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

[kittythehare]

Thursday, February 15th:
*Hearing on Motion to Recuse Judge (@ ET) - IL - Yingying Zhang (26) (missing on June 9, 2017) - Brendt A. Christensen (28) accused kidnapping (Federal charge) resulting in death of Yingying and 2 counts of making false statements to FBI. Pled not guilty; no bond. DA will seek DP.
Judge Bruce has set April 2, 2019 for jury selection and trial to start on April 9, 2019, which should last about 5 weeks. Bruce denied several pretrial motions by the Defense & said amended versions will need to be refiled, including one by Defense of change of venue and to drop main charge against him. Defense attorneys want Judge Bruce to recuse himself from case, prosecutors have until Thursday (2/15) to respond.

I searched for this but I found nothing for 15th...

 

[kittythehare]

i am finding this document a tad curious and I am wondering how significant to the prosecution it actually is, and I am hoping it is a matter of routine, but I'm not at all sure. I would be very grateful for a legal opinion on this, please, i'll do the legwork if someone could just point me in the right direction, please?

This is the document
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6129073/70/united-states-v-christensen/

It concerns his palm prints.
they need them for comparison with forensic searching they did via warrant.

(My alarm is because I would have imagined they would have procured this when they procured his prints(finger) at the beginning..

 

[kittythehare]

Here is link to unsealing of docket from the court records..there's a lot here

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6129073/69/united-states-v-christensen/

the defendant’s claim that the sealed document impacted issues presented to this Court

at the time it was filed. (Def.Mot.1) This claim directly contradicts this Court’s previous

finding that the document did not have any impact on any ruling. (R.52) The defendant

was well-aware that this Court had stated that the document did not impact any ruling

at the time the defendant made his contrary claim


Ironically, on the same date the defendant requested this Court to unseal docket

entry #32 and requested permission to file its recusal motion under seal, the defendant

also filed docket entry #60 under seal. The defendant does not appear to have requested

or received permission under Local Rule 49.9(A) to file docket entry #60 under seal, nor

did he assert a legal basis for filing docket entry #60 under seal.




The defendant’s statements in docket entry #60 violate Rule 11’s prohibition

against involving the Court in plea discussions. Therefore, the United States requests

that the Court strike docket entry #60 from the record and not consider it.


Moreover, typically a defendant is offered protections against any use of plea

discussions and related statements under Rule 11(f) of the Federal Rules of Criminal

Procedure and Rule 410 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Arguably, the defendant has

waived those protections by submitting docket entry #60. The United States submits,

however, that not all of the factual representations and characterizations set forth in

docket entry #60 are correct and further submits that the filing is misleading due to

various omissions. Such a situation is addressed in Rule 410(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of

Evidence: “The Court may admit a statement described in Rule 410(a)(3) or (4) in any

proceeding in which another statement made during the same plea or plea discussions

has been introduced, if in fairness the statements ought to be considered together.” In

fairness, if docket entry #60 is not stricken, then it should be unsealed and the United

States should be permitted to file a response thereto, setting forth relevant and omitted

statements made during the same plea discussions.2
I stopping here but this is reading strong language to me...

 

[Niner]

Here's an article about the Thursday hearing, but no mention of the Judge recusing himself. :dunno:

http://www.wral.com/prosecutors-say-they-ve-held-plea-talks-in-kidnapping-case/17344032/

.....
Such pretrial talks are not unusual. They often involve defendants offering cooperation for a lesser sentence. But what Christensen could offer and whether prosecutors would be willing to recommend a punishment other than death isn't clear.

Wednesday's filing focused on a request to unseal certain court papers. In addressing that issue, prosecutors revealed the talks.

 

[dm92]

i am finding this document a tad curious and I am wondering how significant to the prosecution it actually is, and I am hoping it is a matter of routine, but I'm not at all sure. I would be very grateful for a legal opinion on this, please, i'll do the legwork if someone could just point me in the right direction, please?

This is the document
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6129073/70/united-states-v-christensen/

It concerns his palm prints.
they need them for comparison with forensic searching they did via warrant.

(My alarm is because I would have imagined they would have procured this when they procured his prints(finger) at the beginning..

I'm not sure if it is routine to take palm prints or not. It must not be, as I can't imagine they would have committed an oversight such as this when this case was so high-priority and high profile.

