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

[crhedBngr]

Yup. He was out hunting for his first kill because his wife was out of town for the weekend and he had a window of opportunity to do it, he had his set of characteristics of an ideal victim in his mind, he saw her and she matched them to a sufficient extent, and she was alone at the stop at a time of day when that part of campus is relatively dead; so he went for it.

My wife is Chinese, and when we were talking a bit about the case right after BC's arrest, she gave me some insight on why YY might have thought it was ok to accept a ride from BC. It's late and it would take a while to write it, so I'll try to post it tomorrow.

RBBM

I can't wait to hear her thoughts on this as well.

Just heard on the radio that BC's lawyers have filed a motion to exclude testimony of a panel of expert witnesses. More details later if I get them....

Ugh. Let's hope the judge doesn't allow this.

 

[dm92]

RBBM

I can't wait to hear her thoughts on this as well.



Ugh. Let's hope the judge doesn't allow this.

Sorry I haven't been able to get to it yet. I will; it just might take another day or two.

I think prosecutors need to be careful with this judge. I think he is a good judge. He is supposed to be very fair and even-handed. He does, from what I have read about him, take a defendant's rights in the trial process VERY seriously, and is very mindful of making sure their rights are not trampled during the process. He has another high-profile case on his docket: the upcoming trial of former US Representative Aaron Schrock for allegedly mis-using ~$150,000 in campaign funds for decorating his office. I believe he has chided prosecutors in that case for some of their motions and has ruled against allowing some things to be included in testimony. So, they need to be careful about how they go about things. It would be a disaster if some key witness or testimony critical for making their case is not allowed.

 

[dm92]

Another thing I noticed today:

UIPD set up a webpage when Yingying went missing that they used to communicate updates on the search for her to the community. They continued to provide updates after the initial arrest, but had not provided a new update since August. I haven't expected them to use it, as they are basically working to prepare for the trial, and the FBI is probably doing most of the work now, but I figured that they still might use it to announce any breaking news in the search for her. So, I have been briefly stopping by the page a couple of times every week, just to basically see if it is still up and running.

http://police.illinois.edu/search-updates/

It was up and running yesterday, but today the page will not load.

It could be just a technical issue, or they could have decided to take it down because they don't plan to use it anymore, with most announcements now coming from the FBI or DOJ; but I did find it interesting that it is not working now, just a day or two after the collection of the Wayne County remains has concluded.

Probably nothing more than a coincidence, but I thought I'd pass it on....

 

[Shiressleuth]

This should be interesting... "expert witnesses" at what??? (psychology? forensics? physical remains?...). I would think they'd be trying to block the admissibility of BC's secretly-taped conversations with a friend.

Maybe expert witnesses that say YY was in the apartment. While there is no body as evidence, if they get the experts excluded then it is only that tape from the vigil - he will then say he was just fantasizing, I bet. I hope the video evidence, (of her being taken to past where he says he dropped her off) is good. Let's pray the Wayne County remains are YY.

 

[Gardener1850]

Here's the latest on the Wayne County remains:

http://www.wfiwradio.com/2018/01/02/headlines-for-tuesday-january-2-2018/

now they are saying the remains were found inside a blanket on top of a burn pile. Makes it sound like someone was trying to burn them

confusing. First they were reporting there was a fire, then no fire, and now they are saying it was on a burn pile. no idea if they could tell how recent the burning was done. If it looks like they were burned in the past couple of months, no way it could be YY.....

Here is a thread for the above remains: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-Blanket-in-Burn-Pile-near-Boyleston-Dec-2017

 

[tarabull]

dm92.....link worked for me....maybe give it another whirl. :wave:

 

[dm92]

Finally, here's the story on the motion filed by BC's defense yesterday.....

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/lo...ppers-lawyers-seek-bar-testimony-experts.html

 

[dm92]

dm92.....link worked for me....maybe give it another whirl. :wave:

Yup, works for me now as well.

Like I said, I stop by that page briefly every week just to see if there is any indication of anything thst might be coming. Must have just been some website maintenance or a technical glitch.....

 

[Hatfield]

Sorry I haven't been able to get to it yet. I will; it just might take another day or two.

