary might include a representation of something that meant a lot to their father. I'm not sure how a therapist asking someone to bring in a picture of their parent relates to a picture in an obituary of a cause that was important to the deceased.

JMO

Again, if he didn't kill his father, there's nothing sinister about the photo choice in my opinion.

If he did, he's not "honouring" his father with the seal photo. He's laughing at him, again in my opinion

How is it possible to "honour" a father you've just murdered?

 

[Carli]

It was contained in the obit, but was not found on the internet so we have questioned if it was a bona fide charity at the time. IF it has been registered since DM's arrest and our initial questioning, it could suggest that someone was wishing to make it appear legitimate after the fact.

So I guess this would have to be someone who was aware in advance that Blumberg's law firm was making an FOI request to the Provincial Government for this list which, if granted, Blumberg intended to publish online? (Keep in mind that the only way the general public would otherwise ever have access to this information would be through the same route used by Blumberg- namely an FOI request.) Erring on the side of caution does not seem to have been a hallmark of actions of the accused in this case, imo, imho. etc. Also, not that it matters in the overview, but governments typically take absolutely forever to chew over FOI requests. Months, or even years, dribble by before one may eventually receive documents requested.

 

[Alethea Dice]

It was contained in the obit, but was not found on the internet so we have questioned if it was a bona fide charity at the time. IF it has been registered since DM's arrest and our initial questioning, it could suggest that someone was wishing to make it appear legitimate after the fact.

Thanks, sillybilly. I get that. What I don't understand is, if it was around when WM was still alive (as per EG's obituary), why would it be necessary now (almost 3 years later) to make it look legit?

FWIW, a non-profit organization doesn't need to be incorporated, but incorporating does give it legal status. In order to incorporate it, a minimum of 3 directors would need to be named. Annual meetings would need to be held and bylaws adopted. I'm not convinced that the government would accept an application to incorporate an organization that is at least 3 years old from someone who is incarcerated.

http://www.corporationcentre.ca/docen/home/faq.asp?id=incnp

JMO

 

[Juballee]

Now, question for you, Juballee. You seem to have a healthy respect for expert opinion -- in this case the forensic linguist, and I remember you taking me to task for finding the answer of a Toronto homicide detective evasive. You appeared to think it was out of line for me to question this detective's account of events. And on several other occasions on these forums, you've mentioned your respect for police.

I can't help but wonder how you reconcile this respect for the police and other experts with your opinion (or what I interpret to be your opinion) that Dellen Millard is innocent. If he is, three major police forces have totally blown it. Not only did they get the wrong guy for the Bosma murder, they then spent a year investigating him before charging him with two other murders, none of which you seem to believe he committed.

When I 'took you to task' earlier, it was not because the detective's answers were evasive, it was because you took the detective's dismissal of the question as definitive answer in itself, which you then built up into a whole two part blog entry with headlines boasting of new information, if I recall correctly. I didn't think it was out of line to question the detective, but I thought it was out of line to attribute to him things he did not say just going by the expressions on his face, which was how you claimed to come across your information at that time, from what I recall. I also recall being disappointed that there was no new actual information at the time, honestly, because I had believed your headlines. Sorry.

Please back up your assertions as to my 'opinions', since I don't remember stating that DM is innocent, only that he is innocent until proven guilty. I know it may annoy some that I am so loathe to jump on the bandwagon and join in the chanting to persecute him summarily, but I just really haven't heard enough yet to make up my mind. There may be a small handful of people here whose opinions seem to grate against the majority, just simply because we question the mainstream's insistence on declaring guilt without more information, in my opinion.

How many different police forces, judges and mistaken jury members have convicted the wrong people for crimes over the years? It is not impossible for them to make mistakes, and to pretend that it is impossible does no one any good in a free society. In fact, hasn't at least one of the major police forces involved in 2 out of the 3 murders he is currently being charged with 'totally blown it' already by not discovering the murders of WM and LB when they happened, if what they say now is true? If that is true, they could have prevented the murder of TB, couldn't they, if they had not been incompetent initially, and for almost a year subsequently? How will that knowledge affect SB and her daughter, I wonder, if it is true?

Yes I do respect many in LE, but I don't respect them all blindly, because we know that they are not all always right or moral or can sometimes make mistakes, they are still human beings, after all. Personally, I don't think that I need to justify my right to question authority anymore than I need to justify my right to free speech. But that's just my opinion.

 

[Juballee]

And sometimes, someone who is honouring their father in an obituary might include a representation of something that meant a lot to their father. I'm not sure how a therapist asking someone to bring in a picture of their parent relates to a picture in an obituary of a cause that was important to the deceased.