Remember, in a prosecution response to the defense motion about throwing out witnesses because of the government supposedly missing a deadline for delivery of discovery, the government stated that "frankly, the fingerprint evidence is not particularly important to the government's case, but it does go to show the thoroughness of the FBI's investigation." I took that to mean that they didn't need to show BC's prints on items taken from his apartment that he may have used during commission of this act, because they were in his apartment and it would be obvious that they were his. Also, they probably had plenty of blood/DNA evidence demonstrating YY was in his apartment, so if they did find any of her prints there on furniture or on things she may have grabbed to try and defend herself, it wouldn't really matter, as blood/DNA (and maybe hair) already provided more than enough proof she was there.

Remember, the investigation is still ongoing. While whatever was gathered by search warrants might've come from the examination of the car, and his apartment, both on the 15th, and on the 30th -it could also come from more recent searches. Maybe they figured out what he did to get rid of her, got a search warrant for a location or a facility, and recently found a palm print on something they think he might have used to destroy her. Maybe they took evidence from an outdoor site where he initially took her to prepare her for getting her into the apartment. Maybe on re-examination, they noticed a palm print they hadn't noticed before.

Many possibilities. I tend to think it is due to something that was noticed on re-examination of previously-gathered evidence, or hopefully, on a new bit of evidence that has come from a much more recent search.

 

[Webthrush]

yeah, that palm print request seems odd — you’d think they would already have a full set of palm and fingerprint samples on hand?
I’ll take a wild guess though and surmise that maybe they found a dufflebag late in the process (likely in a landfill) with belongings inside believed or known to be YY’s possessions. And on the handle maybe fingerprints are too smudged or unusable but there’s a partial palm print to be checked. (…truly just a wild guess)
And I hope the rumors of plea bargain talk are true so this doesn’t all drag out for multiple years as a death penalty case (even if that’s what he deserves).

 

[kittythehare]

yeah, that palm print request seems odd — you’d think they would already have a full set of palm and fingerprint samples on hand?
I’ll take a wild guess though and surmise that maybe they found a dufflebag late in the process (likely in a landfill) with belongings inside believed or known to be YY’s possessions. And on the handle maybe fingerprints are too smudged or unusable but there’s a partial palm print to be checked. (…truly just a wild guess)
And I hope the rumors of plea bargain talk are true so this doesn’t all drag out for multiple years as a death penalty case (even if that’s what he deserves).

I sure hope your wild guess pans out.
The reference to the discussion on plea bargain is quite possibly merely a general routine discussion, from a check list.
There was no mention in any media or in court discussions that alluded it was recent or being given any further discussion at all.

Re palm print, think we need an interpreter of actual legal wording used in similar requests, from whence we might be able to make an informed guess at it's significance.. the possibility exists that more than one palm print could have been found at any of the search warrant locations.
It is unlikely they procured a palm print from YY.. possible, I know, hairbrush handles etc..things she would have used..

I wonder when the documents will be unsealed- wITH REDACTIONS and whether there will be anything of interest in them.?

 

[dm92]

I sure hope your wild guess pans out.
The reference to the discussion on plea bargain is quite possibly merely a general routine discussion, from a check list.
There was no mention in any media or in court discussions that alluded it was recent or being given any further discussion at all.

Re palm print, think we need an interpreter of actual legal wording used in similar requests, from whence we might be able to make an informed guess at it's significance.. the possibility exists that more than one palm print could have been found at any of the search warrant locations.
It is unlikely they procured a palm print from YY.. possible, I know, hairbrush handles etc..things she would have used..

I wonder when the documents will be unsealed- wITH REDACTIONS and whether there will be anything of interest in them.?

I will keep watching the document site -but as you have probably noticed, not all documents provided there are offered for download -even ones that are unsealed. Many of those are available elsewhere (for example, the criminal complaint and the superseding indictment), but some aren't. No guarantee they will be available there. Although, I believe if these are unsealed, they are a matter of public record and should be available to the public somewhere eventually.

Some of the reason behind the print request may have something to do with the new attorney who has been added by the government, James B. Nelson. He is a DOJ trial attorney in the capital crimes division, so I am assuming he will be the lead attorney at the trial. He was the one who submitted the motion to compel BC to give the palm prints. Perhaps in his trial prep, he has been going through the evidence, and he is trying to tie up loose ends. Perhaps these palm prints were noted earlier but were not deemed worth querying for some reason. As unexplained palm prints might give the defense an inroad to claiming the investigation wasn't thorough and that the unexplained prints could belong to someone else who might have some involvement in the crime, he could just be moving to verify these are BC's, and thus take away an argument the defense could make.

 

[kittythehare]

I will keep watching the document site -but as you have probably noticed, not all documents provided there are offered for download -even ones that are unsealed. Many of those are available elsewhere (for example, the criminal complaint and the superseding indictment), but some aren't. No guarantee they will be available there. Although, I believe if these are unsealed, they are a matter of public record and should be available to the public somewhere eventually.

