Weekend Discussion Thread 3/24-26/2012

[matou]

This is a radio interview clip taken from the website for CFRB1010am regarding this case and where the remains were found. I thought the members here might find it to be of interest and I did not see the link posted here already but if someone beat me to it then I pre-appologize.
http://www.newstalk1010.com/shows/jerryagar/blogentry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10362807

Thank you, I listened to this and it's clear to me now that TLM did not know the owner of the home across the lane from where Tori's body was found. I will doubt any rumours that TLM might have known this house before Tori was murdered across from this woman's home. JMO

 

[dar107]

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/raffertytrial/2012/03/21/19530086.html

Matou,

Thank-you for posting that beautiful picture of Tori, and reminding us all who this is all about! No matter what our opinions we are all here because our hearts ache for Victoria and what will never be, we all want justice.

 

[matou]

Matou,

Thank-you for posting that beautiful picture of Tori, and reminding us all who this is all about! No matter what our opinions we are all here because our hearts ache for Victoria and what will never be, we all want justice.

I agree dar, this is about Tori. I want everyone to remember that. xox

 

[crazyladi]

I think the OAKVILLE lady was married wasn't she? Maybe that's why he didn't want to give up the last name

 

[maxfactor]

This is a radio interview clip taken from the website for CFRB1010am regarding this case and where the remains were found. I thought the members here might find it to be of interest and I did not see the link posted here already but if someone beat me to it then I pre-appologize.
http://www.newstalk1010.com/shows/jerryagar/blogentry.aspx?BlogEntryID=10362807

Wow, that is pretty powerful. Thanks for posting.

 

[swedie]

What was the date that they added the charges. This article was May 20th, no body was found yet, what would they have that showed sexual assault. DNA eviden from gym bag, clothes etc wouldn't be back that quick...would it?

FF the charges of sexual assault came out just before his trial started. I've read where someone said they were actually mentioned back in 2009 but I have not seen that in the MSM. So I'm going with a couple weeks before MR's trial. The trail started March 5th HTH.

 

[Ardy]

It's not up to the interviewee to determine what information to provide or withhold or what should be considered by LE. It is a criminal offence to lie to officers conducting a criminal investigation. MTR shouldn't have been concerned about his own sorry when police were investigating a missing/murdered child case. They weren't there trying to locate a loaf of bread that went missing from the 711.

Yes, it is against the law to lie to police.........but there is no requirement to answer any or all questions police may put to you. That is why the police asked him if he was "willing" to be interviewed.

MTR lied all the way through the interview, but that fact isn't surprising given that by the date of the interview, he was already "all in" on his misguided hope to not be involved.

Of course he WAS already involved, voluntarily or involuntarily, and he should have gone to the police immediately, with his legal counsel to insure accuracy in his statement, and given a full statement of events to the police. That would have been the wise course of action, but it isn't beyond the realm of possibilities that he thought he wouldn't have been believed. He may have been terrified of going to prison. He could make bad and selfish decisions........or he could be guilty as charged.

In the fullness of the trial and evidence..........we may learn which of the above possibilities is the most likely.

Until then.............MTR is presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

 

[Sillybilly]

Of course he is innocent within that legal concept ... doesn't necessarily apply in the court of public opinion however. Fortunately, whatever our opinion, the jury is not privy to our ramblings

It is very early in the trial, but I personally haven't yet heard what i consider a very plausible explanation for his action or inaction that creates reasonable doubt in my mind. That current opinion is subject to change, based on what is yet to be presented by way of future evidence and testimony.

 

[Hello_Kitty]

Of course he WAS already involved, voluntarily or involuntarily, and he should have gone to the police immediately, with his legal counsel to insure accuracy in his statement, and given a full statement of events to the police. That would have been the wise course of action, but it isn't beyond the realm of possibilities that he thought he wouldn't have been believed. He may have been terrified of going to prison. He could make bad and selfish decisions........or he could be guilty as charged.

Snipped and BBM

I'm wondering why he didn't tell LE right when he was arrested where Tori's remains were. Did he deny any involvement for the two months it took to find the remains. I always suspected that he may have tipped LE as to where to find them, but that was almost end of july, he was arrested in May.

 

[fats]

Yes, it is against the law to lie to police.........but there is no requirement to answer any or all questions police may put to you. That is why the police asked him if he was "willing" to be interviewed.

MTR lied all the way through the interview, but that fact isn't surprising given that by the date of the interview, he was already "all in" on his misguided hope to not be involved.

Of course he WAS already involved, voluntarily or involuntarily, and he should have gone to the police immediately, with his legal counsel to insure accuracy in his statement, and given a full statement of events to the police. That would have been the wise course of action, but it isn't beyond the realm of possibilities that he thought he wouldn't have been believed. He may have been terrified of going to prison. He could make bad and selfish decisions........or he could be guilty as charged


In the fullness of the trial and evidence..........we may learn which of the above possibilities is the most likely.
otherwis
Until then.............MTR is presumed innocent until provene.

