Another victim?
I guess the theory of MR's incredible ability to victimize a numerous and wide ranging number of women supports the Crown's accusation, based on TLM's testimony, that the kidnapping was a master plan by a skillful manipulator......who apparently simultaneously was dumb as a brick.
My biggest problem with the Crown's case is the beginning.
Based on TLM's testimony, we have to believe.............
Despite having a long list of female encounters, none of whom made any reference to a devious sexual side of MR, one day he woke up and decided to take a child and sexually assault her.
He decided it was a good idea to take a witness along with him.
A witness who was recently released from custody, was a drug addict, and was continually in and out of trouble with the law. Surely he could depend on her to keep a secret like this for the rest of his life.
He decided that rather than drive to Guelph and kidnap a child there, it would be a better idea to kidnap one in Woodstock and drive around with her in the backseat of the car for a couple of hours.
He pulled the battery out of his phone so he wouldn't be tracked leaving Woodstock.........frantically listens to the radio for kidnapping alerts and then decides to insert the battery back into the phone when he arrives at Guelph.......just down the highway.
He decided it would be a good idea to stop at Tim Horton for tea, pick up some drugs at a friends home with his car parked out front of her home and a kidnapped young girl inside, and stick around and "chat" for about 10 minutes.
Then he decided to continue on with the crime.
But let's go back to the actual abduction...............
TLM testified it was totally random.
Out of all the elementary schools in Woodstock, they end up at this one.
Out of all the kids in the school, she picks up VS.
Out of all the dog breeds in the world, she talks about the same breed as VS owns.
She walks VS down the street, passing a woman waiting for her own child and who knows whoever else waiting for their kids or just arriving for their kids, and is unconcerned that she is going to be stopped or approached about why she is with that child.
After all she claims she didn't know VS was TM's daughter. She claimed the abduction was random, so she didn't know who VS parents were or what they looked like.
But she did know TM. Her mother had sold drugs to TM and boyfriend JG on numerous occasions. TM knew her from 2 trips to TLM's house.
All of these "coincidences" and there is more..............
TLM testified...she didn't know why she took a little girl that day, she doesn't know why she didn't escape with VS, and she doesn't know why she murdered VS...........but she has an incredibly clear memory of everything else, apparently good enough to sketch out maps for LE.
At this point, I don't know what the defense theory will eventually be, but I don't know how it could be any more unbelievable than the story TLM spun.
I don't believe TLM..........I have never believed TLM.........and I never will.
MR's involvement in the crime is still to be determined, but I don't believe for a second that TLM was an innocent dupe or victim in this case.
****Not that you said she was..but that appears to be the Crown case.
JMO............
. I totally agree by the way, he totally was the definition of pimp. I do not understand why people think a pimp has to be the guy hanging out on the street making sure his broad is being treated right. 
