• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, the online home of TRIBE MAGAZINE. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register. Join us!

Robert Baltovich case. The truth and nothing but

The Kid

TRIBE Member
Don't beleive they hype on the news right now, this motherfucker is guilty and it's disgusting the amount of time and taxpayers money being wasted on this peice of shit's appeal.

There is a side to the story the media is either ignoring or simply not aware of.

For those that don't know, Elizabeth Bain was murdered in 1992 and Baltovitch was convicted. He is now appealing that conviction on the grounds that there is "new evidence" which suggests Paul Bernardo may have been responsible.

My family is good friends with the Bains and there is a lot the media doesn't know right now, but this is especially painful to see as I know the Bains and went on searches for her daughter's body and attended the original trial.

The investigators of the original trial are keeping pretty tight lipped about the whole thing - the appeal wraps up today and my fingers are crossed that they send the motherfucker back to jail and hopefully he gets shanked or something.

:mad:
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
what do you know that the rest of us dont?

why is it so implausable that this guy may not have done it?

i appreciate that you were close to the family and it must have been difficult to hear the trial stretched out ,but is your emotional attachement to the family the only reason you think the accused is guilty?
 

The Kid

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by judge wopner
is your emotional attachement to the family the only reason you think the accused is guilty?
Not at all, I spoke with my parents the other day, they've been going to the hearings with the Bains and have been talking with the investigators of the original trial. They've told the Bains not to speak with the media as they have been preparing their case, etc. There was more than enough evidence to convict him the first time and they believe they'll be able to shut down this appeal.

Basically there are three things that could happen now, 1. He could be completely exonerated, 2. they could decide there is grounds for a new trial or 3. he could be sent back to jail (he's been out for a while now because of this appeal).

I wish I could go to court today but I can't get the time off work.

Why I have so much animosity towards this dick is seeing firsthand his attitude towards the Bain family during the original trial, he actually turned around on several occasions and smirked at the family - this while he was on trial for the MURDER of his GIRLFRIEND. Fucked up shit.

I just hope the hearing judges don't get caught up on all the media hype about this being another Bernardo murder, pretty big stretch if you ask me but I guess we'll see what happens.

:(
 

kerouacdude

TRIBE Member
i've read about 4 articles in the Star over the past two weeks and not once did they disclose that Baltovich worked in their library (the Star's) after he got out.

reminds me i have to borrow the book about the case off my brother this weekend
 

2canplay

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by The Kid
I just hope the hearing judges don't get caught up on all the media hype about this being another Bernardo murder, pretty big stretch if you ask me but I guess we'll see what happens.

:(
How is it a stretch? I meanm, didn't she meet Bernardo? Wasn't he in the middle of carrying out a series of increasingly viscious rapes at the time...in Scarborough?

There is no doubt Baltovich is an asshole - about that I'm sure, but do you know for sure he killed her?
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

The Kid

TRIBE Member
Here's a decent article I found in today's Star:


Baltovich's trial silence questioned
Never testified in court in 1992
Crown wonders why during appeal


TRACEY TYLER
LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER

If the jury at Robert Baltovich's 1992 murder trial headed into its deliberations with a one-sided impression of the evidence, it was because Baltovich himself didn't step into the witness box and testify, the Ontario Court of Appeal has been told.

Although Baltovich complains that Mr. Justice John O'Driscoll delivered an unbalanced jury charge favouring the prosecution, the defence, in many instances, failed to offer explanations for Baltovich's conduct, said crown counsel Brian McNeely.

It wasn't the trial judge's job to "invent" them, he said yesterday.

"If there is one true explanation for all this suspicious conduct, surely the best source of it would have been for the accused to get in the box and explain it," he told Justices Michael Moldaver, Robert Sharpe and Eileen Gillese.

In written materials filed with the court, Baltovich's lawyers say he wanted to testify, but his trial lawyers made a strategic decision that he shouldn't.

The court was in its seventh day of hearings into Baltovich's appeal of his conviction for the murder of his girlfriend, Elizabeth Bain, 22, who disappeared on June 19, 1990. Her body has never been found. Baltovich's lawyers for the appeal hearing — James Lockyer, Brian Greenspan and Joanne McLean — argue his conviction is a miscarriage of justice.

O'Driscoll, they argue, abandoned all fairness and used his influential position to guide the jury toward its verdict of second-degree murder.

