Deceased/Not Found IL - Yingying Zhang, 26, Urbana, 9 June 2017 #11 *GUILTY*

[CousinYeti]

No thanks to me are necessary. Part of being a public servant means being accountable to those you serve.

Our community was truly great in this instance. We, as a community, supported the Zhangs as best we could. I know they appreciated it. It says something (very positive) about our community, I think, that we saw past cultural differences and only saw fellow humans who were suffering, and tried to support them. It made me proud.

The community also tried to assist law enforcement with tips and information. That is immensely beneficial.

So in short, you all deserve a pat on the back, a high five (or the social distancing equivalent), and a thank you.

 

[dm92]

@dm92 -
The really difficult thing about that night was after the interview. At that point, we had confirmed the guy lied to federal agents, which is a federal felony. We also knew he was probably our guy based on the interview, his demeanor, and Yingying being last seen in his car...not to mention MC’s statements about his behavior and desires. So we could arrest him, but didn’t really have enough to prove a kidnapping, much less a murder. We had seized the computers and devices for search, but those searches would take time. We had a trace evidence team coming to search the apartment later on June 15, but again, those results take time. The FBI management wanted to arrest him on the false statements charge, assuring me they would get the evidence we needed for the kidnapping from the searches while we kept him in custody awaiting trial for the false statements charge. I’m on the clock once I charge someone though. I needed to prove a kidnapping-murder and didn’t want to be stuck putting a murderer on trial for a false statements charge if the searches fell through (in other words, didn’t produce enough evidence). We also still had a missing person with no real leads on where she was. Our office ultimately decided to let BC go and not pursue the false statements charge at that time so we could gather the evidence we needed for the appropriate charge—and hopefully find Yingying. It was one of the most difficult decisions I’ve ever been part of, letting a suspected murderer walk out of a jail so we could gather more evidence. Thankfully, TEB is who she is, and the trace evidence did turn up enough of what we needed to support what he told TEB. Those were some stressful weeks though. FBI and other agencies had him on 24 hour surveillance from June 16 through June 30. Had we arrested him, we never get the statements, and I’m not sure just the trace evidence is enough for a murder charge, so it worked out for the best. What would you have done in our shoes in that moment?

Regarding the warrant: I figured it was probably something like that you viewed it as a toss-up on whether you would have enough to get a warrant for the apartment - I had forgotten that the agents who went to his apartment on the 12th to speak with him about the car and his whereabouts that day had also walked through his apartment and Yingying wasn't there -nor was there probably anything that stood out as being suspicious. So, there would be no reason to think she or any of her belongings would be there early on the morning of the 15th. In that moment in time, I would perhaps have been a little worried about the possibility that his wife may have had some knowledge of what happened and refused to let you search, and tried to further sanitize the crime scene and destroy any potential evidence -but if that were the case, both her and him would have had plenty of time already between the 12 and the 14th to further clean the place, and the real damning evidence that they likely never would have realized they needed to clean (the blood stain on the underside of the carpet and on the tack strip that was confirmed to be blood by secondary testing AND contained her DNA) would still be there. A quick follow-up question related to this: IF Michelle had refused to let you have the apartment searched, how long would it have taken you to get the warrant?

As for letting him go, I think that was absolutely the right call. Otherwise as you say, he shuts up and you never get him saying on tape how he killed her and what he used. IIRC, you did seize the bat on the 15th -but you didn't know at the time it had her DNA on it. Moreover, even though her DNA was eventually found in the luminol+ stain on the bat, secondary testing was unable to confirm the stain contained blood. So, in the absence of his statement about how he used the bat, the defense claiming that her DNA could be passively transferred to the bat -by touching it or from some of her hair or skin cells falling on it- would likely provide reasonable doubt for some jurors. Additionally, you wouldn't get him admitting to TEB that he took her back to his apartment against her will (forgive me if I have some of the details not exactly right, I am going from memory). He could concoct some story about how she agreed to go to his apartment with him, and you wouldn't really have a way to fully prove he's lying. So while it must have been awful to let him go ( I remember Stiverson said in an interview not long ago that he realized in the middle of the interview with Christensen that he had likely killed Yingying), it seemed like it was absolutely called for. Plus, there was still the remote chance that she was alive somewhere, and Christensen under surveillance could have led you to her; or, he could have concealed her body somewhere, gotten scared that he had not done a good enough job, and led you right to her remains.

A couple of additional questions:

Fingerprints: I remember during pre-trial motions and filings, when the defense was trying to have everything and anything thrown out, that one of the government responses stated that the fingerprint evidence was not important to the government's case, but that it demonstrated the thoroughness of the FBI investigation. I know you got nothing from the car. I would assume that if you did find evidence of Yingying's fingerprints in his apartment, that that would have been presented at trial, so am I correct to assume that there was nothing of note from the apartment in regards to fingerprints? Also, at one point you filed a motion to compel Christensen to provide palm prints to compare with palm prints that were found on his wall. I assume the palm prints were Christensen's, but were they able to determine who the palm prints belonged to?

