Deceased/Not Found IL - Yingying Zhang, 26, Urbana, 9 June 2017 #7 *Arrest*

[kittythehare]

meanwhile, from a breaking news tweet:
[FONT=&amp]"Government submits proposed trial date in the case for missing U of I Scholar Yingying Zhang. October 16, 2018. The defense has until midnight to file their proposed date."


[/FONT]

Damnit, I googled the phrase and it brought me back here and nowhere else.. Very surprised they expect to be ready by October...
wondering whether further superseding indictments can be added between now and then?

I am spitefully hoping for a lot more evidence showing a long history of abusing women.. and other vulnerable people.
This dude had all the chances, all the exposure to vulnerable minds any predator could wish for- so many opportunities, so much power..

 

[TigerJin]

It 100% cannot be a death penalty case based only on circumstantial evidence. I would love to see any MSM report where it says they have physical evidence because I havent seen it. And if they did, why wouldnt they say so?

If the recorded fantasies are damning then every person on the FL site BC used should be arrested for having kidnapping fantasies/fetishes right?

No, you're right. In any criminal case (not just death penalty) the proof has to be 100%. That is, there cannot be a single doubt in anyone's mind that he did it. Think the OJ Simpson case. He got away with murder in the criminal trial, but was found guilty in the civil trial. A civil trial just needs a preponderance of evidence on one side (so, 51% will do).

So, if there is no body, this is still a cause for concern of them losing the case.

 

[kittythehare]

Here's an ACLU article on life without parole..

[FONT=&amp] Sentencing people to death by execution is three times more expensive than sentencing them to die in prison.

[/FONT][FONT=&amp] For each of the last three executions in California, more than 25 years had been spent in appeals before the executions finally occurred. The current average for appeals is 17 years—and getting longer every day.

[/FONT][FONT=&amp]The death penalty is significantly more expensive than condemning a person to die in prison. Simply housing prisoners on death row costs California tax payers an additional $90,000 per prisoner per year, above what it would cost to house them with the general prison population, which adds up to $59 million a year. The price tag for California’s new death row is $336 million. All of those costs would be avoided if the people on death row were sentenced to die in prison and moved to the general population.

[/FONT] https://www.aclunc.org/article/truth-about-life-without-parole-condemned-die-prison

 

[Webthrush]

Damnit, I googled the phrase and it brought me back here and nowhere else.. Very surprised they expect to be ready by October...
wondering whether further superseding indictments can be added between now and then?

I am spitefully hoping for a lot more evidence showing a long history of abusing women.. and other vulnerable people.
This dude had all the chances, all the exposure to vulnerable minds any predator could wish for- so many opportunities, so much power..

yeah, strange 10 hrs. later still not seeing reports from any other local news outlet except the one lone Fox reporter (and I quoted the complete tweet verbatim so there's nothing more to learn there)... assume newslinks will come today.

And, responding to someone else, there is no such thing as 100% proof (even in science, let alone in the law), so you're only looking for proof beyond a reasonable doubt in any criminal case (including death penalty) -- and the reality is that juries aren't composed of 12 Harvard law graduates who strictly follow the law, but of everyday citizens who are highly subjective and can be swayed. Indeed, every year many individuals who were "proven" guilty are set free (sometimes after decades in prison) when new evidence or trial flaws are uncovered.

 

[Deleted member 158085]

Sounds like they were desperate for evidence

Or just desperate to find her. Seems like the logical thing to do.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[dm92]

Holy Crap.....

Defense wants a start date of June, 2019

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/lo...nt-delays-start-accused-kidnappers-trial.html

 

[Webthrush]

Holy Crap.....

