Found Deceased IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 *Arrest* #47

[glamourkitty1922]

Other blood and fingerprints in the trunk? I wonder if Rivera's a serial killer?

 

[FrostedGlass]

The Beaco

Other blood and fingerprints in the trunk? I wonder if Rivera's a serial killer?

That was my first thought, too. His attorneys seem to think differently.

If anyone wants to look around at the properties along 385th and 200th east of Brooklyn. I should have made notes; this is like starting over.
Beacon - Poweshiek County, IA - Map

 

[FrostedGlass]

I wonder who lives on 200th Street?

Did we conclude, way back when, that she suffered blunt force trauma?

I should have read the article.

Autopsy results showed she died of “multiple sharp force injuries.”

 

[Deleted member 718]

Mollie Tibbetts case: Trial postponed to allow Supreme Court time to review evidence suppression argument

Published 3:30 p.m. CT Jan. 22, 2020 | Updated 4:10 p.m. CT Jan. 22, 2020

The trial for the man accused of murdering University of Iowa student Mollie Tibbetts has been postponed to allow the Supreme Court time to decide whether to take up the defense's claim that their client's constitutional rights were violated.

Attorneys for Cristhian Bahena Rivera have asked the Iowa Supreme Court to review District Judge Joel Yates' Dec. 23 decision to allow most evidence to be taken to trial, despite the defense's arguments that most evidence should be suppressed.

On Wednesday, Yates filed an order to stay proceedings until the Supreme Court has made a decision.

"We are encouraged that the court granted the stay and are hopeful that the Supreme Court will examine these very important constitutional issues at this point," defense attorney Chad Frese said Wednesday following Yates' order. "These issues are necessary not only to this case but to be resolved in many other cases going forward."

Chad and Jennifer Frese, Bahena Rivera's attorneys filed a motion to suppress evidence in March and again in August, requesting that the judge exclude as evidence at trial his statements and physical evidence, arguing in part that his Miranda rights were violated, that he was offered promissory leniency — a promise that something could be gained from confessing — and that he didn't consent to law enforcement searching his vehicle.


Yates in his December ruling disagreed with Bahena Rivera's assertions that his rights were violated, concluding that 25-year-old Bahena Rivera did consent to the search of his car; that his statements were made voluntarily despite his claims of sleep deprivation and lengthy interrogation; and that law enforcement did not use language likely to induce a false confession, according to court documents.

The Freses argued in their application for discretionary review of an interlocutory order filed to the Supreme Court on Sunday that Bahena Rivera's position as an immigrant with "a very limited Mexican education" made him unfamiliar with the U.S. criminal justice system and prevented him from understanding the Miranda rights he was read.

Had he understood his right to counsel, Bahena Rivera would have consulted with representatives from the Mexican consulate before giving any statements to law enforcement, they argued.

 

[mickey2942]

Other blood and fingerprints in the trunk? I wonder if Rivera's a serial killer?

I wondered that as well, they have probably been looking at missing women cases in the area.

Or did he kill women in Mexico, and leave to the United States, when it got too "hot".

 

[Deleted member 718]

Trial on hold for man accused of killing Mollie Tibbetts

Updated on January 22, 2020 at 4:40 pm

The trial for Cristhian Bahena Rivera, the man accused of killing University of Iowa student Mollie Tibbetts in 2018, is being put on hold until the Iowa Supreme Court rules on an appeal regarding an evidence-suppression motion.

The trial was slated to begin Feb. 4 at the Woodbury County Courthouse.

more at link

 

[katydid23]

Uggghhhh...I have a bad feeling about this. They found more blood from other people run his trunk, and the court is considering suppressing evidence found ?

This killer better not walk free over this. The cops were looking for a missing girl and they had video of him following her. They had the right and responsibility to keep questioning him.

I hope he doesn't get away with this, because he didnt understand the language. That was HIS choice to sneak into a country with a different language and different justice system. That wasn't Mollie's fault.

 

[Luckyzmom]

Is it possible def attys are just adding this to their war chest and def knows damn good and well who belongs to blood/dna in his trunk. The strategy from the get is stall and muddy the waters on the residents of Iowa's dime MOO

 

[glamourkitty1922]

Is it possible def attys are just adding this to their war chest and def knows damn good and well who belongs to blood/dna in his trunk. The strategy from the get is stall and muddy the waters on the residents of Iowa's dime MOO

They may be angling for a plea agreement of manslaughter or negligent homicide.

 

[mickey2942]

They may be angling for a plea agreement of manslaughter or negligent homicide.

Great. So he can be free to stalk and kill more young women like Mollie. This guy isn't going to get "better" or change. No amount of mental health treatment is going to change him. He isn't even an "Incel", he had a girlfriend, with a child.

 

[glamourkitty1922]

Great. So he can be free to stalk and kill more young women like Mollie. This guy isn't going to get "better" or change. No amount of mental health treatment is going to change him. He isn't even an "Incel", he had a girlfriend, with a child.

That's the lawyer's job, get the best deal possible. With the details coming out about other blood and fingerprints in that trunk, I'm wondering how many women he has murdered.

 

[MistyWaters]

Uggghhhh...I have a bad feeling about this. They found more blood from other people run his trunk, and the court is considering suppressing evidence found ?

This killer better not walk free over this. The cops were looking for a missing girl and they had video of him following her. They had the right and responsibility to keep questioning him.

I hope he doesn't get away with this, because he didnt understand the language. That was HIS choice to sneak into a country with a different language and different justice system. That wasn't Mollie's fault.

I got to say I’m becoming a little disillusioned over the integrity of the police work. Early on it seemed like an simple open and shut case and LE did a commendable job in taking the vicious killer of Molly off the street. I don’t understand why they can’t just follow the rule book and eliminate any possibility of police procedures becoming an issue at trial.