Expert witnesses: In the initial filing disclosing the government's proposed expert witnesses, an FBI linguist with expertise in Chinese, and a UI professor specializing in Chinese culture were listed as witnesses. Ultimately they were not included in the final witness list and were never called. If they had been needed, what were they going to testify about, and what were they going to disclose in their testimony?

I am still going to write a little something on why I don't think he dismembered her on the bed, but I want to look at the transcript of the recording of him made by TEB after the vigil, and I want to see if I can look at some of the photos of the bed/floor presented at the trial first. IT isn't going to be anything particularly graphic, but it still isn't going to be pleasant to think about or write

 

[dm92]

accidental double post. please disregard.....

 

[CousinYeti]

@dm92 - You are correct, the fingerprint evidence was not particularly useful. Actually, it wasn’t useful at all. We hired the expert for the purpose of explaining why we did not find any prints of note (juries always think there are fingerprints and DNA on everything—TV leads us to believe this, as every crime show pushes the wonders of forensics). That is not unique to this case — we often have experts come explain how difficult it is to lift prints (particularly in cases involving firearms, as there are almost never prints on guns). The defense did not challenge Yingying being in his apartment, so we cut several potential witnesses as we were able. The request for the palm exemplar was intended to be so we could compare some bloody handprints on the wall, but again, they didn’t contest that he killed her, so we cut a lot of the more “out there” forensic stuff.

The experts on Chinese language and culture were also both ultimately unnecessary. The language expert was the person who helped us translate her journal. The defense didn’t challenge the translation or admissibility of the journal, so we didn’t need the expert.

The expert on Chinese culture was largely intended to explain why Yingying would get into a car. The theory (based on Emily Hogan’s testimony) was that Christensen pretended to be a cop to lure a victim in his car. In China, you don’t so no to cop, and the expert would have explained why, culturally, she would have felt compelled to get in the car. You can see her hesitation at his window. She waited an almost full minute. I’m convinced that Christensen abusing the public’s trust in law enforcement, combined with the Chinese cultural prohibition from saying no to cop, is what prompted her to get in the car (against every instinct she had).

 

[TEB]

Investigation Discovery “See No Evil” season 6 Episode 5 titled “Far From Home” just aired last night. I have not seen it yet but will post after I have. If it’s anything like ABC’s coverage, I’m going to need to brace myself. But I figured I would at least share that it exists before I subject myself to watching it.

Stay safe,

TEB

 

[TEB]

Investigation Discovery “See No Evil” season 6 Episode 5 titled “Far From Home” just aired last night. I have not seen it yet but will post after I have. If it’s anything like ABC’s coverage, I’m going to need to brace myself. But I figured I would at least share that it exists before I subject myself to watching it.

Stay safe,

TEB

Honestly... with a few exceptions, it was not terrible, even with it being partially dramatized.

The phrasing of some parts was completely inaccurate, mostly pertaining to logistics of how recordings are obtained.

I recorded every conversation for weeks before I began getting the most helpful recordings, but the narration at about 35:12 states “With Christensen’s girlfriend on sight, investigators wait for the right moment to implement the wire.” No. That is incorrect. The recording device was implemented for a long time, and I had to decide where to put it, when and where to turn it on (and how to do so discreetly) and when to turn it off. I understand that the phrase ‘being wired’ makes it sound it’s something investigators control, but the ‘weight’ of using a recording device is ultimately up to the discretion, consent, and implementation of the person making the recording. I realize that perhaps it’s worth noting that the constant awareness of the location and state of the device is not a light burden, and I hope that in future cases people will underscore that those who wear recording devices are often not trained, they are just ordinary people who have consented to having an enormous responsibility entrusted to them, often at great risk. It’s a lot to carry. I still bear scars that I am reminded of daily. I implemented the device. Investigators provided it and analyzed the data.

That said, as a whole, this piece was far more respectful of all of the secondary and tertiary victims than ABC was. And their editing choices focused on the investigation, YingYing and her family instead of giving the criminal the kind of attention he wanted.

There were perspectives and bits here and there that I was not overly familiar with, but not a whole lot of new information for anyone who has followed the case. Overall, it was far more ethical and considerate than I anticipated.

TEB

 

[dm92]

@dm92 - You are correct, the fingerprint evidence was not particularly useful. Actually, it wasn’t useful at all. We hired the expert for the purpose of explaining why we did not find any prints of note (juries always think there are fingerprints and DNA on everything—TV leads us to believe this, as every crime show pushes the wonders of forensics). That is not unique to this case — we often have experts come explain how difficult it is to lift prints (particularly in cases involving firearms, as there are almost never prints on guns). The defense did not challenge Yingying being in his apartment, so we cut several potential witnesses as we were able. The request for the palm exemplar was intended to be so we could compare some bloody handprints on the wall, but again, they didn’t contest that he killed her, so we cut a lot of the more “out there” forensic stuff.