It's very interesting that he obviously is lying and stalling in this interview. Now his defense theory looks pretty weak. He is so deceptive with the police--and there is no way he was "just the chauffeur" in this crime!
:banghead:

 

[maxfactor]

Snipped and BBM

I'm wondering why he didn't tell LE right when he was arrested where Tori's remains were. Did he deny any involvement for the two months it took to find the remains. I always suspected that he may have tipped LE as to where to find them, but that was almost end of july, he was arrested in May.

BBM That's a very good point! It would have been the decent thing to do, especially if you were innocent.:moo: That question is right up there with why he didn't produce the car seat.

 

[JayFriend]

I disagree that it wasn't the cops' business. Altho I do agree that he probably didn't want the cops to know HIS business.

When someone doesn't want someone else to know their business, then they feel it's not the other person's business.

I guess when one is questioned by the police they can say, or not say, whatever they want. However, once you've said something, withholding additional details when asked sure draws suspicion. It's a chess game. It doesn't look like MR was as expert as the cop, which only makes sense.

 

[swedie]

They already had him for kidnapping and murder, I just don't see why they would up the charges at that time if all they had was TLM's word. Why wouldn't they wait for forensics, then up the charges. I guess time will tell!!!

The charges of sexual assault causing bodily harm didn't come out in the MSM until mid to late February I believe. I remember I was the one who mentioned it here on WS the day I heard it on the news. I was surprised because I had never heard that charge before. All I ever heard about was the abduction and murder charges. I'll see if I can find the date it came out in the MSM.

 

[JayFriend]

It is a criminal offence to lie to officers conducting a criminal investigation.

Do you know this for a fact? Have people been charged (other than giving false information at traffic stops)? I have read that LE will sometimes lie to suspects during interviews to trick them into admitting something. During a police interview, nobody is under oath, neither the interviewer or the interviewee.

 

[swedie]

My post from 01/16/12 6:57

Just watching the news report on CTV, and I heard it twice now, MF the female news reporter said MR is being accused of abduction, sexual assault and murder of eight year old Victoria. Hmm I don't every remember reports stating sexual assault, abduction and murder yes but not sexual assault. I know sexual assault has been speculated, and way back in the beginning, right after the arrests, I believe kidnapping and murder were the charges but I have not seen any reports stating sexual assault. I will posts video when it becomes available. I just found that interesting. Has anyone every heard reporters stating sexual assault prior to today?

Stay strong Rodney. Daryn needs you more than ever as all this comes to the forefront again. Btw Rodney's other son is now 16 months old

 

[roseofsharon]

Do you know this for a fact? Have people been charged (other than giving false information at traffic stops)? I have read that LE will sometimes lie to suspects during interviews to trick them into admitting something. During a police interview, nobody is under oath, neither the interviewer or the interviewee.

What about obstruction of justice?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...minal+code+of+canada&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

i.e. hiding or destroying evidence

Footnote: CA -- 4 counts for lying to LE. That's all she got!

Just MOO

 

[Sillybilly]

Do you know this for a fact? Have people been charged (other than giving false information at traffic stops)? I have read that LE will sometimes lie to suspects during interviews to trick them into admitting something. During a police interview, nobody is under oath, neither the interviewer or the interviewee.

Yes, lying to police falls under obstruction of justice.

Believe it or not, LE is legally allowed to lie during their investigation. I can't recall whether it's referenced under "search and seizure" laws or in a section of the Criminal Code.

 

[crazyladi]

Good point. Once arrested why didn't he tell them where the body was as well as the car seat. If he was only there to clean up why lie ?

 

[Flossie JMO]

bbm

Rafferty may not have had priors but there is documentation that he was involved in a "violent confrontation"

Last month{April as article is May21 2009}, police were called to the home after a violent confrontation between Rafferty and his mother's boyfriend,
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/05/21/9520751-sun.html

This jury will see right through the smoke and mirror defense tactics.
They are using magician illusions that Rafferty was not involved

jmo

bbm, true, but we don't know who was was violent

the article stated several things, which we don't know the details of, or if they are true, including "and the article also stated That kind of outburst doesn't fit with the man Melanie says she knew, who was friendly and not the least bit threatening.

"I found him attractive. I've never known him to be mean to anybody."

we need more info imo

 

[daisy.faithfull]

Likewise, just because TLM says he raped Tori, doesn't mean he did.

I prefer to look at both sides of the coin. Think Guy Paul Morin, Steven Truscott, Kyle Unger, William Mullins-Johnson, David Milgaard.

I understand that and I do look at both sides of the coin. I just mentioned the issue of whether or not the Crown had forensic evidence of a rape because there had been discussion of that specific topic.