Found Deceased IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 *Arrest* #44

[kebdal23]

I work as a generalist in HR and I have been using the e-verify system for almost a decade, paper copies for a decade before that. I take my job very seriously, and once refused a new hire who was working remote who simply wanted to email me his documentation. I asked him to go to a notary to get his I-9 filled out and he refused. I notified corporate (I work for a very large company), and they took care of the I-9 for me. With all that said, if someone gave me false documentation, I would hate to think that I would be personally held liable. Also, I doubt that everyone takes their job as seriously as I do. I ask to see the original documents every time, and I do compare pictures.
I could see how the wool could be pulled over anyone's eyes in a farming environment like this, and no doubt they knew it was going on too. There aren't many checks and balances, and in all the time I've been doing this I've only had e-verify come back and question things one time.

OAN, my step-daughter is not a U.S. Citizen. I filed for her to come here to the U.S. and sponsored her for her green card for the first two years she was here. My name was on her social security card right under hers. I took her to the DMV in Wisconsin and it was near impossible for her to provide the required documentation for them to give her a driver's license. It was SO hard - I think we had to go open a bank account for her and wait for the first statement to come in the mail. We went back to the DMV multiple times. I was shocked at how difficult it was!

 

[MyBelle]

JMO
I agree. Its basically the definition of negligence. Something happens and sure you didnt expect it but you could be negligent for allowing the circumstances that it happened in the first place.

The bottom line is a civil case jury will decide. Thats why there are so many civil cases. Some won and some lost.

The link below is mostly talking about car accidents and negligence resulting from it but in a murder case where an illegal driver is on the road and a murder happens with a possibly company owned vehicle it could get real interesting in this case.

"Negligence can result in all types of accidents causing physical and/or property damage, but can also include business errors"

"Nine states (California, New York, Michigan, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, Rhode Island) make the owner of the vehicle responsible for all damages caused by a driver given permission to use the car"

Legal Dictionary - Law.com

Thanks for the link. The reason those states enacted such laws is because of cases such as this one. Mollie's family had considerable expenses in the long search for Mollie such as lost wages and lodging. Absolutely they should be reimbursed. JMO

 

[MyBelle]

I think y’all have worked CR’s immigration status and severity of his crime into the question - neither of which is relevant in establishing liability.

The same framework would apply if I drive my employers car without a valid license. It expired, I couldn’t pass the eye exam - my employer thinks I have a license but I don’t. I drive their car into town and commit arson, burn someone’s house to the ground. Is there any chance whatsoever that my employer is liable at all?

And since this case is pretty much stagnant pending new info becoming available, I’d love it if some of you would take a look at the Brandon Lawson thread. That case bugs me to no end...

In this case, CR never presented his employer with a valid driver's license. The company insurance carrier would ask for photo copies of the driver's licenses. In the case you cite, it is likely a civil lawsuit would be filed against both you and your employer. It would then be up to the jury to decide the percentages of causation and structure the damages accordingly. JMO

 

[wary]

We have no idea now unless LE can track them with current ID’s which we know can be easily switched out

I would have thought LE. would have requested NO ONE leaves until investigation is done

LE can probably request anything they want, but can they enforce a request like this, without arresting people?

 

[wary]

Sometimes it’s not the money value

Sometimes it’s to stop this sort of thing from happening to the next Mollie

Okay--I'm treading on dangerous ground here, but haven't RT's interviews, op-eds, etc. taken an attitude 180 degrees from this concept?

 

[MyBelle]

“It’s unclear whether E-Verify would have detected any red flags with Rivera’s claimed identity, but the farm has said it used a different government service to confirm that the name and Social Security number matched.”
https://nypost.com/2018/09/06/man-charged-with-killing-mollie-tibbetts-used-fake-name-john-budd/

Does anyone understand why there’s two different verification services?

During the press conference held by Yarrabee Farms, it was explained (according to my understanding) the SS check was later upgraded to E-Verify, but a family member who was performing the verification hadn’t realized that and was still using the older method.

Although the above report mentions it’s “unclear whether E-verify would have detected any red flags”, if E-verify is ‘more’ accurate I’m wondering why the SS site wasn’t shut down?

Yes, E-Verify is more accurate because it sweeps more data bases. Social Security is just Social Security data base. In Iowa, E-Verify is not mandatory. This case may change that decision.

 

[wary]

Thanks for the link. The reason those states enacted such laws is because of cases such as this one. Mollie's family had considerable expenses in the long search for Mollie such as lost wages and lodging. Absolutely they should be reimbursed. JMO

I strongly doubt that the state's enacted such laws because of cases such as this. I bet that it was because of the much more common cases where someone driving a borrowed car hurts other people or causes major property damage in a collision with another car or with a pedestrian. (Or crashing into someone's house, etc.)

That is totally different from what we're discussing here, where CR is accused of using the car to get to the scene of his crime.