The experts on Chinese language and culture were also both ultimately unnecessary. The language expert was the person who helped us translate her journal. The defense didn’t challenge the translation or admissibility of the journal, so we didn’t need the expert.

The expert on Chinese culture was largely intended to explain why Yingying would get into a car. The theory (based on Emily Hogan’s testimony) was that Christensen pretended to be a cop to lure a victim in his car. In China, you don’t so no to cop, and the expert would have explained why, culturally, she would have felt compelled to get in the car. You can see her hesitation at his window. She waited an almost full minute. I’m convinced that Christensen abusing the public’s trust in law enforcement, combined with the Chinese cultural prohibition from saying no to cop, is what prompted her to get in the car (against every instinct she had).

Thanks again for all your help. I have been awfully busy the past several weeks and never seemed to have time to come on here to ask more questions.

It is late, but I had a quick one if you could get to it when you have time:

How much help (if any) did you get from Chinese law enforcement during the investigation? I had heard in the weeks after her abduction (before Christensen was arrested and details of the crime and investigation started coming to light in the media) that you were getting some assistance from Chinese investigators. I assume that once you had identified Christensen as your suspect and investigators were convinced he had kidnapped her, there really wasn't much need for assistance from Chinese law enforcement, and not much they could provide you with to aid in the investigation.....

 

[kittythehare]

Honestly... with a few exceptions, it was not terrible, even with it being partially dramatized.

The phrasing of some parts was completely inaccurate, mostly pertaining to logistics of how recordings are obtained.

I recorded every conversation for weeks before I began getting the most helpful recordings, but the narration at about 35:12 states “With Christensen’s girlfriend on sight, investigators wait for the right moment to implement the wire.” No. That is incorrect. The recording device was implemented for a long time, and I had to decide where to put it, when and where to turn it on (and how to do so discreetly) and when to turn it off. I understand that the phrase ‘being wired’ makes it sound it’s something investigators control, but the ‘weight’ of using a recording device is ultimately up to the discretion, consent, and implementation of the person making the recording. I realize that perhaps it’s worth noting that the constant awareness of the location and state of the device is not a light burden, and I hope that in future cases people will underscore that those who wear recording devices are often not trained, they are just ordinary people who have consented to having an enormous responsibility entrusted to them, often at great risk. It’s a lot to carry. I still bear scars that I am reminded of daily. I implemented the device. Investigators provided it and analyzed the data.

That said, as a whole, this piece was far more respectful of all of the secondary and tertiary victims than ABC was. And their editing choices focused on the investigation, YingYing and her family instead of giving the criminal the kind of attention he wanted.

There were perspectives and bits here and there that I was not overly familiar with, but not a whole lot of new information for anyone who has followed the case. Overall, it was far more ethical and considerate than I anticipated.

TEB

Hi TEB!
Missed you.
I have not seen this.
Is there a link anywhere, please?
Are you okay?

 

[kittythehare]

@Parametric, more good questions.

The mileage is fascinating, isn’t it? It’s one of the big unanswered questions. I would note, it’s also one of the driving factors in the interest in Allerton Park amongst some of the investigative team. The FBI used the mileage to establish a perimeter around Champaign to guide search efforts. They even put up billboards in Indiana and places 50-75 miles out, with the thought that the radius may have extended that far. I tend to think Christensen burned through a lot of that just driving around Champaign. City driving burns gas more than highway, and we know he spent hours driving all over on June 9 (hunting) and June 12 (dumping Yingying’s belongings all over town) at a minimum. The guy was a homebody, he didn’t have friends, and I just think he never left Champaign County. Others wonder, and those others are smart people that I respect. What do you think?

Ironically, regarding your second question, I don’t think the two women closest to him were surprised. I’ll let TEB speak for herself, but as I noted in my previous response, Michelle told the agents on June 16 or 17 that she believed he did it. She even told them that if he did it, he would have strangled Yingying so he could feel the life drain out of her. How morbid is that? It was shockingly accurate too, given what he said on the recording. MC had not heard the recording at the time she told that to agents. I wonder if he ever did something like that to MC that she never told us about.

The discussion of what he did is appalling. When discussing it, I always remind myself it’s what HE did, and brushing it under the rug just brushes his evil out of sight. I think he did what he said on the recording: he sexually assaulted Yingying on the bed, tortured her, and then took her to the tub and hit her with the bat, then cut off her head. The evidence supports all that (he was pretty concerned on the jail calls about the agents taking apart the tub). He told us later, however, that he put her in three bags before disposing of her remains, which means he dismembered her more. I tend to think at least some of that may have happened in the bedroom. That, or he tortured Yingying enough before killing her to cause a lot of bleeding. The cleaning patterns behind the headboard and the carpeting, and the blood soaked under the carpet, suggest Yingying bled a lot in that bedroom. It’s absolutely awful to discuss. Yingying was a beautiful soul, and she suffered through this. It makes me sick.

