Deceased/Not Found IL - Yingying Zhang, 26, Urbana, 9 June 2017 #4 *Arrest*

[davehead21]

I heard of this case before the arrest and I live on the east coast. I think it was covered by CNN at the time of the abduction. CNN of all the natl media outlets has covered this case the most it seems as I have seen several stories, and at times, it is the lead story on cnn.com.

We sometimes forget there are thousands of missing women cases yearly. There was a spate in time where the natl media was obsessed with missing cases (in the era of Lacey Peterson, Chadra Levy) that has since died down. I think this case got significantly national publicity, much more so than any other recent case, indeed, I would say from my perspective, this case has gotten one of the most publicity since the Heather Graham case from UVA. I think cases on college campuses get to get national publicity because it is a compelling story that freaks parents of 18 year old girls out. It's a shame for the thousands of other girls who go missing every year but the story of a college campus is especially compelling to the national media.

Even here on websleuths it is prominent as its link has been on the main page for weeks.

I originally heard about this case on Good Morning America. I cannot recall exactly when but it was well before BC's arrest. It may not have gotten major attention in the national media but it was certainly picked up before the arrest.

 

[Yellow]

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-07-09/attorneys-accused.html

“Christensen called their law offices even before he was arrested, after authorities seized his car, Bruno said.”

That's weird defense would be saying that. When he retained them should be covered under attorney client privilege. I don't see any upside in admitting, "yeah he retained us as soon as police thought he was a suspect." I guess it was smart to retain them at that point, but I don't see how it's in his client's interest to broadcast that info now.

So did he talk to the police after he retained the lawyer? There was a time when he talked to cops and lied to them about video games, then later changed his story. That lie is compelling circumstantial evidence. If in fact he had a lawyer before they did the recording, lawyer may be setting themselves up for a Fifth Amendment issue to throw that as well as the taping of his "confession." That's the only reason why I think lawyer would be broadcasting now-

If you throw out the lie and throw out the confession, there goes your case now without a body.

 

[matou]

I wonder if he dumped the clothing he wore that day? What about his shoes or boots? Gloves?

 

[matou]

So where did he clean his car? In the parking lot? I'm sure people would have noticed. Did he go to a 24 hour carwash with cameras? Hopefully, there is evidence somewhere of this.

 

[Ambitioned]

So, it turns out some people had already detected B.C. was a creep before the abduction. So much for: "he was just a normal guy".

"Others who lived in the same apartment complex have since come out to describe him as 'creepy'.

Alyssa Patterson told the News Gazette she remembered his distinct walk and gait.


'He is really quiet. It's creepy, how he walked, how he held himself,' she said following his arrest.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...nois-grad-student-s-arrest.html#ixzz4mMCW5WXo
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Ah thank you for that! Very interesting that someone did pick up on it.

 

[matou]

What gas station is closest to his place? Or a gas station between his place and the University? LIkely he went to gas up if he wanted to drive far away to dump his victim.

 

[Ambitioned]

So where did he clean his car? In the parking lot? I'm sure people would have noticed. Did he go to a 24 hour carwash with cameras? Hopefully, there is evidence somewhere of this.

Someone mentioned the carwash nearby.

 

[Ambitioned]

What gas station is closest to his place? Or a gas station between his place and the University? LIkely he went to gas up if he wanted to drive far away to dump his victim.

Circle K is also by the carwash and apartments. I presume it's still in business.

 

[thekarmabus]

Forgive me if this has been stated before... I just read this article: “Christensen stated that he brought YZ (Ms Zhang) back to his apartment and otherwise held her in his apartment against her will,” Special Agent Anthony Manganaro said in his statement.

It’s not clear who Christensen was talking to in the tape."

That leaves two ways of him communicating. Phone or on his computer. I have a feeling it was on his computer. Someone allowed them in and wire the place however this sounds like they could hear only one side of the conversation.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/3631424...n-accused-of-kidnapping-yingying-zhang/#page1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Yellow]

I think this case is going to be relatively easy for prosecutors. They have video footage, they have a car, they have a confession, they have bizarre comments from him about perfect victims that we know about, and probably have physical evidence, digital evidence, witness statements, and who knows what else that we don't yet know about. Plus they have a sympathetic victim and an alleged murderer who is not very sympathetic. I agree with SteveP that there is no such thing as a "slam dunk," but I don't think it gets much easier to prosecute than this case.