His jury instructions, they say, were laced with contempt for the defence and effectively endorsed the prosecution's theory that Baltovich killed Bain in a fit of jealousy and attempted to cover his tracks.

But McNeely argued yesterday that O'Driscoll did an "incredible" job and his jury instructions were a fair and balanced representation of the case put forward by the prosecution and defence.

Moldaver, however, asked McNeely to point to one place in the charge where O'Driscoll referred the jury to Baltovich's explanation in connection with a key issue — his failure to return calls from Bain's former boyfriend, Eric Genuis, any sooner than the afternoon of Friday, June 22, 1990. Not mentioning Baltovich's side of the story might be seen as "but one example" of not presenting the case fairly, from the defence point of view, Moldaver said.

Genuis left several phone messages at Baltovich's home late on June 21 and early June 22, while Baltovich was being interviewed by Toronto police officers investigating Bain's disappearance. Lockyer told the court earlier in the appeal that his client didn't get those messages from his mother until late Friday and called Genuis as soon as he did.

Baltovich's friend, Jim Issacs, confirmed this in his testimony at the trial, he added.

But before sending jurors to deliberate, O'Driscoll told them they might want to ask themselves if the reason Baltovich didn't return the calls was because he was the man seen driving Bain's car at an intersection north of Whitby early on June 22. The crown says Baltovich went to Lake Scugog to bury Bain's body and was driving back to Toronto at that time.

The crown's interpretation of testimony from Baltovich's mother at the trial is that, on Friday afternoon, she was simply "reminding" her son to call Genuis, not telling him for the first time, crown Gillian Roberts said.

"I ask you to consider whether any perceived imbalance (in the charge) was partly or indeed substantially a reflection of the appellant's refusal to get in the box and give his side of the story," McNeely said.

In other aspects of his jury instructions, O'Driscoll actually skipped over evidence that would have helped the prosecution, he said.

For example, much has been made of the fact that, in commenting on Baltovich's inability to drive a car like Bain's, which had a standard gearshift, O'Driscoll asked rhetorically, `Is it a big deal for a 26-year-old male to drive a so-called four-on-the-floor,'" McNeely noted.

In fairness, O'Driscoll "did date himself " because it probably was no big deal when he was a young man, he said. However, one thing he never bothered to mention in his charge was that there were problems with the car's clutch and transmission, which might have indicated it was driven by someone who didn't know what they were doing, McNeely said.

Oral arguments in the appeal are expected to wrap up today.
 

2canplay

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by The Kid
Here's a decent article I found in today's Star:


Baltovich's trial silence questioned
Never testified in court in 1992
Crown wonders why during appeal


TRACEY TYLER
LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER

If the jury at Robert Baltovich's 1992 murder trial headed into its deliberations with a one-sided impression of the evidence, it was because Baltovich himself didn't step into the witness box and testify, the Ontario Court of Appeal has been told.

Although Baltovich complains that Mr. Justice John O'Driscoll delivered an unbalanced jury charge favouring the prosecution, the defence, in many instances, failed to offer explanations for Baltovich's conduct, said crown counsel Brian McNeely.

It wasn't the trial judge's job to "invent" them, he said yesterday.

"If there is one true explanation for all this suspicious conduct, surely the best source of it would have been for the accused to get in the box and explain it," he told Justices Michael Moldaver, Robert Sharpe and Eileen Gillese.

In written materials filed with the court, Baltovich's lawyers say he wanted to testify, but his trial lawyers made a strategic decision that he shouldn't.

The court was in its seventh day of hearings into Baltovich's appeal of his conviction for the murder of his girlfriend, Elizabeth Bain, 22, who disappeared on June 19, 1990. Her body has never been found. Baltovich's lawyers for the appeal hearing — James Lockyer, Brian Greenspan and Joanne McLean — argue his conviction is a miscarriage of justice.

O'Driscoll, they argue, abandoned all fairness and used his influential position to guide the jury toward its verdict of second-degree murder.

His jury instructions, they say, were laced with contempt for the defence and effectively endorsed the prosecution's theory that Baltovich killed Bain in a fit of jealousy and attempted to cover his tracks.

But McNeely argued yesterday that O'Driscoll did an "incredible" job and his jury instructions were a fair and balanced representation of the case put forward by the prosecution and defence.

Moldaver, however, asked McNeely to point to one place in the charge where O'Driscoll referred the jury to Baltovich's explanation in connection with a key issue — his failure to return calls from Bain's former boyfriend, Eric Genuis, any sooner than the afternoon of Friday, June 22, 1990. Not mentioning Baltovich's side of the story might be seen as "but one example" of not presenting the case fairly, from the defence point of view, Moldaver said.