JMO

I have to agree, I feel the picture was something that was likely picked as being a photo of his father that he felt was most representative of him in a way WM would have approved of. If, say DM knew that this was one of his father's favourite photos, or if he knew it was an accomplishment that his father was very proud of, it would seem natural that he would pick this picture. In any way that I can imagine it, it would only seem sinister if he had instead chosen a photo of something his father would not likely want to be associated with, like dog fighting or racism, or perhaps a photo of Canadian money, like someone has on their head, in my opinion.

Also, on another topic, aren't seals clubbed so that bullet holes don't ruin the pelts? They do wash they blood off before they make them into coats, I would suspect.

 

[ABro]

I know it may annoy some that I am so loathe to jump on the bandwagon and join in the chanting to persecute him summarily, but I just really haven't heard enough yet to make up my mind. There may be a small handful of people here whose opinions seem to grate against the majority, just simply because we question the mainstream's insistence on declaring guilt without more information, in my opinion.

I'm not annoyed at your opinion. I just find it difficult to understand. Although you say, you're withholding judgment, I definitely get the impression you are pretty convinced Millard is innocent. But maybe that's just me.

If people think Millard is guilty, it's because the evidence they know about is very strong.

At one point, I remember you stating that the box or lack of box around the tattoo would be critical, which I just found bizarre. Really?

How many different police forces, judges and mistaken jury members have convicted the wrong people for crimes over the years?

Way fewer than have been right. Also, wrongful prosecutions convictions don't come from one mistake, they come from mistake piled upon mistake piled upon mistake with all sorts of covering and failure to follow procedures thrown in. I see zero reason to believe that has happened in the Bosma murder.

It is not impossible for them to make mistakes, and to pretend that it is impossible does no one any good in a free society.

Yes they do make mistakes. Who's pretending it's impossible? But as we have discussed here, there are almost always warning signs and many things wrongful prosecution cases have in common. The Bosma case has none of those signs.

In fact, hasn't at least one of the major police forces involved in 2 out of the 3 murders he is currently being charged with 'totally blown it' already by not discovering the murders of WM and LB when they happened, if what they say now is true? If that is true, they could have prevented the murder of TB, couldn't they, if they had not been incompetent initially, and for almost a year subsequently? How will that knowledge affect SB and her daughter, I wonder, if it is true?

This is all true. TPS has many questions to answer. I expect we will be hearing about how these cases were handled for a long time to come.

Also, I wouldn't assume that theses cases were solved by TPS alone or even that TPS played the major role.

Yes I do respect many in LE, but I don't respect them all blindly, because we know that they are not all always right or moral or can sometimes make mistakes, they are still human beings, after all. Personally, I don't think that I need to justify my right to question authority anymore than I need to justify my right to free speech. But that's just my opinion.

I don't respect authority blindly, nor do I mistrust everyone I encounter. I start from the position that the person/organization is competent until I see signs that indicate otherwise. I see nothing at all to indicate the Hamilton detectives in the Bosma case were incompetent, and they would have to be massively incompetent to have the wrong guy in jail. On the other hand, if I was covering a murder and it was 22 Division detectives in charge, I would have a lot of questions about what was going on.

 

[Sillybilly]

Also, on another topic, aren't seals clubbed so that bullet holes don't ruin the pelts? They do wash they blood off before they make them into coats, I would suspect.

<rsbm>

I said they are shot in the head to avoid damaging the pelts.

from harpseals.org:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...org/about_the_hunt/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

In the second phase of the seal hunt, on the Front, in the waters off Newfoundland and Labrador, seals are more mobile and better able to swim, so sealers (mostly Newfoundland fishermen) typically shoot them from their boats. They aim for the head to avoid damaging the pelt

 

[robynhood]

Sillybilly...I agree ..UNREAL..but that is JMHO...robynhood!

 

[Tamarind]

I'm not annoyed at your opinion. I just find it difficult to understand. Although you say, you're withholding judgment, I definitely get the impression you are pretty convinced Millard is innocent. But maybe that's just me.

If people think Millard is guilty, it's because the evidence they know about is very strong.

I know you are not replying to my post so I hope you dont mind me responding to your post.

This (bolded)would be in your opinion, as I for one do not see the evidence as being strong particularly, in this case. I find quite a few people post things that I find difficult to understand but we all have opinions and I respect everyones opinion. My own opinion is based on a bizarre string of events that don't add up to me. Add that to my preference to presume innocent.

At one point, I remember you stating that the box or lack of box around the tattoo would be critical, which I just found bizarre. Really?
Way fewer than have been right. Also, wrongful prosecutions convictions don't come from one mistake, they come from mistake piled upon mistake piled upon mistake with all sorts of covering and failure to follow procedures thrown in. I see zero reason to believe that has happened in the Bosma murder.