Sorry for coming so late after all your help here.
I lived and breathed this case for a very long time.
I have some questions that were unanswered at trial.

The first is in relation to the quantity of blood discovered or estimated from what remained, in the bedroom?
I have felt he decapitated her but possibly while she was still alive.
In the bathroom.
Yet no traces were found in the bathroom and BC was careless by nature...
I also doubt still that he disposed of her as he described.
I have wondered whether he burnt her body- the petrol or hid it somewhere only he had access to...
this because he seemed to be hellbent on becoming a serial killer... is it not likely that he kept trophies, possibly her entire body or just her head?

Was it ever considered that he may have video taped his killing?
Recall the *advertiser censored* file in the 'secret' compartment of his computer? He accessed it on the night of the murder..

Was her body still there at the time or was she still alive?
How long did they estimate he had her alive prior to his vicious slaughter of the beautiful innocent girl?

Do you believe, as I do, that more could have been done to locate her remains?

There were no further movements of his vehicle noted after his return with her that afternoon.
Could he not easily have slung her remains in a bag and gone walking to her final resting place?

somewhere en route to the gym? Sorry if that all sounds stupid but it's where my brain stopped after years of sleuthing.... that he hid her somewhere on that road, a place he could revisit frequently without arousing suspicion as he habitually traveled it each ad every day en route to the gym?

Is it possible she can still be located?
will anybody ever search for her again?
He said he put her in a dumpster= means he did nothing of the sort.

Flashback is unexpected for me.
I had grown disillusioned and felt hopeless because she was never found and the search seemed inadequate and prematurely shortened.
That has left me scarred.

 

[kittythehare]

To be honest, I’m still not used to being called ‘brave.’ I did not feel brave then and I don’t feel brave now. I’m not sure I could have lived a life knowing that I didn’t give it my all when there was a chance to make a difference. The case would have gone forward without me. I’m not sure what the time frames would have been and precisely what grounds would be found for a deeper search of the crime scene, but I would hope that cases like this where there isn’t a random girlfriend on hand willing to take one for the team can still be prosecuted by other means.

For me, the most important part of my involvement was not making the (9?) recordings but making sure I was able to take the stand and speak honestly.

I was afraid I had experienced enough trauma in my lifetime that maybe I would fail somehow on the stand. I am a deeply sensitive person, and though I have been described by the media as stoic, it is only because I worked very hard to keep my emotions in check for the sake of YingYing’s family and the case itself. It was the very most I could offer, to give up the rest of my privacy and anonymity, and to let the sharp, overreaching words of the defense team hit me without flinching. If I could do that despite being outed as polyamorous, pansexual, and kinky in court (and online) then I had a chance to redirect attention away from social minorities being scapegoated for the horrific personal decisions one man made. By showing that people are just people at the end of the day, I hoped to show that labels and social minorities don’t cause crime, people cause crime.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t make for a good news segment, so companies like ABC decided to use court discovery and my voice from the recordings without my consent, so that they could make a terrible two hour special that does not match the descriptions they pitched to me before I declined to be part of their sensationalism. Those of you who appreciated the 20/20 special, I hope you will have the chance to see ‘Finding YingYing’ one day so you can compare the two accounts. Then, you will see the difference between sensationalized media and the beauty of journalism that takes time. I’m not against journalism, I just choose to support ethical journalism rather than the type of content major news networks tend to create.

I hope to get the transcripts from court one day. The time I spent on the stand was far more terrifying than the last recordings. I will never forget how the defense attempted to put words in my mouth. I requested over and over to clarify what they were asserting by correcting their loaded word choices. I at least feel safe enough now to say I never wanted to be walking with that man, and I never wanted to hear what he said to me. I never wanted to testify and allow so much of my personal life be on public record, but it was a price paid forward among the many other prices few will ever need to know about. No price is too high to prevent the further loss of life.

When asked why I was on the stand despite being horrified and terrified I said “Because it’s necessary.”

Still, no matter how much I or anyone else does, the loss remains. And the loss is immeasurable. The least I can do after having been outed is not be afraid to let people know that every victim has a family, and every person involved in a case is a person too.

I’m still working on a book about marginalization as an attempt to empower those who find themselves in situations where there is no system or support structure to account for their experiences or identities. People like YingYing’s family, searching for their daughter despite a foreign culture. People like me, having had a taste of social distancing long before the pandemic. People like all of those who have lost their jobs or their loved ones without access to emotional support. I want people to know that ‘brave’ is continuing on instead of giving up. ‘Brave’ is doing what you can as well as you can, with whatever is available even when it seems impossible. ‘Brave’ is being the one to share when you don’t have much, someone on a bus giving away some of their groceries to a homeless person, standing up for those who don’t have a voice that people are paying attention to. ‘Brave’ is not some magical, rare attribute, it’s the choice to endure personal discomfort in order to ‘do what is necessary.’ And I hope everyone can find ways to be brave now. I think the world is depending upon it.