Defense wants a start date of June, 2019

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/lo...nt-delays-start-accused-kidnappers-trial.html

Is it any wonder lawyers get so little respect in this country :gaah:
http://jokes4us.com/peoplejokes/lawyerjokes/lawyeronelinerjokes.html

 

[kittythehare]

From your link dM
They also said it "is a straightforward charge occurring over a discrete period of time," and that they don't expect mental-capacity defenses, since those "do not appear readily viable in this case."

a multigenerational investigation of the family tree."
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Deleted member 158085]

From your link dM
They also said it "is a straightforward charge occurring over a discrete period of time," and that they don't expect mental-capacity defenses, since those "do not appear readily viable in this case."

a multigenerational investigation of the family tree."
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can someone explain to me what a multigenerational investigation of the family tree would have to do with anything?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Spellbound]

Kidnapping is a federal offense that opens up the possibility of death penalty.

You’re right. you may slap me with a wet noodle for forgetting about that major detail.

 

[Niner]

Well, I guess we will have to wait until Monday (Feb. 12th) for the Judge to decide "when" trial will be....

 

[dm92]

Can someone explain to me what a multigenerational investigation of the family tree would have to do with anything?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

My guess would be looking for family history of mental illness or antisocial/criminial behavior, in order to try and make an argument that his actions are possibly derived from a heritable mental defect, and thus trying to argue that he shouldn't die for his actions that might derive from an underlying mental problem.

 

[dm92]

Well, I guess we will have to wait until Monday (Feb. 12th) for the Judge to decide "when" trial will be....

That's when they will have the hearing and both sides will present arguments to him on when the trial should begin. He might issue a ruling and a new date that day, or he may consider their opinions and issue a new trial date sometime a week or so later.

 

[trunkizback]

My guess would be looking for family history of mental illness or antisocial/criminial behavior, in order to try and make an argument that his actions are possibly derived from a heritable mental defect, and thus trying to argue that he shouldn't die for his actions that might derive from an underlying mental problem.

I've just gotta weigh in on my thoughts about the American Justice System. First off, I;m kinda on the fence about death penalties. Of course there are exceptions.IE mass bombings etc. As already pointed out, there really is no such thing as 100% evidence. Then again the law, as read, says " beyond all REASONABLE doubt " not ALL doubt. Our ( the U.S. ) courts have changed from the 1950's when people tried and convicted in months instead of years. And yes this is progress, of a sort. But it seems to me that in the last 10 - 20 years we may have swung to the other extreme. The whole jury trial system is now pretty much a dog and pony show, run by lawyers and judges. It doesn't seem to be about getting at the actual truth anymore. The OJ trial is a prime example. There was plenty of evidence to convict but between the defense lawyers' antics and the barring of key evidence , he got off.
We are now actually looking at a possibility of being 2 YEARS before this trial even begins! To me, this is unacceptable, Who on here would like to explain to the Zhaang family why it may be 2 years before this even hits trial??
Let's play a hypothetical game here. Let's say the trial starts and the prosecution has the video of YY getting in his car ( never to be seen again ) Hours of tapes of BC admitting what he did. And blood samples of YY in his apt. OK, would that be enough for YOU to convict him? It would be for me. Now we go a step further, let's say the defense gets the tapes dismissed as evidence. Still guilty? OK, one more step, say somehow they get the blood dismissed ( illegal search. yada yada ) Now what? What we have then is a murderer who is let go because of our so called "rules" of evidence. Who on here would like to be the one to explain THAT to the Zhaang family? 'in summation, IMO these "rules" were written by judges and lawyers FOR judges and lawyers. Longer trials , bull$$it rules = more money and TV exposure for the clowns running the show.
I'll never forget this..." If the glove don't fit, you must aquit. " AARRGGHHH

 

[kittythehare]

If this is going to be allowed to drag on for a further 12 months I don't think it's unreasonable to question whether there is a point in carrying out further searches?

They never stated her body was destroyed..which means it is somewhere.
As DM said, they did state they believed her to be dead on the day they arrested him.
- the day after the march when he was allegedly heard threatening another woman..

On the day they arrested him, had they already had access to his electronically stored material?

If they found evidence of her murder there, should they not have arrested him immediately?

If they found evidence she was surely dead from electronic records.. why could they not locate her body?

even if we could figure out what, if any searches they conducted following his arrest, we could get some clue as to what they are thinking, at least?
Sorry, perpetually grasping at straws here.