I think prosecutors need to be careful with this judge. I think he is a good judge. He is supposed to be very fair and even-handed. He does, from what I have read about him, take a defendant's rights in the trial process VERY seriously, and is very mindful of making sure their rights are not trampled during the process. He has another high-profile case on his docket: the upcoming trial of former US Representative Aaron Schrock for allegedly mis-using ~$150,000 in campaign funds for decorating his office. I believe he has chided prosecutors in that case for some of their motions and has ruled against allowing some things to be included in testimony. So, they need to be careful about how they go about things. It would be a disaster if some key witness or testimony critical for making their case is not allowed.

I agree about prosecuters need to be sure to follow the rules and not take things for granted. This case is going to be tough enough without a body if its not found before trial.

If the rules state that a summary should have been provided then I am really surprised that prosecuters did not do one for each witness. That seems like a standard thing. Not sure of the rules though. It will be interesting to see how this pans out.

Lets hope prosecuters dot all the i's and cross all the t's in this case. I think they have the right guy but they need to be careful to do things right.

 

[Hatfield]

Finally, here's the story on the motion filed by BC's defense yesterday.....

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/lo...ppers-lawyers-seek-bar-testimony-experts.html

Thanks for the update.

I think his defense is doing their job. Lets hope the prosecution is doing everything right. This is going to be really interesting as we go forward.

OT
I dont know much about lawyers and the rules of things but one tactic I saw in another case that really disturbed me was when a prosecuter gave the defense their disclosed evidence on CD form and it turned out to be tons of information and was given very late after many delays. It seemed to be a dirty trick. Not only that but I think they purposely gave the dump of data unorganized so the defense would have to pour through it to see how things fit together.

I am a firm believer that a trial should be done fairly to both sides and if the evidence is strong enough then games do not and should not have to be played by either side.

 

[Shiressleuth]

Finally, here's the story on the motion filed by BC's defense yesterday.....

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/lo...ppers-lawyers-seek-bar-testimony-experts.html

By doing this they are almost forcing the prosecution to make a decision to go for the death penalty it seems to me. Aren't such experts normal at trials? Why did the prosecution miss such an important deadline anyway ? Wth are they playing at?

 

[Webthrush]

Finally, here's the story on the motion filed by BC's defense yesterday.....

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/lo...ppers-lawyers-seek-bar-testimony-experts.html

ughhh, sure hope this doesn't all lead to another delay in trial start-date (but of course won't be surprised by another postponement)... so much for the Constitutional guarantee to a "speedy trial" 8-/

On a different note, and realizing there would be a lot of variability, anyone know how long it ought take a body exposed to the elements to typically fully skeletonize? (re: the Boyleston body)

 

[Hatfield]

ughhh, sure hope this doesn't all lead to another delay in trial start-date (but of course won't be surprised by another postponement)... so much for the Constitutional guarantee to a "speedy trial" 8-/

On a different note, and realizing there would be a lot of variability, anyone know how long it ought take a body exposed to the elements to typically fully skeletonize? (re: the Boyleston body)

Re BBM

Its a good question and you are right that it really varies a lot depending on where a body has been placed and the climate. I was surprised in one case how quick bones were the only thing found on a victim.

The other thing to consider is that I am pretty sure sometimes they would describe a body as mostly bones when tissue and bits of clothing are probably still on the body too. They may generically say it was all bones just because most of it was bones. Here is one link that described it below.

"Remains may become reduced to bone in as little as three weeks but can take up to several years. Factors including temperature and environment determine the timeline of skeletonization. In a tropical climate the body may be reduced to bone in just a few weeks, in tundra, the process will take several years."

http://www.thepostmortempost.com/2015/10/01/stage-7-skeletonization/

 

[Niner]

Here's an excerpt from the hearing Tuesday:

Accused kidnapper's lawyers seek to bar testimony from experts
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/lo...ppers-lawyers-seek-bar-testimony-experts.html

URBANA — Prosecutors plan to bring in at least 10 experts to testify at the trial of accused kidnapper and killer Brendt Christensen, according to his lawyers, in topics ranging from fingerprint analysis and electronic forensics to canine cadaver searches and Chinese culture. But if his lawyers have their way, none of them will be able to testify.
They filed a motion this week to bar any expert testimony by the government, arguing that prosecutors failed to provide them with analyses of forensic evidence by the court-ordered Dec. 15 deadline.
[.....]
U.S. District Court Judge Colin Bruce said prosecutors have until Tuesday to respond.
If prosecutors failed to provide all of the required forensic analysis, Christensen's lawyers say any undisclosed evidence could be barred from trial. The court could also order it to be disclosed at a later time or grant a delay.
[.....]
Bruce denied the request but said that if prosecutors decide to seek the death penalty, he'd "welcome a renewed motion to continue the trial."