This case becomes problematic if any of the evidence like the confession is thrown out. Even with confession, it may be hard to prove murder. Think of it from the perspective of a juror. I think possibly a juror with his demographic profile could say, "Yeah he probably did it, but is there a 1% chance he let her out her or more likely he got her in the car for nefarious purposes and there was an accident or he gave her a drug and she reacted bad, yeah, there's a one percent chance." Indeed, the scenario I pose- he wanted to kidnap a girl for his plaything, he gave her a drug and she reacted bad and she died "accidentally" - someone could think there's a 1% chance of that happening. He would be convicted of other things but not murder. Or a story that she got in the car, he had no nefarious intentions but she thought he did, she panicked, started thrashing around and a "fight" broke out where she hit her head. Some juror could think that could have happened. It's possible that even in that scenario he could be convicted of felony murder - which often has similar penalties to first degree - but you would have to prove a first order felony first. Felony murder may be easier to prove here than first degree.

We don't believe these stories because we know so much about him, but would a juror hearing this from the first time seeing such an intelligent, not bad looking married guy (maybe they will even play up the churchgoing angle) with a crying sympathy family/wife buy that angle? I think there's a chance. Indeed, whether he is able to mount such a defense may very well depend on how supportive his family/friends are at trial. If he does not have alot of supporters, that would be telling whereas if he did - painting a sympathetic picture of the law-abiding, church-going good husband - yeah, that could be compelling to a juror. Especially if they throw out the fetlife stuff or argue that stuff was not him, he could get off on less than murder charges.

 

[mrsobrien]

Forgive me if this has been stated before... I just read this article: “Christensen stated that he brought YZ (Ms Zhang) back to his apartment and otherwise held her in his apartment against her will,” Special Agent Anthony Manganaro said in his statement.

It’s not clear who Christensen was talking to in the tape."

That leaves two ways of him communicating. Phone or on his computer. I have a feeling it was on his computer. Someone allowed them in and wire the place however this sounds like they could hear only one side of the conversation.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/3631424...n-accused-of-kidnapping-yingying-zhang/#page1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand it differently. As I understand, the recording was made at the vigil, where he and the unnamed woman were together. He was heard/recorded there, revealing incriminating details and threatening her.

The FBI knows who she is, the media is unclear. Jmo.

 

[MomminIt]

This case becomes problematic if any of the evidence like the confession is thrown out. Even with confession, it may be hard to prove murder. Think of it from the perspective of a juror. I think possibly a juror with his demographic profile could say, "Yeah he probably did it, but is there a 1% chance he let her out her or more likely he got her in the car for nefarious purposes and there was an accident or he gave her a drug and she reacted bad, yeah, there's a one percent chance." Indeed, the scenario I pose- he wanted to kidnap a girl for his plaything, he gave her a drug and she reacted bad and she died "accidentally" - someone could think there's a 1% chance of that happening. He would be convicted of other things but not murder. Or a story that she got in the car, he had no nefarious intentions but she thought he did, she panicked, started thrashing around and a "fight" broke out where she hit her head. Some juror could think that could have happened. It's possible that even in that scenario he could be convicted of felony murder - which often has similar penalties to first degree - but you would have to prove a first order felony first. Felony murder may be easier to prove here than first degree.

We don't believe these stories because we know so much about him, but would a juror hearing this from the first time seeing such an intelligent, not bad looking married guy (maybe they will even play up the churchgoing angle) with a crying sympathy family/wife buy that angle? I think there's a chance. Indeed, whether he is able to mount such a defense may very well depend on how supportive his family/friends are at trial. If he does not have alot of supporters, that would be telling whereas if he did - painting a sympathetic picture of the law-abiding, church-going good husband - yeah, that could be compelling to a juror. Especially if they throw out the fetlife stuff or argue that stuff was not him, he could get off on less than murder charges.

Wouldn't the drug scenario still be a capital murder charge because it was a death that occurred during the commission of a felony?

 

[Deleted member 192280]

If he did not kill her, he would not have kept silence in court.

 

[Tinypeeps]

This case becomes problematic if any of the evidence like the confession is thrown out. Even with confession, it may be hard to prove murder. Think of it from the perspective of a juror. I think possibly a juror with his demographic profile could say, "Yeah he probably did it, but is there a 1% chance he let her out her or more likely he got her in the car for nefarious purposes and there was an accident or he gave her a drug and she reacted bad, yeah, there's a one percent chance." Indeed, the scenario I pose- he wanted to kidnap a girl for his plaything, he gave her a drug and she reacted bad and she died "accidentally" - someone could think there's a 1% chance of that happening. He would be convicted of other things but not murder. Or a story that she got in the car, he had no nefarious intentions but she thought he did, she panicked, started thrashing around and a "fight" broke out where she hit her head. Some juror could think that could have happened. It's possible that even in that scenario he could be convicted of felony murder - which often has similar penalties to first degree - but you would have to prove a first order felony first. Felony murder may be easier to prove here than first degree.