Girl- you sliced 'em when you took that stand that day!
I was in tears.
I still do tear up when I remember.
I'm sorry, I was tagged but I ever received the message, so late coming in now.
I think of you often and I keep meaning to write you and I will.
Love to you girl.
You are an inspiration and you always will be.

 

[kittythehare]

Ying Ying's mother is very much on my mind.
Does anybody know how she is coping?

I cannot even imagine.
Yesterday I was looking at some photos and I noticed YY's shoes and her feet and I thought of the struggles they had to pay for those shoes... how hard it has been for them.

It made me feel very sad again.

 

[kittythehare]

Honestly... with a few exceptions, it was not terrible, even with it being partially dramatized.

The phrasing of some parts was completely inaccurate, mostly pertaining to logistics of how recordings are obtained.

I recorded every conversation for weeks before I began getting the most helpful recordings, but the narration at about 35:12 states “With Christensen’s girlfriend on sight, investigators wait for the right moment to implement the wire.” No. That is incorrect. The recording device was implemented for a long time, and I had to decide where to put it, when and where to turn it on (and how to do so discreetly) and when to turn it off. I understand that the phrase ‘being wired’ makes it sound it’s something investigators control, but the ‘weight’ of using a recording device is ultimately up to the discretion, consent, and implementation of the person making the recording. I realize that perhaps it’s worth noting that the constant awareness of the location and state of the device is not a light burden, and I hope that in future cases people will underscore that those who wear recording devices are often not trained, they are just ordinary people who have consented to having an enormous responsibility entrusted to them, often at great risk. It’s a lot to carry. I still bear scars that I am reminded of daily. I implemented the device. Investigators provided it and analyzed the data.

That said, as a whole, this piece was far more respectful of all of the secondary and tertiary victims than ABC was. And their editing choices focused on the investigation, YingYing and her family instead of giving the criminal the kind of attention he wanted.

There were perspectives and bits here and there that I was not overly familiar with, but not a whole lot of new information for anyone who has followed the case. Overall, it was far more ethical and considerate than I anticipated.

TEB

got tube link

 

[Raptors001]

got tube link

I couldn’t continue watching ... gets me fired up...

Sorry op

 

[kittythehare]

I couldn’t continue watching ... gets me fired up...

Sorry op

me too..
he was plannin' this crap for months , if not longer, bought 'some things', sent them back, high IQ and he couldn't come up with a better idea than putting her in garbage bags for disposal?
There's a vast hole in this whole thing and YY is in that hole.

He had the entire night before to go dig a grave, open a crypt or a tomb , whatever..
he also had access to michelle's car all weekend..
Now see what you have done to me?
how are you @Raptors001 ?

 

[trunkizback]

Wow. Haven't been here in a while. Before I start piling up my questions as well..I'd also like to thank TEB for everything you've done.
Ok..now my timeline is fuzzy...but from what I remember..the thinking was that YY was dead within 5 hours of being grabbed?
So what was in the bag he carried out on Sunday night. ( you know..the one MC said " he picked it up like it didn't weigh nothin "..btw..that's a weird statement.
MC said BC told her it was a cat tree for TEB ...which we know it wasn't. Also..that night..how long was he gone? Did he take the car? Was he walking? A 2 minute walk to the dumpster?
And I'm gonna say what I've thought all along. MC knows wayyy more than she gave.
What was said on that Friday nite call between MC and BC? Is that open info now?

 

[kittythehare]

Wow. Haven't been here in a while. Before I start piling up my questions as well..I'd also like to thank TEB for everything you've done.
Ok..now my timeline is fuzzy...but from what I remember..the thinking was that YY was dead within 5 hours of being grabbed?
So what was in the bag he carried out on Sunday night. ( you know..the one MC said " he picked it up like it didn't weigh nothin'..btw..that's a weird statement.
MC said BC told her it was a cat tree for TEB ...which we know it wasn't. Also..that night..how long was he gone? Did he take the car? Was he walking? A 2 minute walk to the dumpster?
And I'm gonna say what I've thought all along. MC knows wayyy more than she gave.
What was said on that Friday nite call between MC and BC? Is that open info now?

Nothin' to suggest Michelle knew any more than she said, I think her life with him was hell, possibly still is, no idea whether he's still controlling her or not.

TEB has addressed your question about the bag...
BUT, do you remember you and I discussed a big park with statues and we thought she was there but I can't remember why we thought so.. but it apparently had been searched, was that Allerton do you remember at all?

Apparently the JR was searched initially but unconfirmed whether it was searched with dogs or not..

I'm just wondering what brought us to Allerton, why we thought she might be there.. I remember spending hours staring at statues, wondering.
But right now I can neither remember the statues or what brought my mind there? I think I discussed it with you? It was ages ago, I know..

She's still missing.
Prosecution mostly believe she is in landfill.
I'll never believe it.

I'd look at Allerton again if I knew for sure the JR was searched with cadaver dogs..?

Nice to see you after such a long time..

YY will always be with us, we'll carry her forever because she is worth it and her family deserve our efforts or niggles.

