IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 *Arrest* #41

[The Farm]

Went to the link, only background chatter and Dow Jones. Maybe 3 pm central?

Ok maybe that's it. All I hear is background also.

 

[Gardenista]

to when??

IHNI

 

[Cococat]

Yes but it was the security camera video that nailed it for them. So glad those residents had it.

Has the hearing still not started, nothing is happening??

It was cancelled when he got the new lawyers

 

[SharonNeedles]

For Brooklyn, sunset was more like 8:41 - 8:45 with the end of civilian twilight (when you must put your headlights on) a half-hour after sunset, so no later than 9:15 for being to dark for MT to run, and maybe 9:30 for CR stumbling around in a dark corn field with a body over his shoulder, and having to use his phone to find his way back to Brooklyn because it was then dark.

So, by your estimation MT would have had an hour or more daylight to reach mom's house for dinner and to pick up the car and a shirt. Plenty of time if she was going out or coming back on 385th by 8:28. And it would not be out of the question for MT to be on 385 "the blacktop" if she were training for a half-marathon or to trim up/slim down for the beach, for her up coming trip to the DR for the wedding.

Or - she was what, 3 blocks? From mom’s house at that point?

 

[The Farm]

Ahhhhh I remember but when I saw it mentioned up above earlier I thought maybe it was not correct.

Right under where the video is supposed to be it says 3pm-ET for CR. And there is background noise so it is open?

 

[Bravo]

Yes it was cancelled when he got new Lawyers yet the article has today's date.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

CR would have had to be under arrest or detained (in custody) for Miranda to be an arguable issue. LE informing CR they have video of (him driving and following MT in) the Chevy Malibu might have been the catalyst that led to CR cooperating. I'm guessing LE did not arrest CR until after he led them to MT.

 

[wary]

Ahhhhh I remember but when I saw it mentioned up above earlier I thought maybe it was not correct.

Right under where the video is supposed to be it says 3pm-ET for CR. And there is background noise so it is open?

No preliminary hearing. It doesn't matter if there's background noise.

 

[Niner]

Man accused of killing Mollie Tibbetts waives preliminary hearing

I get:
We're Sorry!
This site is not available in your region.

can someone give a 10% synopsis on this article, please!

 

[CuriousCricket]

IHNI

Waived, not postponed -- so maybe never?

 

[Deleted member 718]

I get:
We're Sorry!
This site is not available in your region.

can someone give a 10% synopsis on this article, please!

UPDATE: The man accused of killing 20-year-old Mollie Tibbetts has retained new counsel in his murder trial and waived his preliminary hearing.

Twenty-four-year-old Cristhian Rivera is charged with first degree murder in Tibbetts’ death.

Online court records show the attorney that represented him during his initial appearance last Wednesday, Allan M. Richards, is no longer his counsel. Documents show Chad R. Frese of Kaplan & Frese, LLP and Jennifer J. Frese, of Johnson, Bonzer & Barnaby, P.C. are now representing Rivera.

Rivera’s new attorneys have waived his preliminary hearing, which had been scheduled for August 31st. They’ve also filed a motion to withdraw any previous motions filed by Richards while he represented Rivera – that includes a motion for a gag order

 

[Charliegizmo49]

Yes but it was the security camera video that nailed it for them. So glad those residents had it.

Has the hearing still not started, nothing is happening??

He waived prelim hearing. The court should have cancelled time set aside.

 

[Al Hoffman]

The hearing today was waived.

I was hoping that there had been some change. Apparently not! Maybe at the top of the hour? Probably not.

 

[wary]

Waived, not postponed -- so maybe never?

Right, almost certainly never.

Possible reasons:
1: with what we know, there's absolutely no chance that a judge would not move the case along to trial--not when he led them to her body--the bar at a preliminary hearing is set extremely low.
2: the defense attorneys can get all of the prosecution's evidence through discovery--they don't have to use the preliminary hearing to find out what the prosecution has. (Evidently all the Perry Mason novels were written in a pre-discovery era--when did that change?)
3: So, from the defense's standpoint, the preliminary hearing just serves to create more bad publicity in the community--making the eventual job of seating an impartial jury even more difficult.
4: possibly more expenses--not desirable if the attorneys took the case pro bono

 

[ChuckMaureen]

bbm

Good point, and an even better basis on which to challenge Miranda in this case. You point out that Miranda must be given when the suspect is in custody, which also means that the suspect does not (in his opinion) have a reasonable expectation of walking away. At what point does an undocumented immigrant have a reasonable expectation of walking away? If ICE was in the room, or even just provided an interpreter, would an undocumented alien feel free to just get up and walk out of the room? That is when custody begins, and I'm sure that this team of LE did Mirandize as early as possible, when it became apparent that CBR was of increasing interest, and before CBR said anything substantive. If the FBI were involved, I am sure of this. I was personally involved in a Capitol Murder case that was pled down to 20 years because 5 of 7 incriminating statements were thrown out by the Judge. It does happen in real life.

However, this example underscores reasons why a cultural milieu inability to say no might be a valid basis on which to suppress CR's confession. It is a kind of diminished capacity argument, but one that does not absolve CR of his guilt of the crime.

All of this is just a posit of course, and I am looking forward to seeing just what the defense will do next. I'm not worried about the eventual outcome of the game, I'm just curious about the possible point spread and how the game will be played.

Whether or not an "undocumented alien" (I prefer "undocumented immigrant") being detained or a citizen being detained, neither would be expected to maintain a "reasonable expectation of walking away" or "feel free to just get up and walk out of the room", when confronted with what LE has on video.