We don't believe these stories because we know so much about him, but would a juror hearing this from the first time seeing such an intelligent, not bad looking married guy (maybe they will even play up the churchgoing angle) with a crying sympathy family/wife buy that angle? I think there's a chance. Indeed, whether he is able to mount such a defense may very well depend on how supportive his family/friends are at trial. If he does not have alot of supporters, that would be telling whereas if he did - painting a sympathetic picture of the law-abiding, church-going good husband - yeah, that could be compelling to a juror. Especially if they throw out the fetlife stuff or argue that stuff was not him, he could get off on less than murder charges.

Good analysis. If YY is never recovered, though, would a jury actually believe that BC could be innocent of murder? What other reasonable possibilities are there explaining that?

 

[Russian Blue]

Probably only he could ever answer as to the depth of how he felt about the picture but it sure is intriguing. As this whole case is.

For him to think he could even get away with this crime in broad daylight is just mind boggling to me. For someone like him who was educated and was even teaching others to try to pull this off and think he could get away with it just throws me for a loop.

I guess thats what Narcism does to people is it makes them think they are above others and superior to others where he may have felt he could fool the LE.

I keep thinking he may have had a deteriorating brain situation too. He could have been getting more and more phsychotic as a real illness of his brain maybe.

The thing about "broad daylight" is that when many of these type of crimes are committed. You would be less likely to find your victim at night, or get someone to as easily acquiesce to your scheme or getting in your car late at night. I say this with all due respect.

 

[Millhouse]

So where did he clean his car? In the parking lot? I'm sure people would have noticed. Did he go to a 24 hour carwash with cameras? Hopefully, there is evidence somewhere of this.

All we really know is "that the front passenger door of the SUBJECT VEHICLE Where
Y.Z. would have been sitting appeared to have been cleaned to a more diligent extent
than the other vehicle doors."

To me, that means he might have just wiped or cleaned that door and not necessarily washed the whole car. Even if he wiped it in his parking lot, it might have been a pretty simple task that he could do quickly without being noticed. I have a parking lot at my condo community that is similar to this, and I see people out there cleaning all the time- it wouldn't raise any flags to me at the time if I saw it.

 

[MomminIt]

All we really know is "that the front passenger door of the SUBJECT VEHICLE Where
Y.Z. would have been sitting appeared to have been cleaned to a more diligent extent
than the other vehicle doors."

To me, that means he might have just wiped or cleaned that door and not necessarily washed the whole car. Even if he wiped it in his parking lot, it might have been a pretty simple task that he could do quickly without being noticed. I have a parking lot at my condo community that is similar to this, and I see people out there cleaning all the time- it wouldn't raise any flags to me at the time if I saw it.

You would expect to find bleach in a house, but not in a car. Maybe he cleaned the door with bleach? Or maybe just wiped it down for fingerprints. Either way implies guilty of kidnapping, shows consciousness of guilt because it was done before police came knocking.

 

[Deleted member 192280]

Since FBI began to interview him on June 12, they must have kept him under surveillance ever since. Therefore, the most likely scenario would be that YY was killed before that date. If he killed her or had access to where she was (alive or deceased) after that, FBI should have been able to follow there. The very unlikely but not impossible scenario would be he left her alone, alive, where she was being hidden, and didn't venture to access the place after being interviewed, and she would have died of hunger.

I do wonder whether, after locating his car, the FBI watched him secretly before interviewing him, so that they could catch his activities while he was still totally unaware of himself becoming person of interest. I suppose--hope--the FBI was wise enough to do so. (Unlike search needing warrant, watching doesn't need a warrant)

 

[Ambitioned]

You would expect to find bleach in a house, but not in a car. Maybe he cleaned the door with bleach? Or maybe just wiped it down for fingerprints. Either way implies guilty of kidnapping, shows consciousness of guilt because it was done before police came knocking.

Agreed. I don't think SA Manganaro would have mentioned it in the criminal complaint if it meant nothing.

 

[Yellow]

Wouldn't the drug scenario still be a capital murder charge because it was a death that occurred during the commission of a felony?

Yeah felony murder. But IL does not have a death penalty so it would not be a capital offense, though oftentimes you can still get life for felony murder.

If it stays in federal court and it's just the kidnapping crime, he can get death penalty if the kidnapping results in death. His lawyers have a decent argument that it's stretching jxn here to keep it in federal court if in fact everything occurred in state. The law adding kidnapping to include out of state contacts was meant to cover enticement of minors over the internet. Here, there is no evidence he enticed her over the internet and merely looking up sites on the internet or talking to people over Skype or whatnot would expand federal jxn here more so than it has been expanded it any other case. Many many murderers now use the internet to help plan the crime so if that's the only out of state stuff he did it likely would not stay in federal court.