Genuis left several phone messages at Baltovich's home late on June 21 and early June 22, while Baltovich was being interviewed by Toronto police officers investigating Bain's disappearance. Lockyer told the court earlier in the appeal that his client didn't get those messages from his mother until late Friday and called Genuis as soon as he did.

Baltovich's friend, Jim Issacs, confirmed this in his testimony at the trial, he added.

But before sending jurors to deliberate, O'Driscoll told them they might want to ask themselves if the reason Baltovich didn't return the calls was because he was the man seen driving Bain's car at an intersection north of Whitby early on June 22. The crown says Baltovich went to Lake Scugog to bury Bain's body and was driving back to Toronto at that time.

The crown's interpretation of testimony from Baltovich's mother at the trial is that, on Friday afternoon, she was simply "reminding" her son to call Genuis, not telling him for the first time, crown Gillian Roberts said.

"I ask you to consider whether any perceived imbalance (in the charge) was partly or indeed substantially a reflection of the appellant's refusal to get in the box and give his side of the story," McNeely said.

In other aspects of his jury instructions, O'Driscoll actually skipped over evidence that would have helped the prosecution, he said.

For example, much has been made of the fact that, in commenting on Baltovich's inability to drive a car like Bain's, which had a standard gearshift, O'Driscoll asked rhetorically, `Is it a big deal for a 26-year-old male to drive a so-called four-on-the-floor,'" McNeely noted.

In fairness, O'Driscoll "did date himself " because it probably was no big deal when he was a young man, he said. However, one thing he never bothered to mention in his charge was that there were problems with the car's clutch and transmission, which might have indicated it was driven by someone who didn't know what they were doing, McNeely said.

Oral arguments in the appeal are expected to wrap up today.
Interesting. It sounds like a tough case. I don't know one way or the other, but I would like to see some conclusive evidence before I send the guy off to jail for 25 years.
 

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
these are always difficult,

so many relationships end in big blow outs and arguments, using these as a pre-text when someone goes missing is plausable, but is not in and of itself reason enough to convict.

i dont know the case well, i would say if he is innocent, its not unusuall to smirk the victums familiy when they would be blaming you for something you didnt do. its tough to be reverent if you are in fact innocent and the family keeps in their minds that its you.

secondly id say the fact the she met bernardo and it was during the time of these cases speaks volumes about possible reasons for her death.

offer bernardo some extra outdoor time or something in exchange for any info he may have anything i dont know!!

him being an asshole is secondary to the issue, often defenses dont put the accused on the stand fo rthis reason, the prosecution would be all over it, describing how the girl was missing, her parents were scared, he was jealous and killed her in a rage.... he looks bad either way.

hope a speedy resolution for families sake.

J
 

The Kid

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by 2canplay
Interesting. It sounds like a tough case. I don't know one way or the other, but I would like to see some conclusive evidence before I send the guy off to jail for 25 years.
He was already convicted once, this is an APPEAL.
 

The Kid

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by judge wopner
these are always difficult,

so many relationships end in big blow outs and arguments, using these as a pre-text when someone goes missing is plausable, but is not in and of itself reason enough to convict.



That wasn't the only grounds for his conviction....


i dont know the case well, i would say if he is innocent, its not unusuall to smirk the victums familiy when they would be blaming you for something you didnt do. its tough to be reverent if you are in fact innocent and the family keeps in their minds that its you.


Are you fucking kidding me? If I was on trial for murder and on top of that the murder of a girlfriend I'd been with for several years and was missing presumed murdered I'd want to spend time with her family, not smirk at them from the protection of the witness box.... good god.



secondly id say the fact the she met bernardo and it was during the time of these cases speaks volumes about possible reasons for her death.

offer bernardo some extra outdoor time or something in exchange for any info he may have anything i dont know!!


There is no evidence she "met" Bernardo, the correlations they are drawing is that they both went to U of T Scarborough campus and they both banked at the same branch and it's conceivable they met at some point, blah blah blayh.



him being an asshole is secondary to the issue, often defenses dont put the accused on the stand fo rthis reason, the prosecution would be all over it, describing how the girl was missing, her parents were scared, he was jealous and killed her in a rage.... he looks bad either way.


There's just too much I could say about this but I don't have the time or desire to get into it right now.



hope a speedy resolution for families sake.

