Dellen Millard trial

[boogs82]

Yes. Each first degree murder charge adds 25 years to his parole ineligibility if convicted.

Kind of. If he's convicted on the extra murder charges he will be sentenced to 25 years without parole. More often than not the sentences are concurrent to the original sentence. However the 25 years would add the difference between the first 25 year sentence.

For example, sentence in 2016 means 25 years no parole (2041)
Sentence in 2017 for the next trial means 25 years no parole. Most of the time is likely to be concurrent. (2042)
Sentence in 2018 for the final trial means 25 years no parole. (2043).

If the judges set it up to be consecutive sentences then he could be out by 2091 (probably be dead since he was born in 85). But in all likelihood it'll be done by 2043 and he'll be 58.

[North Shore]

Interesting summary from the CBC website: http://www.cbc.ca/interactives/longform ... osma-trial

[Rockie]

Interesting summary from the CBC website: http://www.cbc.ca/interactives/longform ... osma-trial

I read this last night. I used to work with Wayne and he was an interesting character. Someone here described him as an "aimless hippy" and that really does describe him. Marched to his own drummer and had some issues, but he was a good man and it is inexplicable how anybody - his own son no less - would want to do the man any harm.

I don't know if he's been diagnosed, but Dellen Millard is in my mind a classic psychopath.

[crazyaviator]

Does the blame start with carls failure as a father then is amplified with his sons failure as a father ,, soon to be eclipsed with the piece of dog shit dellen ?

[grimey]

Yes. Each first degree murder charge adds 25 years to his parole ineligibility if convicted.

Kind of. If he's convicted on the extra murder charges he will be sentenced to 25 years without parole. More often than not the sentences are concurrent to the original sentence. However the 25 years would add the difference between the first 25 year sentence.

For example, sentence in 2016 means 25 years no parole (2041)
Sentence in 2017 for the next trial means 25 years no parole. Most of the time is likely to be concurrent. (2042)
Sentence in 2018 for the final trial means 25 years no parole. (2043).

If the judges set it up to be consecutive sentences then he could be out by 2091 (probably be dead since he was born in 85). But in all likelihood it'll be done by 2043 and he'll be 58.

They changed it in 2011. The judge can (but is not required to) now order the sentences to be served consecutively if the murders were committed after Dec. 2, 2011. All 3, Bosma, Wayne Millard, and Dellen's ex were killed after that.

[ChrisEvans]

To clarify, a 1st degree murder conviction actually means an inmate is then able to apply for day parole (half way house) at 22 years, and full parole at 25 years. It also means, if the inmate is granted full parole at anytime - he remain on full parole until the day he dies. Parole officers have the discretion to send the person back to prison at anytime - for any reason - then the inmate has 90 days once returned to prison to see parole board - who decide on release - or how much jail time until next release!!

Upon multiple convictions - if the judge sentences to consecutive terms - the judge has the discretion - to set any parole eligibility date from minimum 25 years - which they could leave - to the full length of the term. For example Millard could end up with a 75 year term with a 40 year minimum eligibility date for full parole.

Millard's lawyer will get the disclosure for the other murders - he should know if the crown has the evidence for a conviction and if so - should cut a deal.

As far as the new laws for sentencing - nobody has challenged the new law in court, if they do, then it is possible to have the sentences reduced to concurrent (maximum 25 years).

[boogs82]

They changed it in 2011. The judge can (but is not required to) now order the sentences to be served consecutively if the murders were committed after Dec. 2, 2011. All 3, Bosma, Wayne Millard, and Dellen's ex were killed after that.

Hence why I said sentences are more often than not served concurrently.

As stated, parole ineligibility may be set consecutively as well.

The only three cases that have seen consecutive life sentencing and parole ineligibility in Canada so far have been Travis Baumgartner for the armoured car murders in Alberta in 2011, Justin Bourque for the RCMP murders in New Brunswick in 2014, and Christopher Husbands from the Eaton Centre shooting in 2012.

It'll be interesting to follow that's for sure.