 

[kittythehare]

I remember, I was searching for an angel and a cross but I couldn't find the exact thing and none of the statues are named in this
Allerton Park Images, Stock Photos & Vectors | Shutterstock

but there are probably many not included in this lot.
There are wings okay....
Was just a dream, maybe nothing but I'll still try seeing all the statues there, just in case.

 

[CousinYeti]

Wow, I apologize, I checked out and I see some stuff has piled up. I will try to answer everything as I get some time.

 

[CousinYeti]

Alright, I'm going to take this one at a time until I catch up. First up, dm92 from May 26 RE: Chinese law enforcement.

This question is awesome, and I'm glad to talk about it. Let me first say, above all, that the Chinese law enforcement officers were extraordinarily welcoming, generous, and willing to help however they could. It was a pleasure meeting our counterparts in China, and there was at least one of the officers (our primary host) that I would love to see again to thank him. However, our contact with them, while pleasant, opened my eyes in many ways, and underscored the differences in our criminal justice systems.

The Chinese government offered to help from the outset (when Yingying was still missing and Christensen had not been identified). In addition to regular meetings with Yingying's family and their attorneys (a Chinese-American attorney the Chinese government hired to assist the family, and Steve Beckett, a local Champaign defense attorney and law professor who is excellent), we also met with other Chinese officials early on just to answer questions and update them on the status of the investigation. Those meetings were the first highlight of the differences between the two justice systems. For example, the Chinese did not understand why we (or they) could not speak with Christensen after he was charged. Apparently in China, the families of the murderer and victim will often speak and resolve differences (honor would often lead the murderer's family to attempt to rectify the situation as much as possible)--so Yingying's family wanted to contact Christensen's family throughout. I don't think they did before the trial though (nothing good would have come of it--the defense attorneys would have done anything to find something they could attack them with at trial). With 100% seriousness, multiple Chinese officials we met with offered to "find" Yingying for us if they could interrogate Christensen. It was jarring, knowing what they meant / intended / would have done. Explaining to them that we don't operate that way in the United States was met with frustration and disbelief.

Yingying's fiancé Xiaolin was particularly involved in trying to connect Chinese resources to the investigation. He introduced us to an impressive Chinese forensics expert who offered to help review the bus footage, review cell phone data, even go through Christensen's apartment using Chinese forensic techniques (even mentioning lasers at one point, which had me curious what that would have entailed). We could not allow anything that would jeopardize our evidence at trial, however, which meant there was really very little we could take them up on (for example, we could not have our evidence having Chinese government officials in our chain of custody; the defense attorneys here accused President Trump and the Chinese Premier of meeting to ensure authorization of the death penalty - it was a ludicrous claim, but the fact that they were willing to make it shows the depths they would have gone to tie us, the DOJ, to the authoritarian Chinese government. If we had accepted the help, there would have been accusations of doctored evidence, etc., galore, and we just couldn't have it). The Chinese forensic expert did make a surprisingly accurate sketch of Christensen just from review of the bus stop footage and the Astra, which was impressive (it was in the news). We also got close to letting them help us review the bus footage - that was a lingering request for some time. It was something that could not be doctored, as we had originals, and if they had people who could help us go through it and find something, so much the better, right? Unfortunately, it never happened for reasons that I cannot discuss here. They offered to help with the investigation at every turn though.

Where the Chinese law enforcement helped us immensely was in our trip to China. After the Attorney General authorized the death penalty, that meant we were going to have a trial and likely a penalty phase. Some of the most powerful evidence in any penalty phase of a death penalty trial is the victim impact evidence. We wanted to show the world what Yingying's loss meant to those who loved her. We also wanted to show, as best we could, who Yingying was (which was particularly important since we did not even have her body). The only way to do that was to travel to China and meet her family and friends on their turf. Arranging it was a nightmare--it involved treaties between the U.S. and Chinese governments to allow U.S. law enforcement to interview Chinese citizens on Chinese soil--but they made it surprisingly easy. Just allowing us to do it was extraordinarily rare. The Chinese government was invested in the case.

Six of us (three FBI agents, an FBI translator, and two prosecutors) traveled to China in late 2018. We traveled to Beijing, Shanghai, Nanping, Guangzhou and Hong Kong in seven days. We did not spend much time in any place - we met with Yingying's friends / teachers / family in those locations, and typically did so in Chinese police stations. Two Chinese officers accompanied us throughout the trip, and as I mentioned, one of them was fantastic. Every night after our interviews they (local law enforcement) hosted us for a meal. The meals were amazing, and the conversations were fascinating. One of the things I found most interesting (and refreshing) was that the officers seemed to want to find ways to connect the two countries in friendship. For example, during our meal on our first night there one of our hosts toasted us, said he hoped we would always be friends, and brought up how the United States had never invaded China, and how the Chinese helped American pilots after the Doolittle raid on Tokyo during World War II. It was a genuine moment of trying to cut through the BS and just emphasize our similarities rather than differences. It was a bit sad that we had to go back to World War II to find an instance of the countries working together in that fashion though.