J


Yeah, you and me both.
 
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders

judge wopner

TRIBE Member
again i dont know the details of the case about if she ever met bernardo, if its as shoddy as youre saying then yeah i agree.

yes i too believe if one was innocent you would be polite at the very least w/ the victums family, but if they thought you were guilty, i dont belive they would want you spending any time with them, they'd be throwing hate your way the whole time.

definately not to justify this dude behaviour i wasnt there, you were and you brought it up so im saying it.

remember, they didnt put him on the stand, and like i said it may have been for any number of reasons but probally him presenting as an asshole doesnt help. remember prosecution in such cases always uses maximun appeals to sentiment to sway juries.

from what youre saying he was soundly convicted and the new defense are just shooting at shadows for anything.

again, hope this finishes quick and proper justice is served.
 

2canplay

TRIBE Member
Originally posted by judge wopner

i dont know the case well, i would say if he is innocent, its not unusuall to smirk the victums familiy when they would be blaming you for something you didnt do. its tough to be reverent if you are in fact innocent and the family keeps in their minds that its you.

But that's precisely why he was convicted last time around, IMO.

From what I hear, many in the criminal defence community don't really feel that concerned by the whole affair, because the guy is a dickwad (I have a few friends who are defence attorneys).
 
tribe cannabis goldsmith - gold cannabis accessories

an honest man

New Member
I came upon this site as fluke. I am not Rob nor am I anyone from the Bain family. I am someone extremely close to this case. I am not (the kid)(username)on this forum pretending to have a clue or inside info about the case(and not saying what it is out of RESPECT, ya ok) because my family knows their family. All of my info is factual.

Let me start by saying that I dont know for a fact if Rob did it or not(though his rock solid alibis lead me to believe he is innocent). Im not god. But what I do know is that strictly based on evidence he is an innocent man. He is also an innocent man who was screwed by our Canadian Judicial system. The original judge odriscoll should be in jail for his unlawful acts. But judges cant be sued or thrown in jail in almost every case. The cops (ressor/raybould are in alot of trouble. One more than the other though. They knowingly withheld vital evidence from the Crown and therefore the defence. They also formed tunnel vision and never looked into Scarborough rapist possibilty. They are in so much trouble, I cant wait til Rob sues them and the province.

Now lets get into why Rob was found guilty way back when.

Basically key witnesses for the Crown gave original statements. Perz/Dibben/nancoo and the other girl i cant remember her name. Not one of their statements pointed the finger at Rob. It wasnt until months later after Robs picture/name were all over the news that these laughable so called witnesses changed their stories. Hypnosis was used which in itself is a joke. Just ask the Supreme Court of Canada. Dibben was the clown who says he saw Bains car at Lake Scugog being driven by a blonde haired man with receding hairline. Well Rob is dark black and not thinning. Dibben also a day after seeing Bains car on tv added more info to his statement. He remembers a foam finger in the window but the dummy says the wrong side of the car. Guess his tv was blurry or maybe he really isnt that bright. Anyways the crown knows the answer to that now.

Nancoo was thrown out last week by the judge. Thats why the Crown has delayed the trial twice in the last 7 days. They are meeting with their bosses to decide if they can continue with the case. Nancoo is a 40 yr old man who lives at home with his parents whos been looking for a spotlight his entire adulthood. This guy changes his story more than I change my undies. Even though the defence wanted this guy to take the stand the judge booted him. And his lies were the key evidence for the crown(even his lies didnt hurt Rob really though).

All hypnosis crap is gone and obviously should be. If I tell the cops that I saw Liz with a blonde man, and then 2 weeks later under hypnosis change my story and now say its dark haired Rob after seeing him on tv what does that tell you. Use common sense please.

As a once proud Canadian and I stress once Im ashamed of all this. Im sorry Liz is dead but dont fry an innocent man because you want a promotion. The media now knows he should/will be found innocent. Even Rosie dimanno.

For the people like 'The kid' whom have spewed bs over the years in here. Id love to hear from you guys who all swore he was guilty. You guys called him some pretty bad names. Funny how none of you actually know him. Is he arrogant, yes. Does he appear to think he is better than others, yes. Does that mean he killed somebody, that answer is obvious.

So hopefully these other people in here dont act like cowards and hide. I would have wrote alot more but i have feed my daughter. ILL BE BACK
 
tribe cannabis goldsmith - gold cannabis accessories
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders
Top