Weekend Discussion thread 04/21-24/2012

[Thinkzerz]

I think kidnapping her was easy even if she was talked to by her mother about stranger danger. TLM was a female for one and a teenager. Kids don't see that as danger jmo

This is true.

 

[Ardy]

I thought that too, they seemed to be hurrying, I wondered if TS had been told her mother was sick I have to take you to the hospital or something like that. JMO But again, we may never know. JMO

That is a conundrum in this case.

TM testified that she didn't believe VS knew TLM, but may have overheard conversations about breeding dogs with TLM's mother. TM also testified that VS would not walk away with strangers.

It is entirely possible, in my opinion, that TLM may have known who VS was, through other people who knew both TLM and TM.........and TM wasn't aware that TLM had that knowledge.

The only one who can say for sure she didn't know VS..................is TLM.

JMO

 

[Thinkzerz]

This may sound off but what if MR was selling a child and VS was to young. Staying on track with the run to Guelph would make sense if they were waiting to hear back from the buyer and VS age? Then buyer didn't want her at that age so TLM went into home depot and bought the tools used to kill VS. JMO a thought.

 

[snoofer]

What i don't understand is the window looks rolled down and his arm laying on the rim of the window frame. Who would have the window down when kidnapping a child?

that is why i wonder if TS was subdued in someway by that time ie tape, drugs etc. As crown indicates TS was in the car at that time. These are the things we don't know and can only guess about. JMO

 

[Macright]

That is a conundrum in this case.

TM testified that she didn't believe VS knew TLM, but may have overheard conversations about breeding dogs with TLM's mother. TM also testified that VS would not walk away with strangers.

It is entirely possible, in my opinion, that TLM may have known who VS was, through other people who knew both TLM and TM.........and TM wasn't aware that TLM had that knowledge.

The only one who can say for sure she didn't know VS..................is TLM.

JMO

JMO ..TM testified that VS did not know TLM..then she testified that VS would not walk away with strangers...anyone else see something wrong with those two sentences...JMO

 

[Thinkzerz]

that is why i wonder if TS was subdued in someway by that time ie tape, drugs etc. As crown indicates TS was in the car at that time. These are the things we don't know and can only guess about. JMO

Hmm and looks like window was rolled down. Sure seems like VS knew one of them. Also TLM was in passenger seat. Not the back right?JMO

 

[Macright]

that is why i wonder if TS was subdued in someway by that time ie tape, drugs etc. As crown indicates TS was in the car at that time. These are the things we don't know and can only guess about. JMO

if that were the case MR & TLM were sure taking chances driving into public parking lots with a restrained child in the back area..that car stood out and if the tag was run once by an OPP what were the chances that it could happen again on their route... JMO JMO.. obviously they were not too worried about anything...

 

[snoofer]

No purse? Where would I put my cell, my wallet and makeup and the pepper spray? LOL

I don't see going to Timmie's or McDonald's for a first encounter as being bad especially if you met the guy on some dating site and it's your first face to face meeting. It's probably the safest place, imo. If things work out then perhaps a second more appropriate place like a nice restaurant would be the way to go. If he takes you to Timmie's for soup and sandwich or McD's for the happy meal on a second date....ummmm....he probably has no money or very limited money and he's either married or a loser. LOL

IMO

ha yes i mean the first date after you meet.

 

[snoofer]

if that were the case MR & TLM were sure taking chances driving into public parking lots with a restrained child in the back area..that car stood out and if the tag was run once by an OPP what were the chances that it could happen again on their route... JMO JMO.. obviously they were not too worried about anything...

wether subdued or not subdued by that time if LE got either one of them they were in deep caacaa. JMO

 

[Oldsoul2]

That "announcement" was made after there were some legal issues being discussed when the jury left the room. So after the crowd gasped and a jury member "recoiled", Derstine knew he had to attempt some damage control over the unexpected announcement from CS.

As I've stated before, the Crown cannot bring in character witnesses for the defendent. It is considered prejudicial and cannot be done in the Canadian court system. With that said, the only reason they were allowed to bring all these women in was because they all had some information about the day of and the days following the crime about MR's actions and behaviours regarding the crime.

If MR had never called, texted anyone that day or spoke about the crime with any of these women, none of them would have been permitted to testify about their "relationship" to him. Thankfully he did have contact with all of them during this time so that they could be brought in to speak of what he had told them or to verify parts of TLM's story such as CS stating that her BBM's to him were undeliverable for a period of time that day. And of course they are permitted to give a bit of background as to how they know the defendent to explain why he was tellng them this stuff.

It worked very well to the Crown's advantage that he was stupid enough to be blabbing to them all. There could even be more that he didn't say anything to or have contact with on the crucial day that didn't show up on the witness stand.

So the judge had to issue a disclaimer to tell the jury that these women were not brought in as character references but had actual evidence to present to them. It's a technicality really. Juries are human, and the Crown knew the impact that this "parade" of women was going to have on his image as an innocent dupe. But the jury cannot convict him because they think he's a pig. They have to use the other evidence for that. This parade of women just helps to put things in perspective when the defence starts in on their side of the story.

MOO

In my strong opinion, the reason why that jury gasped was because they sat through woman after woman testifying to dating MR during the same period of time and thinking up to that point, why would he need to do this. Than comes a witness saying he was her pimp and when they take all the evidence and put it together in regards to motif as to why he would just take a child to rape her based on a dare (which made no sense to me from the get go but that's just me) and has a history of older women and not children and a multitude of them, well one and one equals two. IMO That testimony surely shed light on an ulterior motif. That in my opinion, was the death of the defense and the reason why IMO the judge said what he said. He did not tell the jury to disregard the pimp testimony which is the smoking gun because it is the reason so many woman existed in the first place.