[North Shore]

Seems that Millard is representing himself for his next trial. IIRC, there's an old legal saying along the lines of "A man who represents himself in court has a fool for a client" One wonders if Millard is just doing it to twist the knife in his ex's parents...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/l ... -1.4367180

[Inverted2]

He's just representing himself to get some attention and have some fun in his mind. He knows he's not ever getting out of prison once they slap another 25 (or 50- the dad) years on him. They could make a movie about this guy.

[crazyaviator]

just revictimizing the innocent ones! Where is the vigilante justice when you need it?

[YYZSaabGuy]

just revictimizing the innocent ones! Where is the vigilante justice when you need it?

Yes. Nothing says "civilized" better than a good, pre-trial lynching.

[A346Dude]

just revictimizing the innocent ones! Where is the vigilante justice when you need it?

Yes. Nothing says "civilized" better than a good, pre-trial lynching.

While I agree with you in principle, Millard is already a convicted murderer.

[Cat Driver]

, pre-trial lynching.

did you mean " post trial lynching?

[photofly]

While I agree with you in principle, ...

I don't see this is a principle that is amenable to exceptions. If it doesn't apply to everyone, it doesn't apply to anyone at all.

After all, it's not the good people who have any need to be protected from the mob.

[A346Dude]

You're right. My post was a response to the "pre-trial" comment.

So I'm against vigilante justice in this case, but not because Millard might be a good guy who could be innocent of murder.

[photofly]

It's fascinating listening to the CBC dancing around not giving any indication of his background or recent history *at all* while reporting the current trial. It's obvious there are severe reporting restrictions in place.

[crazyaviator]

While I agree with you in principle, Millard is already a convicted murderer.

So now this piece of dog excrement gets to examine the innocent girls father and rub her life all over his honour AFTER he has been sentenced to 1st degree murder ( premeditated over a friggin lust for a truck )

Justice????? NO it is a kangaroo court. He should be summarily shot, but now he will cost INNOCENT taxpayers MILLIONS!

Let me guess, 3 1st degree murders and he gets out in 20 years with good behaviour?

[trey kule]

As far as the new laws for sentencing - nobody has challenged the new law in court, if they do, then it is possible to have the sentences reduced to concurrent (maximum 25 years).

Just to be clear....Life is life. Your use of the( maximum 25 years )is misleading.
The 25 year is for full parole eligibility, though there is a 15 year faint hope clause.
Consecutive sentences really do not make a difference except for a parole eligibility date, and that date is just....an eligabity date..not a guarantee.

So, Millard having one life sentence could spend the rest of his life behind bars.
Consecutive sentences only give the public reassurance, more than any practical application.

As a bit of history, the 25 year parole eligabilty was tossed in by the govt when they were trying to eliminate capital punishment. At the time a life sentence had a 10 year parole eligabilty, though the average time to full parole was 13 years.( average is not quite the correct term..)
And there were those who died behind bars despite being eligabile for parole.

[YYZSaabGuy]

just revictimizing the innocent ones! Where is the vigilante justice when you need it?

Yes. Nothing says "civilized" better than a good, pre-trial lynching.

While I agree with you in principle, Millard is already a convicted murderer.

Yes, he is. So were Robert Baltovich, James Driskell, Donald Marshall Jr., David Milgaard, Guy Paul Morin, William Nepoose, Romeo Phillion, Thomas Sophonow, Steven Truscott, and William Mullins-Johnson, until their convictions were acquitted on appeal, set aside, stayed, or quashed. Have a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overturne ... _in_Canada and http://innocencecanada.com/?ref=aidwyc. Regardless of Millard's other convictions and his guilt or innocence here, he's entitled to the same due process everybody else is.

, pre-trial lynching.

did you mean " post trial lynching?

No: I was not commenting on post-trial sentencing. I was responding to crazyaviator's comment, which I took to imply that the accused should be lynched, without benefit of a trial. Given his subsequent post, I think that inference is correct.

[crazyaviator]

He ALREADY had a trial, he was convicted of FIRST degree murder. kill 1 or 100 this way, the sentence should be the same!