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

[AnemoneBrown]

Yes, especially when cleaning is not his thing per previous testimony. If the whole apt smelled of bleach. That would be unusual for the guy who doesn't like to clean. I just wonder how hard the detectives went at interviewing her. I wish there was video of that.

I think prosecution may have stated he googled knife sharpening and she was trying to neutralise that. Not 100% sure of that.
She stated she had asked him to sharpen them but that he had not done so.
There was no need for her to mention it at all, it served no purposes, we had evidence he googled detergents to remove blood stains.
She also said there was no smell when she returned, that's hard to believe.

 

[kittythehare]

Yes, especially when cleaning is not his thing per previous testimony. If the whole house smelled of bleach. That would be weird for the guy who doesn't like to clean. I just wonder how hard the detectives went at interviewing her. I wish there was video of that.

She has not been charged with a crime.
She is not a suspect.
There is no evidence linking her to any part of the crime of slaughtering YingYing.
If there is, we don't know about it.
That was stupidity today.
But his defense placed her in that position. Her husband or ex-husband placed her in that position or she placed herself in that position.
She will have to live with those consequences for the rest of her life.
Hopefully, she gets well herself in time.
But BC is highly deluded if he thinks she will spend the next 40 yrs of her life spoonfeeding him.
She needs to break free.
We've all done stupid things in relationships, she is no different.
I reckon she will cry tonight but it may take a long while before the reality of her actions and her, at best, misplaced loyalties hit home.

 

[AnemoneBrown]

Thank you for your reply. She has not been charged with a crime. Yes, but that doesn't mean she isn't guilty of one (whether a conspirator or an accessory after the fact.) I'm not accusing her of a crime but just said we don't know. I said I wonder how hard the police went at her and I still wonder that. I hope if she knew more than she told, they detected it.

She chose to testify for the defense and with that public choice comes public opinions and public scrutiny. Her sworn testimony is fair game for discussion of this case.

She has not been charged with a crime.
She is not a suspect.
There is no evidence linking her to any part of the crime of slaughtering YingYing.
If there is, we don't know about it.
That was stupidity today.
But his defense placed her in that position. Her husband or ex-husband placed her in that position or she placed herself in that position.
She will have to live with those consequences for the rest of her life.
Hopefully, she gets well herself in time.
But BC is highly deluded if he thinks she will spend the next 40 yrs of her life spoonfeeding him.
She needs to break free.
We've all done stupid things in relationships, she is no different.
I reckon she will cry tonight but it may take a long while before the reality of her actions and her, at best, misplaced loyalties hit home.

 

[kittythehare]

Thank you for your reply. She has not been charged with a crime. Yes, but that doesn't mean she isn't guilty of one (whether a conspirator or an accessory after the fact.) I'm not accusing her of a crime but just said we don't know. I said I wonder how hard the police went at her and I still wonder that. I hope if she knew more than she told, they detected it.

She chose to testify for the defense and with that public choice comes public opinions and public scrutiny. Her sworn testimony is fair game for discussion of this case.

Her testimony is.But he allegedly did it.
Whereas YingYing played no active part in her own demise, she was wholly a victim., I don't believe Michelle did either.
See early Gazette reports discussing some details of her interactions with the police. They were all pretty positive. She was quite open with them.
My reticience is because of my ignorance, primarily, I just read tweets and a few short news articles.
I am reluctant to contribute to her demise or join in a witch hunt against her (sorry for using the wc word)
One woman is dead.

And forgive me if it sounds like virtue signalling, but I dont want to contribute to the demise of another of Christensen's victims.
I dont know whether she was complicit or brain-fried.
None of us do because we did not see her testifying.

 

[AnemoneBrown]

Per this report the entire defense strategy is geared toward sparing his life. Day 8: Ex-wife takes the stand; prosecution rests case in Chinese scholar’s slaying trial

 

[Webthrush]

OK I just watched this hour-long Justice Network TV show “Confessions of a Serial Killer: Ted Bundy” — thought it was some sort of re-run, but it actually turns out to be a new series on serial killers with the first episode by chance on Bundy. It’s a docu-drama format with mostly dramatic re-enactments, but based on facts and Bundy’s actual words — in this case based on Bundy's death-row confessions prior to electrocution.

I hesitate to draw too many conclusions from these, but here are the points or similarities I noted that some may find of some interest (…but a caution that I think it possible that BC didn’t do all he claimed, but simply had a Bundy-like script or fantasy in his head of what he wanted to do):

1) Bundy smashed the heads of many of his victims, and also severed some heads.

2) He buried most victims deeply in forested or ravine areas at significant distance from where they were abducted; sometimes covered them with rocks before putting final layer of dirt over them (hoping to avoid animals digging them up).

3) He viewed his victims as mere objects or possessions; lacked any empathy for victims or their families.

4) As a sociological narcissist he fancied himself smarter than others, a center of attention, on a stage as a sort of dramatist or performer, and he was “a natural-born storyteller;” he always sought to hold power over those around him.
He was also a charmer, women drawn to him; even in prison had plenty of female suitors.

