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

[kittythehare]

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

"Poor" guy!

I still, in my wildest imagination and in the collective wildest imaginations here cannot imagine how he 'disappeared ' her body so quickly.. what could he have done?
fast setting concrete and in a semi public place is a possibility.. so obvious that nobody would look there or even notice fast setting concrete..

But, that's not consistent with the seal.. not at all..

 

[crhedBngr]

I still, in my wildest imagination and in the collective wildest imaginations here cannot imagine how he 'disappeared ' her body so quickly.. what could he have done?
fast setting concrete and in a semi public place is a possibility.. so obvious that nobody would look there or even notice fast setting concrete..

But, that's not consistent with the seal.. not at all..

Kittythehare: I know, I really wonder as well. Still lurking in the back of my mind are two scenarios:

Graphic scenarios follow:

1. He disposed of her remains within a few miles of his appt. complex. He could have wrapped her in plastic, then placed her in a gym bag and tossed her into a dumpster.

2. I'm assuming he came back home to Steven's Point, Wisconsin, enough to observe the lay of the land along the roads he travelled. As I indicated in an earlier post, I am from that area of Wisconsin (within a 50-mile radius), and there are so many, many rural places he could have scoped out when planning this abduction. And, I think he was thinking of abducting someone long before the actual event (just a hunch).

As many are aware, Wisconsin and the surrounding states have lots of open area, populated with the occasional farm. The farmers I know are up around 5:00 a.m. (if not earlier), and they don't stop working until later on in the evening. They don't have time to scope out what's going on in the remote corners of their property. Several farm fields were adjacent to our property, and I don't recall seeing the owners on the land too much--only on an as-needed basis.

Remember the long time span before Jacob Wetterling was found? The perp. had to lead LE to Jacob's resting site. I'm suspecting we have the same scenario here. This is a bleak view to take, but I'm suspecting this is how things might go down.

Hopefully, BC blabbed to one of his informer cellmates, throwing out the occasional hint, as to what he did with her. Let's hope and pray this is the case, because I know LE will be investigating!

 

[kittythehare]

Kittythehare: I know, I really wonder as well. Still lurking in the back of my mind are two scenarios:

Graphic scenarios follow:

1. He disposed of her remains within a few miles of his appt. complex. He could have wrapped her in plastic, then placed her in a gym bag and tossed her into a dumpster.

2. I'm assuming he came back home to Steven's Point, Wisconsin, enough to observe the lay of the land along the roads he travelled. As I indicated in an earlier post, I am from that area of Wisconsin (within a 50-mile radius), and there are so many, many rural places he could have scoped out when planning this abduction. And, I think he was thinking of abducting someone long before the actual event (just a hunch).

As many are aware, Wisconsin and the surrounding states have lots of open area, populated with the occasional farm. The farmers I know are up around 5:00 a.m. (if not earlier), and they don't stop working until later on in the evening. They don't have time to scope out what's going on in the remote corners of their property. Several farm fields were adjacent to our property, and I don't recall seeing the owners on the land too much--only on an as-needed basis.

Remember the long time span before Jacob Wetterling was found? The perp. had to lead LE to Jacob's resting site. I'm suspecting we have the same scenario here. This is a bleak view to take, but I'm suspecting this is how things might go down.

Hopefully, BC blabbed to one of his informer cellmates, throwing out the occasional hint, as to what he did with her. Let's hope and pray this is the case, because I know LE will be investigating!

Both of those scenarios are likely, but like the quick setting cement theory, none of them would have called off a search.

It is likely the girl with the wire asked the question..
Did he refuse to tell her or give any hint at all?

And, if he had told her how he managed to destroy a body, there would have been no reason to use a jail informant, would there?

I wish we knew, I wish we could find her..

 

[crhedBngr]

Both of those scenarios are likely, but like the quick setting cement theory, none of them would have called off a search.

It is likely the girl with the wire asked the question..
Did he refuse to tell her or give any hint at all?

And, if he had told her how he managed to destroy a body, there would have been no reason to use a jail informant, would there?

I wish we knew, I wish we could find her..

RBBM

Yes, quick-setting cement is another possibility.

He may have hinted to the girl with the wire how things went down, just to try and impress her. Same with the jail informant. I'm suspecting he released snippets of info., keeping the location of YYZ to himself.

I believe he may have taped this; said tape is probably all the evidence LE has. If YYZ appeared to be deceased on this tape, they would have called off the search.

BC relishes his 15 minutes of fame. Once he gives up the location of YYZ, his "fame" will be history.

JMVHO.

 

[kittythehare]

RBBM

Yes, quick-setting cement is another possibility.