 

[MyBelle]

I work as a generalist in HR and I have been using the e-verify system for almost a decade, paper copies for a decade before that. I take my job very seriously, and once refused a new hire who was working remote who simply wanted to email me his documentation. I asked him to go to a notary to get his I-9 filled out and he refused. I notified corporate (I work for a very large company), and they took care of the I-9 for me. With all that said, if someone gave me false documentation, I would hate to think that I would be personally held liable. Also, I doubt that everyone takes their job as seriously as I do. I ask to see the original documents every time, and I do compare pictures.
I could see how the wool could be pulled over anyone's eyes in a farming environment like this, and no doubt they knew it was going on too. There aren't many checks and balances, and in all the time I've been doing this I've only had e-verify come back and question things one time.

OAN, my step-daughter is not a U.S. Citizen. I filed for her to come here to the U.S. and sponsored her for her green card for the first two years she was here. My name was on her social security card right under hers. I took her to the DMV in Wisconsin and it was near impossible for her to provide the required documentation for them to give her a driver's license. It was SO hard - I think we had to go open a bank account for her and wait for the first statement to come in the mail. We went back to the DMV multiple times. I was shocked at how difficult it was!

In Illinois, you have to show proof you reside in the state such as a utility bill with your name on it. I think many states have stiffened the requirement to cut down on identity fraud. JMO

 

[wary]

Could someone please remind me what role a victim’s family plays in prosecution of criminal cases? For example, can RT ask the State to reduce charges? Or is the State bound by law to prosecute at the highest charge based on the evidence they have? Because, JMO, i believe RT would want to lower the charges. He seems very uncomfortable with the whole thing.

The family can ask anything they want.

I think that the State, while trying to show sympathy to the family, should not be influenced by the family's desires. The reason I think this?

Visualize three equally heinous crimes.

The family of one victim wants to go easy on the criminal because it will make THEM feel better. They do not give a thought to the possibilities of other families suffering as they have, if the criminal is given a lighter sentence. (Dru Sjodin, Sierra Joughlin come to mind. They were both killed by people whose prior criminal behavior made it clear what a menace they were --An afterthought--I'm not saying anything negative about the families of the prior victims--not meaning to imply that they had a part in the sentences of the criminals.)

The family of the other victim wants the criminal skinned alive and roasted over a slow fire. (Enough said.)

The third victim has no family at all. Does that mean that she was worthless,,her life meant nothing?

I think that in all cases the State should gently, sympathetically, lovingly ignore the wishes of the family.

 

[MyBelle]

I strongly doubt that the state's enacted such laws because of cases such as this. I bet that it was because of the much more common cases where someone driving a borrowed car hurts other people or causes major property damage in a collision with another car or with a pedestrian. (Or crashing into someone's house, etc.)

That is totally different from what we're discussing here, where CR is accused of using the car to get to the scene of his crime.

This case involves an unlicensed person driving a vehicle. It goes to liability.

 

[SharonNeedles]

This case involves an unlicensed person driving a vehicle. It goes to liability.

Unless he hit Mollie with the car there aren’t any damages related to the car or who was driving it. Suggesting that this murder wouldn’t have happened without the use of this car to facilitate it doesn’t seem to me to be a very solid argument.

 

[1987]

This case involves an unlicensed person driving a vehicle. It goes to liability.

moo. I think the total blame rest firmly on the person without a license. how is the farm any more at fault than the usa period? no he shouldn't have been driving, no he should not have killed anyone, no he should not have been working at the farm and no he should not have been in the USA at all undocumented. so how deep does the liability go? he is the common factor in it all, he made the choices.

 

[Jealoushe]

It does....however speaking in terms of a civil case, the employer may be found somewhat liable. We need more details of the actual crime etc to be sure. Makes for interesting discussion though.

 

[Al Hoffman]

At the time somebody made a comment about maybe a 2 for 1 deal, maybe it was you. Regardless I thought that was quite witty because I can imagine that sort of practical occurrence happening in a small community.

No ma'am, it weren't me. But I can see a "Hey, while we're out here....attitude, as the LE in a rural county would have a relationship with all of the tow drivers in the area. MVAs, DUIs, Extractions, and let's not talk about winter in Iowa and doing 25 MPH down the white ice Interstate with only the semi-trailers in the ditches telling you where the road "should" be with a seminar lecture class waiting for you in Davenport....

BUT. as funny as this concept is...NO! Not in this case. If LE had two vehicles towed, under guard, then it was related to this case. I have too much respect for LE in general, and the Iowa farm boys I used to drink with at the Student Union in Davenport to think otherwise!

There is a reason that CR is in the Tama County jail. I think LE is a tad hard pressed to find a local lock-up where they can keep him safe for trial. I have every confidence in the local LE (my Dad was kinda a jailer at the New Orleans NOPD Central Lock-up for 7 or so years). But a county lock up isn't really set up for so high a profile inmate who needs to be kept in PC (Protective Custody). I can see why they did not keep him in Montazuma. What if a friend of MT's landed in the County pokey for whatever, and "happened" to pass CR in a hall. It could get ugly. Hope for CR's sake, no Aryian bikers wind up in the Tama Lock-Up. But, I am still hoping for the Daily Mail to come up with a bought jail house bunkie conversation report...NOT! But I can still hope, right?