Also, IMO there's NO QUESTION in my mind any longer as to what really happened and the motif behind this crime. As someone else as well as myself here mentioned, child traffickers commonly rape the child first before selling them because they need to have the element of fear of them from the child so they won't scream and yell. Also, he wanted a younger one for that very reason. It could possibly be that Tori was not meant to die that day but put up enough of a fight that MR lost it. I do not believe in any way that this motif will ever be told by MR or TLM and the reason is because she was caught on camera which led to him being caught because when the evidence came out there was no way for her to cover him and explain that away and since they were both going to prison for this crime, they might as well be protected in there because the alternate option for them was their own life.

I also want to say that the Crown has done an amazing job of driving the point home with very few words.

 

[snoofer]

There was one court hearing when it was reported that MR mouthed the words" Liar" to TLM. Does anyone know what TLM was saying when MR mouthed those words to her?

going to go see if i can find it; i am curious too. JMO

it was on day 6 of trial
http://www.am980.ca/Channels/Court/Story.aspx?ID=1670372

according to the link it was tuesday day 5 (as stated in above link but i cannot find it in transcripts on day 5 or 6) Interesting going back and read the minute details TLM gave of her version of events. IMO Ok still looking.

 

[brighidin]

...yes I agree IMO this abuction for a " susposively"..... " "spur of the moment "...abuction did happen EXTREMELY QUICK...Imo I am sure it was discussed previously to that horrible day of April 8 2009...Imo...

Something else that always struck me odd is how fast the actual kidnapping happened. For a random, unplanned kidnapping of a child unknown to the kidnapper, everything happened very quickly. At 3:25 the school bell rang, and by 3:33 Tori was in the car and being driven away. All it took was 8 minutes. 8 minutes to find a child that was all alone, talk to her about dogs, convince the child to go with her, take the 3 minute walk down the street, get in the car and leave. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like everything ran very smoothly for a spur of the moment, stranger abduction.

Respectfully, what other kind of kidnapping is there? No one kidnaps a child slowly. people, imo, don't take their time to kidnap kids. Read around the forums: sadly, it's done in the blink of an eye.

Also IMO, but even if a child has been told about stranger danger, I think that it would be relatively easy to manipulate an empathetic little girl if you told them your puppy was missing, or that their mommy was sick. My DD is 7 and I have told her about stranger danger over and over, but I still have a feeling that if someone told either of those scenarios, she would go with them.

IMO

 

[Allanae]

JMO ..TM testified that VS did not know TLM..then she testified that VS would not walk away with strangers...anyone else see something wrong with those two sentences...JMO

When my child was 9 years old child I thought that he would never walk away with anyone either. I tested him with one of my mommy female friends he didn't know, and he totally bought her story that I was sick and he followed her to her house with no questions asked. He said he felt strange doing it but still went with her. My friend didn't even use my name she just called me mommy while talking to him. He went willingly.

Just because we think our children are "Stranger Smart" doesn't mean they actually are.

 

[Oldsoul2]

This may sound off but what if MR was selling a child and VS was to young. Staying on track with the run to Guelph would make sense if they were waiting to hear back from the buyer and VS age? Then buyer didn't want her at that age so TLM went into home depot and bought the tools used to kill VS. JMO a thought.

Very possible IMO

 

[Thinkzerz]

going to go see if i can find it; i am curious too. JMO

Let me know if you find it. I am looking too.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

TLM told VS that she wouldn't let anything happen to her, according to her own testimony.

She either lied to VS then, or she is lying about it now.

She lied to VS family and said MR killed VS.

TLM is a sociopath. She lies just because she can. She has no moral code.

If a Judge stepped forward and said MR was at his house the day of the abduction, TLM would simply change her story to include the Judge.........

That is how sociopaths operate.

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

Well.... I tend to believe that TS would have asked to go home becaue that's what a child would do. So...

 

[Thinkzerz]

RaffertyLFP: McClintic at one point prepared a letter of apology to Tori's mother "as a way to cope" [via Twitter]

OMG i can't believe she would do this. She can cope by living in emotional pain for the rest of her life.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

To me IMO this is the most important part before even consider all of the other overwhelming evidence; I want to hear defense explain how this is not sinister behavior in this day and age. Because that initial act alone has bad data written all over it IMO. Remember it was HIM that went to buy drugs with the child in the car to HIS drug connection, did HE have permission for that, did TLM have permission for that. Yea right; I think not! Nobody takes a kid to another town without permission, I have never heard of something so rediculous for behavior while babysitting. MOO

Not to mention that when TS asked to go home (if it's true he didn't know about the kidnapping) he should have gotten a clue and told himself 'something is wrong' and turned right around and brought TS back to the school, or taken her home.

 

[Thinkzerz]

RaffertyLFP: McClintic said she barely recalls meeting Tara MacDonald -says she was "really out of it" dealt more with Goris

Maybe VS knew TLM through Goris?

 

[kmclaren]

JMO ..TM testified that VS did not know TLM..then she testified that VS would not walk away with strangers...anyone else see something wrong with those two sentences...JMO

No I don't, as allanae already posted that until your child is actually put into a situation you just don't know. TM probably believed or wanted to believe that Tori would not just walk away with a stranger. At age 8, kids are still so vulnerable - to Tori, TLM was a just a friendly teen girl with a dog to show her not the big bad boogie man... jmo