First, I feel sorry for the sisters who put themselves before the media today.
However, making the victim's family feel better is never an appropriate reason for a guilty verdict.
Stobbe was not awakened by the noise. Nor were the children, and nor were the neighbours.
There was no evidence of a motive. It is idle speculation that there was infidelity or an argument. It can equally be groundlessly speculated that the victim was embroiled in controversy with a lover, a lover's spouse, a co-worker, etc.
As far as I can tell there was no evidence that Stobbe drove her to Selkirk. The evidence that he rode his bike back to the house was discredited. The Crown theory that he cleaned up the scene was unsupported by evidence.
I am surprised that the Crown took this case to trial.
However, making the victim's family feel better is never an appropriate reason for a guilty verdict.
Stobbe was not awakened by the noise. Nor were the children, and nor were the neighbours.
There was no evidence of a motive. It is idle speculation that there was infidelity or an argument. It can equally be groundlessly speculated that the victim was embroiled in controversy with a lover, a lover's spouse, a co-worker, etc.
As far as I can tell there was no evidence that Stobbe drove her to Selkirk. The evidence that he rode his bike back to the house was discredited. The Crown theory that he cleaned up the scene was unsupported by evidence.
I am surprised that the Crown took this case to trial.
