mickey2942
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2016
- Messages
- 14,663
- Reaction score
- 139,924
This I also wonder if there’s any truth to this defence allegation -
“......Rivera's attorneys filed a motion to suppress evidence in March and again in August, requesting that the judge exclude as evidence at trial his statements and physical evidence, arguing in part that his Miranda rights were violated, that he was offered promissory leniency — a promise that something could be gained from confessing....”
Mollie Tibbetts case: Unidentified fingerprints, blood found in Cristhian Bahena Rivera's trunk, records show
(same link to other quotes below)
Because it’s well established if a suspect is questioned for hours and hours on end, deprived of sleep, lacks understanding the intricacies of the justice system, and is unduly fearful of authority obtaining false confessions becomes quite possible. One of the ways that occurs is by LE asking leading questions.
Without seeing a transcribed transcript of the hours of questioning I’d also be curious to know how many times he was asked “did you kill her and then place her body in the trunk?” and, as a hypothetical example, after the 25th time he finally answered “yes” - well indeed, that’s still considered a confession. Because LE obviously knew blood was found in the trunk as it was being tested all the while CR was being questioned.
“Around 11:30 p.m., after a few hours of interviews, Bahena Rivera was detained and was read an incomplete version of his Miranda rights, court records show. Division of Criminal Investigation Special Agent Trent Vileta said during testimony in November that a Miranda warning was read after blood that matched Tibbetts' DNA was found in the Malibu's trunk.”
I guess in some ways I’m seeing shades of Brendan Dassey and whether he’s truly guilty or innocent, how his confession was obtained by observing the videos of LE questioning tactics on the Netflix documentary. I think it left many people feeling somewhat unsettled on the topic of LE and promissory leniency in general.
If indeed there was enough enough to charge CR without his “confession”, why didn’t LE just arrest him and the basis of the physical evidence?
I also wonder what this eludes to -
“The state chooses not to specifically respond to the characterizations of the evidence made by the defense as it relates to DNA mixtures in the trunk of the Malibu," Assistant Attorney General Scott Brown wrote in the state's resistance. "Suffice it to say that the state disagrees with those characterizations in the defense motion."
If I was a juror, I think it would ultimately become very important to me to hear recorded evidence of CR leading LE to the body. And I’d want to feel confident he did so freely by retracing his movements, removing any doubt in my mind that he had access to second-hand information or that for some very far-fetched unthinkable reason, LE didn’t utilize prior knowledge to lead him there.
But this is only just my opinion.....why I also think this case is becoming not quite a slam dunk conviction in view of the information that’s began to creep out by the defence team at this point in time. I have no idea if CR will be proven guilty or innocent but this case will be an interesting trial to follow, that’s for sure. Justice for Molly is what’s most important at the end of the day.
And I suppose that other people think, "Justice for Rivera".
I agree, that there have been issues of false confessions. In this case, he is guilty. Let's hope that it works out.