 

[MyBelle]

Unless he hit Mollie with the car there aren’t any damages related to the car or who was driving it. Suggesting that this murder wouldn’t have happened without the use of this car to facilitate it doesn’t seem to me to be a very solid argument.

Of course it is impossible to say for certain without the car this murder would not have happened but I'm fairly confident Mollie would still be alive if CR wasn't in this country. We don't know what evidence the car provides and we still don't know how he took control of Mollie.

 

[MistyWaters]

This case involved the use of an automobile by an unlicensed driver and a death resulted. CR may have used the car to disable Mollie--we still don't know-- but he has admitted using the car to transport Mollie. I doubt a jury would have any problem deciding liability. JMO

The autopsy revealed her cause of death to be multiple sharp force injuries.

As far as the vehicle being used to disable Mollie, the possible proof would be in damages to the vehicle. If there is no damage to the vehicle, doubtful an insurance company would ever be held liable for the drivers illegal acts. Can you imagine the precedent that would set? Any time a person committed a robbery and arrived at the crime scene by vehicle, the victim would also be eligibe to collect damages from the vehicle insurance company. The end result would be nobody could afford car insurance. No one case is ever decided without every similar situation in the future getting applied equally.

 

[MyBelle]

moo. I think the total blame rest firmly on the person without a license. how is the farm any more at fault than the usa period? no he shouldn't have been driving, no he should not have killed anyone, no he should not have been working at the farm and no he should not have been in the USA at all undocumented. so how deep does the liability go? he is the common factor in it all, he made the choices.

Yes but the Farm--or whomever registered it for those who don't believe the Farm-- also made a choice by providing access to a vehicle even though CR didn't have a driver's license. Complicating it even more will be if CR actually owned the car and the Farm--or whomever--registered it as a favor because he didn't have a license. As long as he didn't drive it on a highway, they weren't guilty of any crime. I'm confident LE is untangling ownership of the two vehicles seized.

 

[MyBelle]

The autopsy revealed her cause of death to be multiple sharp force injuries.

As far as the vehicle being used to disable Mollie, the possible proof would be in damages to the vehicle. If there is no damage to the vehicle, doubtful an insurance company would ever be held liable for the drivers illegal acts. Can you imagine the precedent that would set? Any time a person committed a robbery and arrived at the crime scene by vehicle, the victim would also be eligibe to collect damages from the vehicle insurance company. The end result would be nobody could afford car insurance. No one case is ever decided without every similar situation in the future getting applied equally.

No insurance company is going to be liable in this case because CR wasn't a licensed driver. Insurance doesn't cover unlicensed drivers.

 

[MistyWaters]

No ma'am, it weren't me. But I can see a "Hey, while we're out here....attitude, as the LE in a rural county would have a relationship with all of the tow drivers in the area. MVAs, DUIs, Extractions, and let's not talk about winter in Iowa and doing 25 MPH down the white ice Interstate with only the semi-trailers in the ditches telling you where the road "should" be with a seminar lecture class waiting for you in Davenport....

BUT. as funny as this concept is...NO! Not in this case. If LE had two vehicles towed, under guard, then it was related to this case. I have too much respect for LE in general, and the Iowa farm boys I used to drink with at the Student Union in Davenport to think otherwise!

There is a reason that CR is in the Tama County jail. I think LE is a tad hard pressed to find a local lock-up where they can keep him safe for trial. I have every confidence in the local LE (my Dad was kinda a jailer at the New Orleans NOPD Central Lock-up for 7 or so years). But a county lock up isn't really set up for so high a profile inmate who needs to be kept in PC (Protective Custody). I can see why they did not keep him in Montazuma. What if a friend of MT's landed in the County pokey for whatever, and "happened" to pass CR in a hall. It could get ugly. Hope for CR's sake, no Aryian bikers wind up in the Tama Lock-Up. But, I am still hoping for the Daily Mail to come up with a bought jail house bunkie conversation report...NOT! But I can still hope, right?

If DM printed a story about a snitch, me personally, I’d be inclined to not believe it!

Besides, I think CRs confession is already adequate to convict him with a life sentence, no eligible parole. The manner in which it was framed in the affidavid was as respectable to a murder victim as could ever be and I think Mollie’s family would be content if it were left at that.

But this silence has me wondering if a plea deal is in the works. Iowa 2nd degree murder is a 50 year sentence with parole eligibility at 70% served. I wonder if no parole eligibity is negotiable? At age 74 CR would get sent back to Mexico. That might be something that’s being considered.

 

[Warwick7]

I don't see how we could know. Unless someone who saw him drinking came forward, which I am guessing would never happen.

Let's throw a wrench in this. Let's say CR is arrested and then different undocumented workers run and hide (or run for good). If anyone saw him, or helped him, or knew anything---they could be long gone.