The government has until Feb. 1 to decide whether to seek the death penalty. That decision is ultimately U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions' to make.

re bold - Tuesday, Jan. 9th I going to assume.

 

[crhedBngr]

Sorry I haven't been able to get to it yet. I will; it just might take another day or two.

I think prosecutors need to be careful with this judge. I think he is a good judge. He is supposed to be very fair and even-handed. He does, from what I have read about him, take a defendant's rights in the trial process VERY seriously, and is very mindful of making sure their rights are not trampled during the process. He has another high-profile case on his docket: the upcoming trial of former US Representative Aaron Schrock for allegedly mis-using ~$150,000 in campaign funds for decorating his office. I believe he has chided prosecutors in that case for some of their motions and has ruled against allowing some things to be included in testimony. So, they need to be careful about how they go about things. It would be a disaster if some key witness or testimony critical for making their case is not allowed.

RBBM

Okay, NP. We don't want you to stress over posting this.

 

[dm92]

RBBM

Okay, NP. We don't want you to stress over posting this.

Don't worry, I'm not. I just didn't want anyone to think I was getting cold feet and going back on what I had promised. Also trying to remember everything we talked about.....

 

[Webthrush]

Don't worry, I'm not. I just didn't want anyone to think I was getting cold feet and going back on what I had promised. Also trying to remember everything we talked about.....

I’m not sure how much you have to add to it, but this was actually discussed here quite awhile back; saying that Chinese students, if not foreign students in general, will often feel deferential to other Americans, so it’s no surprise that if BC presented himself as a police officer or an Uber driver or simply a fellow student trying to be helpful, YY could easily be coaxed to accept a ride, not wanting to appear rude and already in a hurry, because she was running late for an appointment. Most foreign visitors here probably underestimate the simple dangers possible every day.
Like others, I think BC was just cruising for a vulnerable victim that was his "type," and poor YY chanced to be at the wrong place at the wrong moment.

 

[dm92]

By doing this they are almost forcing the prosecution to make a decision to go for the death penalty it seems to me. Aren't such experts normal at trials? Why did the prosecution miss such an important deadline anyway ? Wth are they playing at?

Not sure. I've not heard any allegations that the US Attorneys here are inept bunglers, so I'm not sure why they would allow themselves to miss a deadline like this.

However, the hearing at the DOJ where the panel decides whether or not to seek the death penalty is confidential, and may have already been held. IF they do seek death, the trial will almost certainly be delayed further, and probably by a significant number of months. Perhaps the prosecutors know already that the DOJ will seek the death penalty, so everything will be pushed back significantly and there will be new deadlines set by the judge. We will find out what their reasoning is by next Tuesday.....

 

[dm92]

I’m not sure how much you have to add to it, but this was actually discussed here quite awhile back; saying that Chinese students, if not foreign students in general, will often feel deferential to other Americans, so it’s no surprise that if BC presented himself as a police officer or an Uber driver or simply a fellow student trying to be helpful, YY could easily be coaxed to accept a ride, not wanting to appear rude and already in a hurry, because she was running late for an appointment. Most foreign visitors here probably underestimate the simple dangers possible every day.

Like others, I think BC was just cruising for a vulnerable victim that was his "type," and poor YY chanced to be at the wrong place at the wrong moment.

You are on the right track, but I wouldn't so much say '"deferential to other Americans" as I would say perhaps putting too much trust in someone's character because they are a student seeking an advanced degree at a prestigious university. Also, a great deal of emphasis on running late......

More later.

 

[dm92]

ughhh, sure hope this doesn't all lead to another delay in trial start-date (but of course won't be surprised by another postponement)... so much for the Constitutional guarantee to a "speedy trial" 8-/

Remember, if they decide to seek the death penalty, there will almost certainly be another delay -perhaps a significant delay of many more months. Perhaps that is why prosecutors let this deadline pass; they may know already that the DOJ will seek death, and that the judge will push everything back and will just be setting new deadlines anyway......

I hope it is something like this, and not some inexplicable inept bungling........