He may have hinted to the girl with the wire how things went down, just to try and impress her. Same with the jail informant. I'm suspecting he released snippets of info., keeping the location of YYZ to himself.

I believe he may have taped this; said tape is probably all the evidence LE has. If YYZ appeared to be deceased on this tape, they would have called off the search.

BC relishes his 15 minutes of fame. Once he gives up the location of YYZ, his "fame" will be history.

JMVHO.

But would they not have initiated a search for her body if they no longer believed her to be alive?
I'm beginning to think that he did something to render her body to such minute particles that she will never be found.. dissolved in some fashion, something we never thought of.. but , definitely pre-planned, as you say, is my instinct too..

A vat of acid he had stored somewhere in combination with many more chemicals.. something we have not thought of.. he would have had time to prepare for her disposal,he was cunning enough..he was highly intelligent..
only for that cctv, nobody would ever have suspected him- a perfect crime..

 

[Webthrush]

Both of those scenarios are likely, but like the quick setting cement theory, none of them would have called off a search.

It is likely the girl with the wire asked the question..
Did he refuse to tell her or give any hint at all?

And, if he had told her how he managed to destroy a body, there would have been no reason to use a jail informant, would there?

I wish we knew, I wish we could find her..

I believe police DO KNOW, in at least a general way, from BC’s early taped conversations, what he did with the body. IF you accept/believe the report given here by a poster earlier about a landfill being searched, then he may well have indicated placing the body in a dumpster, but perhaps not specifying which one — could have been at or near his apt. complex, or could’ve been 10 miles outside town, etc., so they may not know for sure the right landfill to search — also possible that only belongings and crime items were disposed of in dumpster, and body was destroyed by other means, like incineration — in any event I think police know in rough outline, if not specifics; otherwise I know of no reason they would conclude so early on that she was dead and offer no encouragement for searching.

 

[trunkizback]

Both of those scenarios are likely, but like the quick setting cement theory, none of them would have called off a search.

It is likely the girl with the wire asked the question..
Did he refuse to tell her or give any hint at all?

And, if he had told her how he managed to destroy a body, there would have been no reason to use a jail informant, would there?

I wish we knew, I wish we could find her..

We ( the public ) have pretty much been petty bystanders as far as " searches " go. At this juncture we can only hope that the FBI does indeed know the answers AND can prove them. If we all have to wait a full calender year just to find out the FBI doesn't know where she is or what happened, then they all need to be fired.

 

[Niner]

Monday, March 5th:
*Deadline to file Motion that court omitted (@ 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.
3/5: Deadline to file motion that court omitted; 5/18: State's disclosure re expert witnesses & expected evidence; 7/13: Def. Motion for any contested discovery; 8/24: Discovery Motions; 9/21: Def. deadline to give notice of intent to offer Atkins defense; 9/28: Motion to examine Defendant if 9/21 motion is filed; 10/16: Responses to pretrial motions; 11/16: Hearing on objections to Juror questionnaire; 12/14, 17, 18 & 19: Hearing on pretrial motions & jury questions; 1/4/19: Submission of proposed jury questionnaire; 1/11: Jury questionnaire mailed; 1/18: Objections to jury instructions; 2/1: Conf. on jury instructions & selection; 2/8: Motion in limine; 3/1: Response to Motion in limine; 3/4: Motion to strike potential jurors; 3/11: Pretrial Conf.; 3/25: Final Pretrial Conf.; 4/2: Jury Orientation; 4/3: Jury Selection begins; 4/9: Trial begins.

 

[Shiressleuth]

Monday, March 5th:
*Deadline to file Motion that court omitted (@ 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.
3/5: Deadline to file motion that court omitted; 5/18: State's disclosure re expert witnesses & expected evidence; 7/13: Def. Motion for any contested discovery; 8/24: Discovery Motions; 9/21: Def. deadline to give notice of intent to offer Atkins defense; 9/28: Motion to examine Defendant if 9/21 motion is filed; 10/16: Responses to pretrial motions; 11/16: Hearing on objections to Juror questionnaire; 12/14, 17, 18 & 19: Hearing on pretrial motions & jury questions; 1/4/19: Submission of proposed jury questionnaire; 1/11: Jury questionnaire mailed; 1/18: Objections to jury instructions; 2/1: Conf. on jury instructions & selection; 2/8: Motion in limine; 3/1: Response to Motion in limine; 3/4: Motion to strike potential jurors; 3/11: Pretrial Conf.; 3/25: Final Pretrial Conf.; 4/2: Jury Orientation; 4/3: Jury Selection begins; 4/9: Trial begins.