It wasn't fun and games though. We were still in an authoritarian country that did not trust us. I had my bags tossed in my hotel room in Shanghai. One of the Chinese officers attempted to record much of what we did (covertly, though we noticed). That same officer made a statement at one point that left little doubt my rooms were bugged and recorded. We had no agenda though, so I cared little what they recorded--as long as we got to interview Yingying's family and friends, we got what we were there for.

The saddest part of that trip was going to Yingying's hometown. We saw her schools, met her teachers, and went to her home. Her family has a very modest, but well maintained home in Nanping - sort of like a very small townhouse (essentially 1-2 rooms per floor). They had given her the room on the top floor since it was the quietest and allowed her to study. Her family had a chicken coop on a raised rooftop just outside her bedroom door. Before we arrived, her father fell off the ladder and broke his arm while trying to climb and get a chicken to cook for us. It was incredibly jarring -- the kindness of the gesture, and the limited financial means of Yingying's family. We visited Mr. Zhang in the hospital in Nanping while we were there.

Standing in Yingying's room was surreal. What struck me most was the map on her wall. I always had maps on my bedroom wall as a child, and I loved to wonder about the rest of the world and dream up places to travel to. Yingying's map had a reversal of the typical maps that we see with North America on the left and Europe/Africa/Asia on the right. I wondered - how many times had she looked at the United States on that map and hoped to visit, thinking it would brighten her (and her family's) future? Something about that, and all the books she had, just hit me. I couldn't hold back the tears walking through her house. Her grandfather, with a shaking voice, told us how she was the hope of their family and begged us to find her. We didn't need the translation to understand the anguish.

The Chinese officers guided us to all the witnesses, and helped us collect whatever evidence may help us. We used the interviews from that trip in the penalty phase of the trial. After the trial, many of the jurors asked to speak with us, and they commented that they appreciated seeing what we collected on that trip (including the video of Yingying singing an Avril Lavigne song with her college band).

I will keep going on additional questions as I get time - it may take me a bit, I apologize.

 

[CousinYeti]

Sorry for coming so late after all your help here.
I lived and breathed this case for a very long time.
I have some questions that were unanswered at trial.

The first is in relation to the quantity of blood discovered or estimated from what remained, in the bedroom?
I have felt he decapitated her but possibly while she was still alive.
In the bathroom.
Yet no traces were found in the bathroom and BC was careless by nature...
I also doubt still that he disposed of her as he described.
I have wondered whether he burnt her body- the petrol or hid it somewhere only he had access to...
this because he seemed to be hellbent on becoming a serial killer... is it not likely that he kept trophies, possibly her entire body or just her head?

Was it ever considered that he may have video taped his killing?
Recall the *advertiser censored* file in the 'secret' compartment of his computer? He accessed it on the night of the murder..

Was her body still there at the time or was she still alive?
How long did they estimate he had her alive prior to his vicious slaughter of the beautiful innocent girl?

Do you believe, as I do, that more could have been done to locate her remains?

There were no further movements of his vehicle noted after his return with her that afternoon.
Could he not easily have slung her remains in a bag and gone walking to her final resting place?

somewhere en route to the gym? Sorry if that all sounds stupid but it's where my brain stopped after years of sleuthing.... that he hid her somewhere on that road, a place he could revisit frequently without arousing suspicion as he habitually traveled it each ad every day en route to the gym?

Is it possible she can still be located?
will anybody ever search for her again?
He said he put her in a dumpster= means he did nothing of the sort.

Flashback is unexpected for me.
I had grown disillusioned and felt hopeless because she was never found and the search seemed inadequate and prematurely shortened.
That has left me scarred.

Hello kittythehare, thanks for asking your questions. I know you followed the case closely throughout. Unfortunately, I don't have great answers for these questions. I'll do my best to outline what we knew.

Regarding the amount of blood we recovered - it wasn't much. We could make inferences based on where it was located, but we could not tabulate how much blood was lost from what we recovered. For example, there was spots of Yingying's blood on the mattress. Those amounts were small. The blood from underneath the tack strip and soaked into the floorboard is more telling. That blood had to be a sufficient quantity to drip down the wall, soak under the tack strip and carpet, soak into the wood and carpet, and still be leftover from his extensive cleaning efforts. I think it's a fair inference to say that was quite a bit of blood. The little pool of what was leftover after cleaning was not large - maybe 10" x 4-5" or so. Was it enough to show death just from the amount of blood lost? I'm not certain. That was one of the things I wanted to hire an expert to do, but we ultimately chose not to, as there was a significant risk if the amount of blood was not sufficient to show death. We felt we had enough to prove Yingying's murder without introducing more uncertainty.

Regarding the bathroom - remember, Christensen had a professional cleaning done on the tub. It was unlikely we would recover anything after that cleaning. He missed cleaning under the vanity, however, and the cadaver dog picked up that odor several weeks later. Where did he kill her? It would have been hard to swing a bat in that bathroom, but that's what he claims he did. I don't have any answers on that.

