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

[kittythehare]

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).

they dont exclude, as a rule and all of them were up to date when i searched..
i have not the faintest idea where he is.

 

[kittythehare]

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.

You're right.. but that report was only filed Feb 14..
I don't understand this reference, from the report..

The defendant’s current detention at the Livingston County Jail further reduces

the Fourth Amendment implication. Id. (noting that the infringement on Sechrist’s

privacy was especially minor because he was incarcerated); see also Hudson v. Palmer,

468 U.S. 517, 528 (1984) (noting that “‘Loss of freedom of choice and privacy are

inherent incidents of confinement’&#8221 (quoting Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 537 (1979));

Smith v. United States, 324 F.2d 879, 882 (D.C. Cir. 1963) (holding that a detained

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6129073/70/united-states-v-christensen/

 

[Niner]

When you all find him - maybe there will the "next court hearing date", if so, please post!

TIA!

 

[kittythehare]

When you all find him - maybe there will the "next court hearing date", if so, please post!

TIA!

List and dates of all hearings are in the documents.. there are quite a few!
But mostly administrative routine-type hearings.
Has anybody heard anything from local people regarding whether any searches are still being conducted?

 

[trunkizback]

List and dates of all hearings are in the documents.. there are quite a few!
But mostly administrative routine-type hearings.
Has anybody heard anything from local people regarding whether any searches are still being conducted?

Nope. No searches and no word on why not since way back last year.

 

[kittythehare]

Nope. No searches and no word on why not since way back last year.

Any ideas on who we can ask?

 

[Niner]

List and dates of all hearings are in the documents.. there are quite a few!
But mostly administrative routine-type hearings.
Has anybody heard anything from local people regarding whether any searches are still being conducted?

Can you post a link - if it's the one before that was posted, I couldn't get in. If so, can you or someone post all the dates for me? I like to keep up with all the hearings on my cases!

TIA! :wave:

edited to add - never mind! I can get into the one posted above!! Thanks!!

 

[Niner]

Ok - from the link above the court docket only goes to 2/14, where they had a hearing on a Motion to Recuse the Judge on 2/15. Guess we have to wait for them update that docket?

 

[kittythehare]

Ok - from the link above the court docket only goes to 2/14, where they had a hearing on a Motion to Recuse the Judge on 2/15. Guess we have to wait for them update that docket?

Sorry for delay in getting back to you Niner, this is the document to which I was referring
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6129073/67/united-states-v-christensen/

The court enters the following scheduling order in this matter. If the parties

believe the court has omitted any deadlines they believe should be incorporated into the

scheduling order, they must file a motion seeking such incorporation with the court by

March 5, 2018.



• May 18, 2018 Government disclosure to Defendant of Rule 16 material and
evidence required to be disclosed under Brady and Giglio;

Government supplemental disclosure to Defendant of
expert witnesses in case-in-chief and expected
evidence in support of aggravating factors.

• July 13 , 2018 Defense motions concerning any contested discovery
matters related to either guilt/innocence or penalty
phases of trial.
2:17-cr-20037-CSB-EIL # 67 Page 2 of 4



• Aug. 24, 2018 Defendant disclosure to Government of non-Rule 12.2
expert witnesses, including rebuttal experts;

New and amended pretrial motions due (other than
motions in limine), specifically including the
following:
- Discovery motions;
- Constitutional challenges to the Federal
Death Penalty Act;
- Challenges to Superseding Indictment
or Notice of Intent;
- Factual and legal challenges to validity
of aggravating factors;
- Challenges to Grand Jury venire
- Motions attacking institution of
prosecution;
- Bill of Particulars;
- Motions to suppress evidence;
- Challenges to Government’s expert
witnesses (including Daubert motions);

• Sept. 21, 2018 Defendant’s deadline to give notice of intent to offer
Atkins defense or Rule 12.2 evidence during the guilt
and/or penalty phase.

• Sept. 28, 2018 Motion to examine Defendant pursuant to
Defendant’s notice of intent to offer Atkins defense or
Rule 12.2 evidence during the guilt and/or penalty
phase (if such defense offered);

Motion for change of venue.

• October 16, 2018 Responses to pretrial motions;

Government disclosure of rebuttal experts;

Government’s challenge to defense expert witnesses;

Government’s response to Defendant’s challenge to
Government experts;

Response to any motion for change of venue.

2
2:17-cr-20037-CSB-EIL # 67 Page 3 of 4

There's 4 pages.. I just c/p one.

 

[Niner]

Thanks a BUNCH!!! kittythehare! Got all the dates now!

 

[crhedBngr]

Sorry for delay in getting back to you Niner, this is the document to which I was referring
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6129073/67/united-states-v-christensen/

The court enters the following scheduling order in this matter. If the parties

believe the court has omitted any deadlines they believe should be incorporated into the

scheduling order, they must file a motion seeking such incorporation with the court by

March 5, 2018.



• May 18, 2018 Government disclosure to Defendant of Rule 16 material and
evidence required to be disclosed under Brady and Giglio;

Government supplemental disclosure to Defendant of
expert witnesses in case-in-chief and expected
evidence in support of aggravating factors.