Re 9/21 Def deadline to give notice of intent to file Atkins defense. Is that connected with the diet during his mother's pregnancy? Is it concerning the fitness of def to be given the death penalty? If not what is the Atkins defense?

 

[Two for the road]

AFAIK from a law perspective, the Atkins defense was a VA law saying that it was an 8th amendment violation to sentence an intellectually disabled person to death.

His lawyers are going to claim he is intellectually disabled?!

 

[Hatfield]

AFAIK from a law perspective, the Atkins defense was a VA law saying that it was an 8th amendment violation to sentence an intellectually disabled person to death.

His lawyers are going to claim he is intellectually disabled?!

I was just looking it up too and that is what it is because notice the 2nd part below it where if he goes with that defense then the state is asking to be able to examine him with their own doctors.

I dont think we know if the defendent is even going with Atkins defense but it sounds like he was considering it. It would be an almost laughable defense strategy for someone like him with his high IQ.

"9/21: Def. deadline to give notice of intent to offer Atkins defense; 9/28: Motion to examine Defendant if 9/21 motion is filed;"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkins_v._Virginia

 

[kittythehare]

Re 9/21 Def deadline to give notice of intent to file Atkins defense. Is that connected with the diet during his mother's pregnancy? Is it concerning the fitness of def to be given the death penalty? If not what is the Atkins defense?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkins_v._Virginia

On appeal, the Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the conviction but reversed the sentence after finding that an improper sentencing verdict form had been used. At retrial, the prosecution proved two aggravating factors under Virginia law—that Atkins posed a risk of "future dangerousness" based on a string of previous violent convictions, and that the offense was committed in a vile manner. The state's witness, Dr. Stanton Samenow, countered the defense's arguments that Atkins was mentally retarded, by stating that Atkins's vocabulary, general knowledge and behavior suggested that he possessed at least average intelligence. As a result, Atkins's death sentence was upheld. The Virginia Supreme Court subsequently affirmed the sentence based on a prior Supreme Court decision, Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302 (1989). Justice Cynthia D. Kinser authored the five-member majority. Justices Leroy Rountree Hassell, Sr. and Lawrence L. Koontz, Jr. each authored dissenting opinions and joined in each other's dissent.

However, in same article states that law was subsequently revoked..

Means they're giving notice for a mitigating factor- insanity for the death penalty phase of the case, I think.

 

[Two for the road]

http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/reprint/32/3/304.pdf

The American Psychiatric Assn briefing on the case. Atkins defense is a loosely defined defense stating anyone with a mental or intellectual disability shouldn't be put to death because it is cruel and unusual.

One thing I don't understand is that the court needs to establish he has an intellectual disability. The above link is from 2004 and states are given the discretion to define what constitutes an intellectual disability and therefore could accept it as a defense to take the death penalty off the table. . . But just as in the original Atkins case, they have to PROVE that it wasn't other factors but his intellectual disability that caused him to murder YYZ. Good luck with that.

Personally I think this is grasping at straws.

The law wasn't revoked. The ruling in Atkins case was, and it was due to prosecutorial misconduct not the defense. Atkins v. State of VA ruling still is used today.

 

[kittythehare]

http://www.jaapl.org/cgi/reprint/32/3/304.pdf

The American Psychiatric Assn briefing on the case. Atkins defense is a loosely defined defense stating anyone with a mental or intellectual disability shouldn't be put to death because it is cruel and unusual.

One thing I don't understand is that the court needs to establish he has an intellectual disability. The above link is from 2004 and states are given the discretion to define what constitutes an intellectual disability and therefore could accept it as a defense to take the death penalty off the table. . . But just as in the original Atkins case, they have to PROVE that it wasn't other factors but his intellectual disability that caused him to murder YYZ. Good luck with that.

Personally I think this is grasping at straws.

The law wasn't revoked. The ruling in Atkins case was, and it was due to prosecutorial misconduct not the defense. Atkins v. State of VA ruling still is used today.

Twelve years later in Hall v. Florida the U.S. Supreme Court narrowed the discretion under which U.S. states can designate an individual convicted of murder as too intellectually incapacitated to be executed.[SUP][2][/SUP]