Some of the reason behind the print request may have something to do with the new attorney who has been added by the government, James B. Nelson. He is a DOJ trial attorney in the capital crimes division, so I am assuming he will be the lead attorney at the trial. He was the one who submitted the motion to compel BC to give the palm prints. Perhaps in his trial prep, he has been going through the evidence, and he is trying to tie up loose ends. Perhaps these palm prints were noted earlier but were not deemed worth querying for some reason. As unexplained palm prints might give the defense an inroad to claiming the investigation wasn't thorough and that the unexplained prints could belong to someone else who might have some involvement in the crime, he could just be moving to verify these are BC's, and thus take away an argument the defense could make.

He is NOT lead , he is assistant.
Lead is Bryan David Freres.

[FONT=&quot]

[FONT=&quot]REPRESENTED BY[/FONT]​

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][h=4]Bryan David Freres[/h] (217) 373-5875

Bryan David Freres
US ATTY, 201 South Vine
Urbana, IL 61802
Bryan David Freres
US ATTY, 201 South Vine
Urbana, IL 61802
Attorney to be noticed

Lead attorney


[h=4]James B Nelson[/h] (202) 598-2872

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Crimnial Division Capital Case Section
1331 F St. NW
Suite 625
Washington, DC 20004
Attorney to be noticed

For USA.

[/FONT]

 

[kittythehare]

Here's an article about the Thursday hearing, but no mention of the Judge recusing himself. :dunno:

http://www.wral.com/prosecutors-say-they-ve-held-plea-talks-in-kidnapping-case/17344032/

.....
Such pretrial talks are not unusual. They often involve defendants offering cooperation for a lesser sentence. But what Christensen could offer and whether prosecutors would be willing to recommend a punishment other than death isn't clear.

Wednesday's filing focused on a request to unseal certain court papers. In addressing that issue, prosecutors revealed the talks.

It was possibly moot as it allegedly concerned the sealing of documents which can now be unsealed.. acc to the Feb 14 documents..
They can now be unsealed, plus quite a lotta stuff the defense may not want released, including their vexatious requests..
I find no mention of it anywhere today either.

 

[dm92]

He is NOT lead , he is assistant.
Lead is Bryan David Freres.

[FONT=&amp]

[FONT=&amp]REPRESENTED BY[/FONT]​

[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Bryan David Freres

(217) 373-5875

Bryan David Freres
US ATTY, 201 South Vine
Urbana, IL 61802
Bryan David Freres
US ATTY, 201 South Vine
Urbana, IL 61802
Attorney to be noticed

Lead attorney


James B Nelson

(202) 598-2872

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Crimnial Division Capital Case Section
1331 F St. NW
Suite 625
Washington, DC 20004
Attorney to be noticed

For USA.

[/FONT]

You are right, Freres is in charge, but what I meant to say was that Nelson will probably be the one doing a lot of the presenting of evidence and questioning witnesses at the trial. As he's part of the capital crimes division, he's probably also the one who is considered "learned counsel" for conducting death penalty trials -the counterpart to Tucker, who is the learned counsel for the defense.

 

[Webthrush]

<snip>

Some of the reason behind the print request may have something to do with the new attorney who has been added by the government, James B. Nelson. He is a DOJ trial attorney in the capital crimes division, so I am assuming he will be the lead attorney at the trial. He was the one who submitted the motion to compel BC to give the palm prints. Perhaps in his trial prep, he has been going through the evidence, and he is trying to tie up loose ends. Perhaps these palm prints were noted earlier but were not deemed worth querying for some reason. As unexplained palm prints might give the defense an inroad to claiming the investigation wasn't thorough and that the unexplained prints could belong to someone else who might have some involvement in the crime, he could just be moving to verify these are BC's, and thus take away an argument the defense could make.

all kinds of scenarios are possible of course, but I still think the palm print interest relates to some newer finding (not from prior searches), somehow relating directly to YY (perhaps her disposal?) or her belongings -- I want to believe the FBI work has been thorough and that they wouldn't have just missed something this important earlier on. (jmo)
Still curious too what the move from Macon County to Livingston is all about -- anyone noticed any significant differences between the 2 facilities? (it doesn't look any closer to Champaign; if anything maybe a bit farther than Decatur)

 

[kittythehare]

all kinds of scenarios are possible of course, but I still think the palm print interest relates to some newer finding (not from prior searches), somehow relating directly to YY (perhaps her disposal?) or her belongings -- I want to believe the FBI work has been thorough and that they wouldn't have just missed something this important earlier on. (jmo)
Still curious too what the move from Macon County to Livingston is all about -- anyone noticed any significant differences between the 2 facilities? (it doesn't look any closer to Champaign; if anything maybe a bit farther than Decatur)

I checked it out in past couple of days and I posted here on my findings. He is not there. I'll find the post # and edit this with it.
Post #580.