• July 13 , 2018 Defense motions concerning any contested discovery
matters related to either guilt/innocence or penalty
phases of trial.
2:17-cr-20037-CSB-EIL # 67 Page 2 of 4



• Aug. 24, 2018 Defendant disclosure to Government of non-Rule 12.2
expert witnesses, including rebuttal experts;

New and amended pretrial motions due (other than
motions in limine), specifically including the
following:
- Discovery motions;
- Constitutional challenges to the Federal
Death Penalty Act;
- Challenges to Superseding Indictment
or Notice of Intent;
- Factual and legal challenges to validity
of aggravating factors;
- Challenges to Grand Jury venire
- Motions attacking institution of
prosecution;
- Bill of Particulars;
- Motions to suppress evidence;
- Challenges to Government’s expert
witnesses (including Daubert motions);

• Sept. 21, 2018 Defendant’s deadline to give notice of intent to offer
Atkins defense or Rule 12.2 evidence during the guilt
and/or penalty phase.

• Sept. 28, 2018 Motion to examine Defendant pursuant to
Defendant’s notice of intent to offer Atkins defense or
Rule 12.2 evidence during the guilt and/or penalty
phase (if such defense offered);

Motion for change of venue.

• October 16, 2018 Responses to pretrial motions;

Government disclosure of rebuttal experts;

Government’s challenge to defense expert witnesses;

Government’s response to Defendant’s challenge to
Government experts;

Response to any motion for change of venue.

2
2:17-cr-20037-CSB-EIL # 67 Page 3 of 4

There's 4 pages.. I just c/p one.

Thanks, Kittythehare. Sept./October seems a long time to wait.

 

[kittythehare]

Thanks, Kittythehare. Sept./October seems a long time to wait.

too long..
Is there anything we can do in the interim?

Anybody searching for her?

Any reports of FBI investigating bodies located in vicinity?
Any hope?

 

[dm92]

Not much going on. Three filings made with the court the other day. BC is not fighting the request for his palm prints. Also, further confirmation that plea bargaining was going on at one point, as it is mentioned in a request to make another filing under seal.

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

 

[kittythehare]

WHOA..
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6129073/71/united-states-v-christensen/

4. In the present case, counsel filed Docket #60 under seal to prevent

sensitive information regarding plea negotiations from becoming public and tainting

the jury pool. Mr. Christensen’s Response to the government’s motion contains similar

references, which if made public, could irreparably poison the venire in this case.

Therefore, he asks permission to file his Response to Docket #69 under seal, and has

filed a copy of the Response as a separate sealed document.

Respectfully submitted,

BRENDT A. CHRISTENSEN, Defendant

 

[Shiressleuth]

WHOA..
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6129073/71/united-states-v-christensen/

4. In the present case, counsel filed Docket #60 under seal to prevent

sensitive information regarding plea negotiations from becoming public and tainting

the jury pool. Mr. Christensen’s Response to the government’s motion contains similar

references, which if made public, could irreparably poison the venire in this case.

Therefore, he asks permission to file his Response to Docket #69 under seal, and has

filed a copy of the Response as a separate sealed document.

Respectfully submitted,

BRENDT A. CHRISTENSEN, Defendant

Just catching up here. This seems pretty important if they have to seal it. I can only imagine (hope) it must be a guilty plea. That's the only thing I can think of that could be harmful to his case.

 

[pillywiggin]

Just catching up here. This seems pretty important if they have to seal it. I can only imagine (hope) it must be a guilty plea. That's the only thing I can think of that could be harmful to his case.

We can only hope and pray this is the case--and that part of the plea is an explanation of what exactly he has done with her body. Her loved ones deserve to know the truth.

 

[mrsobrien]

Just catching up here. This seems pretty important if they have to seal it. I can only imagine (hope) it must be a guilty plea. That's the only thing I can think of that could be harmful to his case.

If it's a guilty plea, the jury pool would be irrelevant, imo.

 

[BReVeTTe]

another accidental post on a glitchy touch screen :/
my apologies ...but hello from australia.
I'v been following ying ying's case from the beginning

... keep up the good work [emoji1360]

 

[Shiressleuth]

If it's a guilty plea, the jury pool would be irrelevant, imo.

Not really because he may be pleading guilty to kidnapping but not murder and if prosecution don't accept it he would go to trial still. If it is known he was going to plead guilty to part of the indictment, I see how it could be thus thought prejudicial or possibly taint a jury pool (poison the venire) for instance.

 

[crhedBngr]

WHOA..
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6129073/71/united-states-v-christensen/

4. In the present case, counsel filed Docket #60 under seal to prevent

sensitive information regarding plea negotiations from becoming public and tainting

the jury pool. Mr. Christensen’s Response to the government’s motion contains similar

references, which if made public, could irreparably poison the venire in this case.

Therefore, he asks permission to file his Response to Docket #69 under seal, and has

filed a copy of the Response as a separate sealed document.

Respectfully submitted,

BRENDT A. CHRISTENSEN, Defendant

[SARCASM]. . . .Really?? [/SARCASM]

"Poor" guy!