MOO

 

[ACG2x]

When a defendant waives a preliminary hearing it usually means several (or most) of the following that the defendant (or their attorneys):

- Knows there is ample evidence against them and the case will go to trial anyway so it will be a waste of time
- Plans to plead guilty and wants to avoid more negative publicity for themselves or their family
- Is guilty of more offenses than what was originally charged and fears evidence of those additional offenses will come out at preliminary hearing. Remember by the time the prelim hearing happens the prosecution has had time to do additional DNA and other testing
- Nature of offense is vicious, violent or nasty and if the defendant plans to plead guilty anyway, keeping that information off the public record can help the defendant before the sentencing judge
- Prosecution's case is extremely strong and defense lawyers fear prosecution witnesses may become so firmly attached to their positions at prelim that they may become angrier with the defendant and thus refuse later interviews requested by defense to prepare for trial

There are other reasons but these are the ones that likely apply to the killer in this case. Honestly, the most simple explanation why the preliminary hearing was waived is because the case is so strong it would go to trial anyway. In many murder cases where a defendant waives prelim, their attorneys are trying to cut a deal for a lesser charge (such as Murder Two or Manslaughter vs. Murder One) to get a sentence that isn't life w/o parole or death in DP states of which I know Iowa is not one.

It appears the killer's attorney's are trying to see if there is any way he can plead guilty to something lesser than Murder One and get say 20-40 in prison with parole possible in 15. The argument almost certainly will be that he did kill Mollie but did not intend to so Murder One doesn't apply and it wasn't premeditated. Either way, I don't think we are looking at a trial here - the case against him is strong without any DNA evidence so if any exists from genetic testing done during the autopsy, a guilty verdict is a foregone conclusion. The only question here is of what.

I can say with almost absolute certainty that there is no chance he gets off. The unknown factor his how many years will he serve. This guy is going to prison for a long time - just if it's for the rest of his life is the thing we need to have revealed over time.

 

[kpm]

So glad your friend survived that horrific attack kpm

Thanks Bravo!

 

[Twistinginthewind]

I agree. I think that when Mollie and her dad last spoke in a long phone conversation before she disappeared, they may have discussed dealing with unwanted attention and being safe on the streets / on campus. She could have said something like "Don't worry, dad, I always have my phone with me, and can hit the emergency button or will call 911 if I'm uncomfortable."

I had this same conversation with my daughter, and she said there’s a button on the side of her iPhone that if you hit it three times quickly, a loud alarm goes off.

However, in Mollie’s case, that fateful day on her run on one of the routes she went on, I don’t think she got the chance to do anything with her phone to send out an SOS because Mr. Evil (sorry, CR) was quickly very violent as he came up on her.

 

[rebel123]

UPDATE: The man accused of killing 20-year-old Mollie Tibbetts has retained new counsel in his murder trial and waived his preliminary hearing.

Twenty-four-year-old Cristhian Rivera is charged with first degree murder in Tibbetts’ death.

Online court records show the attorney that represented him during his initial appearance last Wednesday, Allan M. Richards, is no longer his counsel. Documents show Chad R. Frese of Kaplan & Frese, LLP and Jennifer J. Frese, of Johnson, Bonzer & Barnaby, P.C. are now representing Rivera.

Rivera’s new attorneys have waived his preliminary hearing, which had been scheduled for August 31st. They’ve also filed a motion to withdraw any previous motions filed by Richards while he represented Rivera – that includes a motion for a gag order

His new lawyers have stated that; 'had they been his lawyers from the start; they would have advised him to waive the preliminary hearing'.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

When a defendant waives a preliminary hearing it usually means several (or most) of the following that the defendant (or their attorneys):

- Knows there is ample evidence against them and the case will go to trial anyway so it will be a waste of time
- Plans to plead guilty and wants to avoid more negative publicity for themselves or their family
- Is guilty of more offenses than what was originally charged and fears evidence of those additional offenses will come out at preliminary hearing. Remember by the time the prelim hearing happens the prosecution has had time to do additional DNA and other testing
- Nature of offense is vicious, violent or nasty and if the defendant plans to plead guilty anyway, keeping that information off the public record can help the defendant before the sentencing judge
- Prosecution's case is extremely strong and defense lawyers fear prosecution witnesses may become so firmly attached to their positions at prelim that they may become angrier with the defendant and thus refuse later interviews requested by defense to prepare for trial

There are other reasons but these are the ones that likely apply to the killer in this case. Honestly, the most simple explanation why the preliminary hearing was waived is because the case is so strong it would go to trial anyway. In many murder cases where a defendant waives prelim, their attorneys are trying to cut a deal for a lesser charge (such as Murder Two or Manslaughter vs. Murder One) to get a sentence that isn't life w/o parole or death in DP states of which I know Iowa is not one.

It appears the killer's attorney's are trying to see if there is any way he can plead guilty to something lesser than Murder One and get say 20-40 in prison with parole possible in 15. The argument almost certainly will be that he did kill Mollie but did not intend to so Murder One doesn't apply and it wasn't premeditated. Either way, I don't think we are looking at a trial here - the case against him is strong without any DNA evidence so if any exists from genetic testing done during the autopsy, a guilty verdict is a foregone conclusion. The only question here is of what.

I can say with almost absolute certainty that there is no chance he gets off. The unknown factor his how many years will he serve. This guy is going to prison for a long time - just if it's for the rest of his life is the thing we need to have revealed over time.

Wow, thank you so much for your post! It really helped me, at least, get my head screwed on straight re charges and time that will have to be served and prelims that can have an effect.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that it’s complicated, isn’t most stuff in life?

Still feel confident what CR did admit to doing to Mollie is plenty nuff to keep him locked up in GP for the rest of his life.

Yes, it’ll be a chunk of money paid through taxes, but he’ll be punished & he’ll never be able to do what he did to Mollie to any other unsuspecting young woman just going about her business in her home town.