5) In prison he was constantly trying to delay the whole process, of trial, of legal moves, of his execution.

Make of it what you will....

 

[kittythehare]

OK I just watched this hour-long Justice Network TV show “Confessions of a Serial Killer: Ted Bundy” — thought it was some sort of re-run, but it actually turns out to be a new series on serial killers with the first episode by chance on Bundy. It’s a docu-drama format with mostly dramatic re-enactments, but based on facts and Bundy’s actual words — in this case based on Bundy's death-row confessions prior to electrocution.

I hesitate to draw too many conclusions from these, but here are the points or similarities I noted that some may find of some interest (…but a caution that I think it possible that BC didn’t do all he claimed, but simply had a Bundy-like script or fantasy in his head of what he wanted to do):

1) Bundy smashed the heads of many of his victims, and also severed some heads.

2) He buried most victims deeply in forested or ravine areas at significant distance from where they were abducted; sometimes covered them with rocks before putting final layer of dirt over them (hoping to avoid animals digging them up).

3) He viewed his victims as mere objects or possessions; lacked any empathy for victims or their families.

4) As a sociological narcissist he fancied himself smarter than others, a center of attention, on a stage as a sort of dramatist or performer, and he was “a natural-born storyteller;” he always sought to hold power over those around him.
He was also a charmer, women drawn to him; even in prison had plenty of female suitors.

5) In prison he was constantly trying to delay the whole process, of trial, of legal moves, of his execution.

Make of it what you will....

That's brilliant work @Webthrush! Was any reason for his wanting to or actual killing presented- what did he gain by the killings?

 

[katydid23]

If my husband murdered a college girl, believe me, his defense team would not be calling me as his witness.

 

[Webthrush]

That's brilliant work @Webthrush! Was any reason for his wanting to or actual killing presented- what did he gain by the killings?

well, he raped most of his victims (always young attractive females) and did perverse/deviant things to them (though those weren't detailed), but otherwise it just seemed a sort of power trip (being able to get away with it so easily, and manipulate people), and they did trace back to a rejection from an early (perhaps first major) girlfriend.
...But that complete lack of empathy or feeling for others probably goes back to something in childhood.
(The show is very focused on his end-of-life confessions; leaves out a lot of details from his early life that other books cover.)

 

[tresir2012]

Thanks for that @Webthrush.
I don't even have a hint of a 'feel' for what they might come up with tactically.
A lot depends on how much credibility they imagine she has gained with jury after tody.
Prosecution objected several times to their line of questioning and actually requestioned her as a result of their tactics.
If she managed to cast considerable doubt on his alleged state of drunkenness, they may need to re-consider their tactics ... I cannot find info to put this question to rest.
Was she successful or not?
all the interest in this case at outset, now only 3 are tweeting during intervals..
It's the most frustrating thing.

I'm wondering if he is somehow going to say it was consensual and an accident (a bit like the perp in sydney loofe case). atm the defence have only admitted BC killed her, BC has pleade not guilty and may say it was all a mutual fantasy scenario that went wrong or something.

why does the drunkenness matter? why would that change the reality of the confession at the vigil?

 

[MomminIt]

I read Ann Rule’s book on Ted Bundy in high school. I remember not being able to sleep and having to turn the lights on. Ted Bundy never talked to anyone or admitted his crimes until he was signed, sealed, delivered.

I think Michelle could either get the remains location out of him or she could point investigators to a location BC & Michelle visited once before or she heard him talk about in the past. He talked a lot. He talked and acted leading up to it and he talked after he did it. He even talked during some parts probably as his phone was only off for a few hours. He’s a talker. It’s just a matter of her remembering and/or connecting the dots.

 

[tresir2012]

FBI Special Agent Greg Catey is called to the witness stand. Catey has 16+ years of experience in cellular call detail records and is considered an “expert in the field”. @WCIA3

Catey confirms that cell phone records show both Yingying and BC’s phones stopped sending text messages and phone calls around 2 p.m. on June 9, the day Yingying was last seen.

Catey indicates BC didn’t send any texts or make any phone calls for around five hours around the time of Yingying’s disappearance. Catey indicates this was unusual compared to BC’s typical cell phone usage.




Catey says records show that Yingying’s phone was disabled around 2/2:30 on June 9, 2017. He didn’t know how. Cross examination questioned if the phone was ever found. Catey says no.

Ok here's the 5 hours I remembered from previously. And YY's phone? he could have just turned it off/removed the battery or wrapped it in tin foil or a metal crisp packet and disposed of it. He could have done the crisp packet trick with his phone too and kept it with him while he travelled to dispose of her remains.

 

[MomminIt]

Let’s supposed he abducted, committed the abhorrent acts we know he did, and then disposed of her in that 5 hours. He was probably still cleaning up while texting his lovers, especially considering he took a break to watch some *advertiser censored*. Although, that could’ve been a ruse, seeing as he thinks himself so clever.

 

[Webthrush]

This may have already been asked and answered at some point, but I can’t remember:
BC pled “NOT guilty” then his Defense begins the case proclaiming ‘he did it, kidnapped and killed YY’!