RE: the disposal of her body, that is the mystery, isn't it? The prosecution / investigatory team still believes Christensen disposed of her body in the trash bin, and that her remains are in the landfill somewhere. There is still interest in other locations, notably Allerton Park, but nothing concrete that moves the general belief off the landfill hypothesis. We have no credible evidence to suggest Christensen buried the remains, nor that he burned them. Burning a body would take quite a bit of time and effort. Christensen was lazy. He never went outdoors (beyond to and from class) if he could avoid it. He had no tools to dig a grave and burn a body. It's possible he had them and got rid of them, but that seems to be against his general character.

Regarding trophies / videotaping, that is all possible. His electronic devices were all seized and reviewed, however, and we found no trace of any video involving Yingying. His accessing his *advertiser censored* files after the murder - when Yingying's body was still in his apartment - is beyond disgusting. In all probability, he was masturbating with a dead body partially dismembered in his bathroom. I suppose it is possible he videotaped the murder, hid it in his *advertiser censored* file, and was watching it at that time - and then later deleted it - we just don't know. We did not find any videos of the murder.

We know, from MC and TEB, that Christensen came up with a ridiculous explanation for the disappearance of the giant bag he ordered. He left the house with it after MC had returned, and told MC and TEB it contained a broken cat tree that someone must have stolen from the grounds near TEB's residence (NOTE: the jurors laughed continually about this ridiculous story - they told us after the trial how ridiculous they found it). Christensen later told us the bag contained Yingying's belongings, etc., and that he drove around C-U dumping it in dumpsters. That bag likely also contained the knives and cleaning materials. Remember, the bag had been in a closet in their house, and the agents found baking soda in that area during their search (which, per MC, was not there when she left). It's possible he kept trophies initially, but decided the heat was too much, and ended up dumping them.

I don't believe Yingying was alive long in the apartment. Christensen sexually assaulted her, tortured her, and killed her in brutal fashion - but I don't think Yingying was alive beyond a couple hours inside the apartment.

As far as what more could have been done - this is still a sore subject. Do I wish we would have done more? Of course - I wish we had done whatever it takes to find her. I still wish that. Nobody pushed harder for a landfill search than me. Even after the FBI said no, I begged and pleaded, whatever I needed to do, to try to get one of our agencies to do that search. I was pushing on that as early as the fall of 2017. The agencies all said no, for various reasons. I was not able to come to some peace with that (NOTE: coming to "peace" with something does not mean I agree with the result, or am happy...just that I can accept the rationale) until ISP and U of I did their extensive study on it. Searching the Danville landfill would have cost millions of dollars to search, exposed thousands of people to asbestos, medical, and toxic waste, risked environmental damage, taken months, and then cost thousands (or millions) of dollars more in litigation afterwards - all for perhaps a 1 or 2% chance of finding her remains if she were even there. That's a tough sell. Despite how tough of a sell that was, and despite the fact that Yingying's family was suing them at the time, I know the University really wanted to do the search. This was just too much risk for a vanishingly small chance of reward though.

As for searching outside of the landfill, certainly more could have been done, but that's not how the FBI operates. Had this been a state agency leading the investigation, then perhaps they would have marshalled the public to assist. I know everyone here wanted that. The reason state agencies sometimes marshal the pubic is often one of two scenarios: (1) they just don't have the resources to follow all the leads, or (2) they don't have any leads. Neither was the case here. FBI brought federal resources, and they followed every single lead. How much more would have been productive? Is searching for the sake of searching, even if there is no reason to believe the area to be searched would produce evidence, productive? I don't know the answer to that. I do know such searches pose risks when marshalling the public. C-U is in the middle of farm country. Having parades of people traipsing through farmlands in the summer and fall risked damaging crops, among other risks. Expending the necessary law enforcement resources to conduct such searches would have drained the agencies of the ability to investigate other crimes. Again, those are tough decisions. The FBI chose to let the public guide them through tips, and kept the investigation internal.

Even if she's not in the dumpster, I doubt he hid her somewhere near his apartment. There were extensive searches, of the type you suggest, in the areas around the apartment. The FBI and state agencies used dogs (cadaver and articles searching) throughout much of that area, and many of these areas were extensively searched. Ponds were dredged through, dumpsters dove into by agents, fields combed, empty buildings explored, etc. There was a lot more searching in and immediately around C-U than the public knew about.

Will she be found? Will anyone search for her again? I hope so! FBI is still following leads, so if something comes in, they will follow up. As I noted in a recent post, they dredged a pond and searched a woodline in northwest Champaign as recently as a couple months ago based on a new tip from after the trial. If she is in the landfill, finding her will require a new set of eyes, a technological breakthrough that would make searching landfills easier and safer, or some serious fortitude by the leadership of a law enforcement agency or a private / public partnership with significant resources.