 

[Webthrush]

I checked it out in past couple of days and I posted here on my findings. He is not there. I'll find the post # and edit this with it.
Post #580.

the search you listed for Livingston County is for Livingston County MISSOURI, not for Illinois; not sure why he's not showing up on the other two searches, but will begin looking myself (the news reports sounded pretty definite that he is now at the Livingston County facility).

 

[kittythehare]

the search you listed for Livingston County is for Livingston County MISSOURI, not for Illinois; not sure why he's not showing up on the other two searches, but will begin looking myself (the news reports sounded pretty definite that he is now at the Livingston County facility).

I never actually saw a news report..I just saw people talking about it here and was trying to answer that question.

wow, thank you for finding that and telling me so quickly. Appreciate it.
I was hoping to locate his admissions document and I had to keep checking back to court documents for his case number..
And I think I checked all the mugshots several times too..

next time, i will let a citizen of whatever country it concerns find the info.

You would not believe how often this happens in America..!!
Thank you for straightening me out.

wait a sec.. I think I have a feeling that all states are not on this listings system.. I have a horrible feeling.. Possibly not all subscribe to this particular system.. it seemed so fast and simple..

 

[Webthrush]

I don't know what's going on with online 'inmate searches' -- I don't even find BC showing up in the Macon County Jail where he was for months (nor anywhere else -- and I've tried different names & spellings; unless they exclude certain people from listings??? -- or, maybe the transfer was so recent that he's been removed from the Decatur listing already, but not yet added to a new listing site).

 

[dm92]

I never actually saw a news report..I just saw people talking about it here and was trying to answer that question.

wow, thank you for finding that and telling me so quickly. Appreciate it.
I was hoping to locate his admissions document and I had to keep checking back to court documents for his case number..
And I think I checked all the mugshots several times too..

next time, i will let a citizen of whatever country it concerns find the info.

You would not believe how often this happens in America..!!
Thank you for straightening me out.

wait a sec.. I think I have a feeling that all states are not on this listings system.. I have a horrible feeling.. Possibly not all subscribe to this particular system.. it seemed so fast and simple..

The report that he is currently in the Livingston County jail comes from the motion filed asking the court that BC be compelled to provide investigators with palm prints.

Same with the reports on plea bargain talks. That information hasn't come from a press conference or from a FBI/DOJ spokesperson; it has come from reporters reading the motions filed with the court that are available to the public.

 

[altojack]

Would it be possible that the authorities have kept his move hush hush if he was under threat in prison? As I&#8217;m not from your Country I&#8217;m not sure how things work compared to the UK.

As to the palm print I think they&#8217;ve recently found something and need to match the print. Only my opinion, clutching at straws here.

 

[dm92]

I don't know what's going on with online 'inmate searches' -- I don't even find BC showing up in the Macon County Jail where he was for months (nor anywhere else -- and I've tried different names & spellings; unless they exclude certain people from listings??? -- or, maybe the transfer was so recent that he's been removed from the Decatur listing already, but not yet added to a new listing site).

Months ago I did an inmate search at the Macon County jail website, and he was listed as being held as a federal inmate.

I suspect the transfer may have taken place weeks ago. The last couple of times at court, he has appeared in a teal-colored jail uniform; all the times before, he had appeared in the black and white uniform issued by Macon County. Many possible reasons he may have been moved:

1) The Livingston County jail is closer to Peoria, and one of the public defenders working his case is based there.
2) After he realized the guy he was talking to was an informant, he may have made threats, or there may have been an incident, and they decided to move him for his safety and the safety of others.
3) Reporters may have been staking out the Macon County jail to see if they could ID his wife/family members coming to see him, and they could have been harassing them with questions every time they came to visit.

 

[dm92]

all kinds of scenarios are possible of course, but I still think the palm print interest relates to some newer finding (not from prior searches), somehow relating directly to YY (perhaps her disposal?) or her belongings -- I want to believe the FBI work has been thorough and that they wouldn't have just missed something this important earlier on. (jmo)

I am hoping that you are right that it is related to a new finding, and my guess is that is what it would be. It would be nice if they have found some of her belongings and are trying to determine if a palm print found accompanying them belongs to him.