I actually do believe that wrongful prosecutions can come from one mistake. There is a section in the pre trial papers that asks if defendant wants to challenge continuity. They can have the Crown prove everything that occurred along the way from the outset of the investigation. Many lawyers don't bother with it so I am told, but thats usually due to the cost involved. When this gets overlooked it is possible that something small that snowballed from that point, gets overlooked.

Yes they do make mistakes. Who's pretending it's impossible? But as we have discussed here, there are almost always warning signs and many things wrongful prosecution cases have in common. The Bosma case has none of those signs.

How do we know the Bosma case has no sign of being a wrongful prosecution? Unless we have been privy to the full disclosure and been able to scrutinize the details, how could we know at this point?

 

[ABro]

I know you are not replying to my post so I hope you dont mind me responding to your post.

This (bolded)would be in your opinion, as I for one do not see the evidence as being strong particularly, in this case. I find quite a few people post things that I find difficult to understand but we all have opinions and I respect everyones opinion. My own opinion is based on a bizarre string of events that don't add up to me. Add that to my preference to presume innocent.

I actually do believe that wrongful prosecutions can come from one mistake. There is a section in the pre trial papers that asks if defendant wants to challenge continuity. They can have the Crown prove everything that occurred along the way from the outset of the investigation. Many lawyers don't bother with it so I am told, but thats usually due to the cost involved. When this gets overlooked it is possible that something small that snowballed from that point, gets overlooked.

How do we know the Bosma case has no sign of being a wrongful prosecution? Unless we have been privy to the full disclosure and been able to scrutinize the details, how could we know at this point?

I think it's fair to say the evidence is strong when the victim's body is found on the accused's farm, when the victim's car is found in the accused mother's driveway, when the victim is burned in an incinerator belonging to the accused, according to major newspapers, when the accused has no reason to own a livestock incinerator, when credible witnesses identify physical features which lead police to trace the accused. Honestly, I can't imagine what you'd consider strong evidence if not this.

Snowballing, as you put it, is what I alternatively described asmistake piling up upon mistake upon mistake. ONe mistake leads to others. Clearly, a wrongful conviction has to star somewhere. The point is it ends up being lots of people making lots of mistakes that checks and balances should prevent, but don't because they usually aren't used when they should be.

Here is the Innocence Project on causes of wrongful prosecutions. Which causes do you believe apply to the Millard case?

http://www.newenglandinnocence.org/knowledge-center/causes/

 

[MsSherlock]

There are certain events surrounding the death of WM that really puzzle me. 2 weeks prior to WM's death, DM meets with AS and expresses concern over running out of money. AS claims they parted on good terms.

From reports, I'm assuming that WM was found by DM and perhaps others on the evening of Thursday Nov 29th/12. By the time the scene was processed by TPS, I think it's safe to say that they didn't take the body out til early morning Friday Nov 30th/12 and I'm sure it would have gone for an autopsy. I can only assume that it would have been a sleepless night for all those on the scene.

The fact that there was a gun involved leads me to assume that there would have been a bit of clean up necessary at the house on Maple Gate- the house that DM was living in with WM. I can only imagine that it was an incredibly emotionally draining time.

But there's a part of this early post suicide time period that perplexes me. By Tuesday, Dec 4/12, 11 days before an obit or funeral, the manager of Waterloo International made this announcement by email to airport staff: "Wayne Millard passed away on Thursday last week, and his son Dellan (sic) has decided to shut down the business. All employees were laid off as of today. Jeff (Schelling, regional government lawyer) will be discussing the next steps with the bank and Millard's legal council. There is never a dull moment around here, that's for sure."
http://www.orangeville.com/news-sto...aster-inside-the-secret-millard-negotiations/

Gosh gosh gosh...IMO, Millardair's lawyers would have barely had time to digest WM's death let alone assess severances etc, move to shut down the company and layoff all the employees. Those layoff notices would have been prepared on Monday, Dec 3rd. Exactly what was the rush? Overwhelming grief? Need to have the hangar void of employees? Perhaps a "pink slip" power trip on all those guys that didn't have much respect for DM?

There's just something gnawing in my gut here- I just can't imagine a person so overwhelmed with the grief of losing the person he loved most moving so rapidly to shut that persons dream down. A DM perfected plan? Kill Dad on Thursday-stage scene for suicide- go out with unassuming ex on Thursday-find Dad on Thursday, act for Ex, Mom and Police, call lawyer on Friday, act for lawyer, shut down business on Monday and lay everyone off. Take a week to recoup, write obit, have memorial- the end. MOO

 

[Sillybilly]

This (bolded)would be in your opinion, as I for one do not see the evidence as being strong particularly, in this case.