I have no idea of even where to get this information or who to ask, on the ground..

 

[kittythehare]

I've just gotta weigh in on my thoughts about the American Justice System. First off, I;m kinda on the fence about death penalties. Of course there are exceptions.IE mass bombings etc. As already pointed out, there really is no such thing as 100% evidence. Then again the law, as read, says " beyond all REASONABLE doubt " not ALL doubt. Our ( the U.S. ) courts have changed from the 1950's when people tried and convicted in months instead of years. And yes this is progress, of a sort. But it seems to me that in the last 10 - 20 years we may have swung to the other extreme. The whole jury trial system is now pretty much a dog and pony show, run by lawyers and judges. It doesn't seem to be about getting at the actual truth anymore. The OJ trial is a prime example. There was plenty of evidence to convict but between the defense lawyers' antics and the barring of key evidence , he got off.
We are now actually looking at a possibility of being 2 YEARS before this trial even begins! To me, this is unacceptable, Who on here would like to explain to the Zhaang family why it may be 2 years before this even hits trial??
Let's play a hypothetical game here. Let's say the trial starts and the prosecution has the video of YY getting in his car ( never to be seen again ) Hours of tapes of BC admitting what he did. And blood samples of YY in his apt. OK, would that be enough for YOU to convict him? It would be for me. Now we go a step further, let's say the defense gets the tapes dismissed as evidence. Still guilty? OK, one more step, say somehow they get the blood dismissed ( illegal search. yada yada ) Now what? What we have then is a murderer who is let go because of our so called "rules" of evidence. Who on here would like to be the one to explain THAT to the Zhaang family? 'in summation, IMO these "rules" were written by judges and lawyers FOR judges and lawyers. Longer trials , bull$$it rules = more money and TV exposure for the clowns running the show.
I'll never forget this..." If the glove don't fit, you must aquit. " AARRGGHHH

Death without parole is quite a nice punishmment too (LWO, I mean, posted link below, yesterday- a dp will drag on for 20 yrs.. if that informant could be allowed a few implements for an hour, she'd be found in no time- trade that for dp..!
i know it doesn't work that way but am appalled at a public funded defense submitting outrageously vexatious requests .

SURELY one of his confidantes must have asked him what he did with her?

Did he lie? Did he demur?
If the latter it would suggest he had suspicions the female confidante would inform on him?

I also have to wonder what kind of control he exercised over her/
To what degree had he infiltrated her mental sphere?
Is he controlling her still with the force of his will?

we only know she has been exposed horribly and that he is fully aware of what she has done- to him.

I wonder whether his defence have been in contact with her, what form that contact took and how she felt afterwards..

I worry for her

 

[Maroon10]

wrong post

 

[Ursamajr]

If this is going to be allowed to drag on for a further 12 months I don't think it's unreasonable to question whether there is a point in carrying out further searches?

It doesn't look like LE is concerned about searching for her body and it also doesn't sound like LE is concerned about anyone else finding her body either.

 

[MomminIt]

Does anybody know will Feb 12 also give us judge's rulings on all of defense's motions? Also, I read that defense wants current Judge Bruce recused, is there a chance that could really happen? I like this judge..

 

[TigerJin]

And, responding to someone else, there is no such thing as 100% proof (even in science, let alone in the law), so you're only looking for proof beyond a reasonable doubt in any criminal case (including death penalty) -- and the reality is that juries aren't composed of 12 Harvard law graduates who strictly follow the law, but of everyday citizens who are highly subjective and can be swayed. Indeed, every year many individuals who were "proven" guilty are set free (sometimes after decades in prison) when new evidence or trial flaws are uncovered.

I learned this Monday from my criminal law professor. He said 100% certainty is needed in a criminal trial. 98% certainty will not do in a criminal case. If you disagree, take it up with Prof. Sekhon. Not me.

This is why prosecutors pile on charges to the defendant and try to force a plea bargain. Way easier to get a conviction that way, than to go through a full trial.