Why can’t BC (or someone on his behalf) ask for a mistrial simply based upon misrepresentation or inadequate Defense?
I still don't get how the court system allows the defendant to state one thing and his Defense team to then say the opposite?

 

[MomminIt]

This may have already been asked and answered at some point, but I can’t remember:
BC pled “NOT guilty” then his Defense begins the case proclaiming ‘he did it, kidnapped and killed YY’!

Why can’t BC (or someone on his behalf) ask for a mistrial simply based upon misrepresentation or inadequate Defense?
I still don't get how the court system allows the defendant to state one thing and his Defense team to then say the opposite?

I don’t like it. I think it’s a shady tactic to get a mistrial or an appeal down the road.

 

[kittythehare]

I'm wondering if he is somehow going to say it was consensual and an accident (a bit like the perp in sydney loofe case). atm the defence have only admitted BC killed her, BC has pleade not guilty and may say it was all a mutual fantasy scenario that went wrong or something.

why does the drunkenness matter? why would that change the reality of the confession at the vigil?

He's not gona be saying anything at all. The thing is over. Just the closing on Monday.
What he has said, via his lawyers was that Tb only did it for money...
he was sent to therapy as a condition towards saving his marriage.
People who are 'sent' to therapy are not sincerely there.
Instead of testifying himself, his defense submitted a video of his therapy session where he was on his best behaviour, lying frequently, told therapists he had considered harming others but in a fleeting sort of way, he had changed.. he wouldn't be able to live with the 'guilt' of killing someone.
9 weeks later he went ad did just that. He killed someone, allegedly.
He offered no alternative scenario, just depressed and with drug and alcohol problems and a cowboy and western style heartachey whine about the loss of his marriage, though he never really lost it at all.
So it was all waffle, really, I imagine it lacked credibility.
The drunkenness was a ruse that he was talking nonsense on the vigil tape.. people do talk nonsense, exaggerate and lie while drunk. But TB got that effectively neutralised yesterday because she said she had drunk as much as he did and it was highly diluted spirits- rum, I think.
It was always going to be a very streamlined type trial, a pre-agreed frame of reference.
The exhibits prove and disprove the lies
They're all here Exhibits | Central District of Illinois | United States District Court

 

[trunkizback]

well, Monday and both sides will do their closings. The prosecutions will be pretty self explanatory. Just curious to see what red herring type of tomfoolery the defense will pitch.
I'd like to do a poll here. If you were on the jury..what say you?
Me: Guilty...and LWOP

 

[Webthrush]

According to the phone records (posted previously, & below), BC messages wife Michelle just 1 hr. and 26 mins. after abducting YY! Anything’s possible, but I have a hard time imagining that he's messaging his wife while in the middle of doing things to YY, so I think she’s already dead well within the first 90 mins.
https://www.ilcd.uscourts.gov/sites/ilcd/files/Govt Ex 34.pdf

 

[MomminIt]

Guilty- Penalty

 

[kittythehare]

This may have already been asked and answered at some point, but I can’t remember:
BC pled “NOT guilty” then his Defense begins the case proclaiming ‘he did it, kidnapped and killed YY’!

Why can’t BC (or someone on his behalf) ask for a mistrial simply based upon misrepresentation or inadequate Defense?
I still don't get how the court system allows the defendant to state one thing and his Defense team to then say the opposite?

all the coourt reporters today reported that the judge invited him to speak and asked several questions to clarify his answer..
Could he still? I don't know, I was wondering about it earlier- at what stage is it too late to speak? After the wrapping up or after the verdict or after the penalty phase?
So in order to go through the process, a trial must be held, a jury must judge and then the sentencing stage commences.
It is not possible in law to go straight to sentencing and in a dP case there are even more stringent rules to be observed.
I was trying to understand it through her family's eyes and I hit a stone wall.
Her name wasn't even mentioned once today.
As if she never existed.
There's enough proof in the exhibits that he is a complete habitual liar....
They have all that evidence against him.
They knew he had multiple sexual partners, he says he had no friends.
He was dishonest with Michelle.
She knew it before she took the stand today because the exhibit list is public.
He couldn't testify because he knew the dice was stacked against him.
It was a hopeless case.
He has shown no remorse at all.
He became animated today because he was acting a role with Michelle.
He's very very like your excellent description of Bundy.
I knew it would be bad but to thrust the fake therapy sessions in front of the jurors , when everybody knew he was either attending out of duress or it was part of his plan to kill a person in case he got caught.
What were the therapists supposed to do?
They gave him contacts for the problem he said he had. It was up to him to follow through. He could walk, talk and get around town and make appointments
He didn't present enough of a case for them to call the emergency services.
They presented this farce as if it was his testimony as if they believed it to be the truth, all the while knowing that probably every word he uttered was a lie.

They also did it because he mentioned his mother was an alcoholic.
And that may be useful for appeals which can only be based on the original trial testimony/lies/BS whatecver.. got the mental health dagnosis, his own, in there in a neat move. Horrible thing to do.