<rsbm>

I think it's fair to say the evidence is strong when the victim's body is found on the accused's farm, when the victim's car is found in the accused mother's driveway, when the victim is burned in an incinerator belonging to the accused, according to major newspapers, when the accused has no reason to own a livestock incinerator, when credible witnesses identify physical features which lead police to trace the accused. Honestly, I can't imagine what you'd consider strong evidence if not this.

<rsbm>

Let's not forget that LE lets the evidence lead them ... so starting with phone records and the Ambition tattoo, whether the Etobicoke man remembered correctly if it did or didn't have a box around it, DM has the Ambition tatt, which led to all the other evidence (that ABro mentions) that was garnered throughout the investigation. I fail to understand how folks who presume DM's innocence can logically or reasonably explain what would almost have to be one or more of the biggest coincidences in the annals of history.

 

[Tamarind]

I think it's fair to say the evidence is strong when the victim's body is found on the accused's farm, when the victim's car is found in the accused mother's driveway, when the victim is burned in an incinerator belonging to the accused, according to major newspapers, when the accused has no reason to own a livestock incinerator, when credible witnesses identify physical features which lead police to trace the accused. Honestly, I can't imagine what you'd consider strong evidence if not this.

Snowballing, as you put it, is what I alternatively described asmistake piling up upon mistake upon mistake. ONe mistake leads to others. Clearly, a wrongful conviction has to star somewhere. The point is it ends up being lots of people making lots of mistakes that checks and balances should prevent, but don't because they usually aren't used when they should be.

I do see why you have formed your opinion, I on the other hand see these 'physical features' as being somewhat too obvious. It has been shown that DM may well not have been the buyer of the incinerator and also the 'moving' of the incinerator to a viewable spot also has me suspicious. Snowballing is when an initially small snowball (mistake) continues to gain ground (snow) as it is not stopped and picks up speed (snow) along the way., thats my interpretation, but I guess some may think it (same mistake) gathers furthers snowballs ( mistakes), which again brings us to the subject of interpretation. This case is becoming publicly based, it would seem, on interpretation. Thank you for your reply

 

[Tamarind]

There are certain events surrounding the death of WM that really puzzle me. 2 weeks prior to WM's death, DM meets with AS and expresses concern over running out of money. AS claims they parted on good terms.

From reports, I'm assuming that WM was found by DM and perhaps others on the evening of Thursday Nov 29th/12. By the time the scene was processed by TPS, I think it's safe to say that they didn't take the body out til early morning Friday Nov 30th/12 and I'm sure it would have gone for an autopsy. I can only assume that it would have been a sleepless night for all those on the scene.

The fact that there was a gun involved leads me to assume that there would have been a bit of clean up necessary at the house on Maple Gate- the house that DM was living in with WM. I can only imagine that it was an incredibly emotionally draining time.

But there's a part of this early post suicide time period that perplexes me. By Tuesday, Dec 4/12, 11 days before an obit or funeral, the manager of Waterloo International made this announcement by email to airport staff: "Wayne Millard passed away on Thursday last week, and his son Dellan (sic) has decided to shut down the business. All employees were laid off as of today. Jeff (Schelling, regional government lawyer) will be discussing the next steps with the bank and Millard's legal council. There is never a dull moment around here, that's for sure."
http://www.orangeville.com/news-sto...aster-inside-the-secret-millard-negotiations/

Gosh gosh gosh...IMO, Millardair's lawyers would have barely had time to digest WM's death let alone assess severances etc, move to shut down the company and layoff all the employees. Those layoff notices would have been prepared on Monday, Dec 3rd. Exactly what was the rush? Overwhelming grief? Need to have the hangar void of employees? Perhaps a "pink slip" power trip on all those guys that didn't have much respect for DM?

There's just something gnawing in my gut here- I just can't imagine a person so overwhelmed with the grief of losing the person he loved most moving so rapidly to shut that persons dream down. A DM perfected plan? Kill Dad on Thursday-stage scene for suicide- go out with unassuming ex on Thursday-find Dad on Thursday, act for Ex, Mom and Police, call lawyer on Friday, act for lawyer, shut down business on Monday and lay everyone off. Take a week to recoup, write obit, have memorial- the end. MOO

Grief can be overwhelming, I can understand why someone does not want to go on and why they would feel inadequate at running a company in that state. I don't see the complexities in such a plan as you feel may have occurred. But I do see how someone forms such an opinion if going solely by their own interpretation. This is probably why they need 12 people for a jury .