Hall v. Florida, 572 U.S. ___ (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a bright-line IQ threshold requirement for determining whether someone has an intellectual disability (formerly mental retardation) is unconstitutional in deciding whether they are eligible for the death penalty.[SUP][1][/SUP]
The case fleshed out standards first announced by the Court in Atkins v. Virginia, which left the determination of what constitutes intellectual disability to the states. In Atkins, the Court held that people are intellectually disabled and thus ineligible for the death penalty if these three conditions are met: 1.) “subaverage intellectual functioning,” meaning low I.Q. scores; 2.) a lack of fundamental social and practical skills; and 3.) the presence of both conditions before age 18.[SUP][2][/SUP] The Atkins court stated I.Q. scores under “approximately 70” typically indicate disability, but the court let the states determine who is mentally disabled and thus cannot be executed.[SUP][2][/SUP]
In Hall the Court narrowed the discretion under which U.S. states can designate an individual convicted of murder as too intellectually incapacitated to be executed.[SUP][3][/SUP] The Court prohibited states in borderline cases from relying only on intelligence test scores to determine whether a death row inmate is eligible to be executed. States must look beyond IQ scores when inmate tests are in the range of 70 to 75. IQ tests have a margin of error, and those inmates whose scores fall within the margin must be allowed to present other evidence of mental disability.[SUP][4][/SUP] The Court further held that the states may not use a "rigid rule" that denies leniency to defendants with severe mental disabilities simply because they score above 70 on an IQ test.[SUP][5][/SUP] Hall had scored a 71 instead of 70 on an I.Q. test.[SUP][2][/SUP] Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority that this "rigid rule, the court now holds, creates an unacceptable risk that persons with an intellectual disability will be executed, and thus is unconstitutional."[SUP][5][/SUP] If an individual claiming intellectual incapacity has an IQ score that falls somewhere between 70 and 75, then that individual’s lawyers must be allowed to offer additional clinical evidence of intellectual deficit, including, most importantly, the inability to learn basic skills and adapt to changing circumstances.[SUP][3]

ntellectual disability is a condition characterized by significant limitations in both intellectual functioning and in adaptive behavior, which covers many everyday social and practical skills, and originates before the age of 18, according to the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities,[SUP][6][/SUP] and the term is preferred by the medical profession.[SUP][7]


[/SUP][/SUP]

 

[Two for the road]

Kittythehare, you are correct. It seems there are trying to say BC can't be put to death bc of an ID or mental disability of some sort. Again, his lawyers will have a great time proving that. Unfortunately, there are plenty of quack neuropsychologists in IL that would say whatever the defense paid them to say and very few in IL that are certified to test him.

In any case, I kinda read that to mean "we know we're going to lose his case and there WILL be sentencing and now they have to find a way to weasel out of the death penalty.

 

[kittythehare]

Kittythehare, you are correct. It seems there are trying to say BC can't be put to death bc of an ID or mental disability of some sort. Again, his lawyers will have a great time proving that. Unfortunately, there are plenty of quack neuropsychologists in IL that would say whatever the defense paid them to say and very few in IL that are certified to test him.

In any case, I kinda read that to mean "we know we're going to lose his case and there WILL be sentencing and now they have to find a way to weasel out of the death penalty.

There is no doubt they pulled everything out of the bag to the point of vexatious, at one point the judge even remarked upon it..

This over worked, under funded, oh so terribly busy firm casting every expensive red herring at the prosecution is almost like witnessing a tantrum..

it is not strange they did not know of the changes..
Careless of them..

 

[trunkizback]

Monday, March 5th:
*Deadline to file Motion that court omitted (@ 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.
3/5: Deadline to file motion that court omitted; 5/18: State's disclosure re expert witnesses & expected evidence; 7/13: Def. Motion for any contested discovery; 8/24: Discovery Motions; 9/21: Def. deadline to give notice of intent to offer Atkins defense; 9/28: Motion to examine Defendant if 9/21 motion is filed; 10/16: Responses to pretrial motions; 11/16: Hearing on objections to Juror questionnaire; 12/14, 17, 18 & 19: Hearing on pretrial motions & jury questions; 1/4/19: Submission of proposed jury questionnaire; 1/11: Jury questionnaire mailed; 1/18: Objections to jury instructions; 2/1: Conf. on jury instructions & selection; 2/8: Motion in limine; 3/1: Response to Motion in limine; 3/4: Motion to strike potential jurors; 3/11: Pretrial Conf.; 3/25: Final Pretrial Conf.; 4/2: Jury Orientation; 4/3: Jury Selection begins; 4/9: Trial begins.

Am I reading this correctly? The trial won't start until April of 2019???

 

[Niner]

Am I reading this correctly? The trial won't start until April of 2019???

Yep! They have a TON of motions to go through....

 

[Shiressleuth]

Am I reading this correctly? The trial won't start until April of 2019???

The pre-trial motions take up 7 months (now till Oct)while considering them and jury procedures take up another 6 months (Oct to April). It's crazy but normal I guess.

 

[Shiressleuth]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_in_limine

I had to look up what this meant so thought I would post the wiki for others.

It's about excluding certain evidence - whatever that may be we may not know but I am guessing it is likely the secret recordings.