Something I’m curious about which I don’t ever recall released was regarding the ownership of the vehicle. Who was it registered to and did CR have sole access to its usage?

 

[katydid23]

I got to say I’m becoming a little disillusioned over the integrity of the police work. Early on it seemed like an simple open and shut case and LE did a commendable job in taking the vicious killer of Molly off the street. I don’t understand why they can’t just follow the rule book and eliminate any possibility of police procedures becoming an issue at trial.

Something I’m curious about which I don’t ever recall released was regarding the ownership of the vehicle. Who was it registered to and did CR have sole access to its usage?

The cops did follow the rule book. The problem was, they brought in a woman who could interpret for the suspect, and she gave the Miranda warning in Spanish, and she left out one small portion when she gave the instructions. It was a mistake, not malicious or on purpose.

It is very hard, in any large complicated process to 'eliminate any possibility of procedure eventually becoming a trial issue.' Easier said than done. When the defense team plays back the interview tapes, there are ALWAYS going to be 'issues' to bring out for the trial.

I don't see a lack of integrity on the part of LE here. I see them looking for a vulnerable, missing college student. They were not thinking about 'the trial'- they were thinking about finding her.

 

[BUF]

Something I’m curious about which I don’t ever recall released was regarding the ownership of the vehicle. Who was it registered to and did CR have sole access to its usage?

I am also very curious about this.

 

[MistyWaters]

The cops did follow the rule book. The problem was, they brought in a woman who could interpret for the suspect, and she gave the Miranda warning in Spanish, and she left out one small portion when she gave the instructions. It was a mistake, not malicious or on purpose.

It is very hard, in any large complicated process to 'eliminate any possibility of procedure eventually becoming a trial issue.' Easier said than done. When the defense team plays back the interview tapes, there are ALWAYS going to be 'issues' to bring out for the trial.

I don't see a lack of integrity on the part of LE here. I see them looking for a vulnerable, missing college student. They were not thinking about 'the trial'- they were thinking about finding her.

CR clearly had knowledge regarding Molly’s murder but until he’s convicted beyond reasonable doubt, I question if he acted alone and was solely responsible for her death. It’s just that it appears there are still unanswered questions at this time.

As for police tactics, I can’t think of one valid reason why it’d require 15 police officers to request one farm worker come along into town for voluntary questioning, especially as he’d already been stopped two days earlier and did not attempt to flee. I also don’t recall having read LE already knew CR was associated with the black Chevy Malibu prior to the day of his confession.

If he had sole access to the black Chevy Malibu, I also wonder why he was driving his girlfriends car on the day of his arrest and what was his stated reason for borrowing her car that day? The accuracy of some of the media reports I do wonder about as well because I don’t believe anyone but the registered owner can give permission for investigators to conduct a lawful search of a vehicle, regardless of who’s known to have been driving it.

BBM

“The Freses added that 15 law enforcement officers arrived at Yarrabee Farms, which they said could be seen by Bahena Rivera, an undocumented immigrant, as a projection of authority.”
Mollie Tibbetts case: Unidentified fingerprints, blood found in Cristhian Bahena Rivera's trunk, records show


“....Prosecutors say the deputy did not stop the car, but instead, followed it until the driver stopped himself and the deputy approached them. The driver, was Cristhian Rivera. The deputy asked him about the Tibbetts disappearance, Rivera said he had no involvement and was allowed to leave.

Authorities next spoke to Bahena Rivera when they arrived at his employer's dairy two days later. They noticed Rivera was driving a different car, this one, belonging to his girlfriend. Rivera allegedly gave permission to investigators to search both vehicles and voluntarily went with deputies to the sheriff's office for questioning...”
Mollie Tibbetts blood found in suspect's trunk, investigators say

 

[StarryStarryNight]

This is concerning but I think it will all end up right. If I remember it all right LE had security cam video of him following her which is why they went to talk to him. Probable cause. Prior to him being in custody or being arrested, prior to the need for him to be read his rights, he gave permission to search the car and Mollie’s blood is in his trunk. I don’t see how any of that could be excluded as evidence. And that evidence just by itself, in my opinion, points to his guilt.
If the extra blood is related to the murder it is either the suspect’s or somebody he knows or somebody at the farm and he should just say if someone helped him. Matching it shouldn’t be a problem. If it is some unknown person I don’t see how it could be related. I would think it’s from the previous owner of the car or a previous victim. As long as the prosecution doesn’t let the defense spin it up crazy it should be OK, but hopefully the court will let it all stand as is. Just my thoughts. Trying to be positive.

 

[mickey2942]

There are a lot of bigger implications in this case, I can seriously see this as almost a Supreme Court decision, our country has more immigration, people who don't speak English.

Is every single suspect supposed to have a court appointed interpreter in the language of their choice? Where does it end? Spanish, Pushto, Arabic, Somalian, there are currently over 500 different languages spoken in the home by children in the Los Angeles school district!

This issue is far bigger than this case.

 

[katydid23]

CR clearly had knowledge regarding Molly’s murder but until he’s convicted beyond reasonable doubt, I question if he acted alone and was solely responsible for her death. It’s just that it appears there are still unanswered questions at this time.

I haven't seen any evidence that he had an accomplice. According to his version of events:

"... Bahena Rivera, 25, told them he chased Tibbetts after driving past her on the evening she disappeared. She threatened to call police, at which point he said he got mad and “blocked his memory.”

Bahena Rivera said he then recalled finding her body in the trunk of the Chevrolet Malibu he was driving and hiding her in a cornfield, according to court documents."

It seems like it happened very fast. There does not seem to be any one else included in his version of events.

If there was an accomplice, why wouldn't he admit to that? So far, he is taking responsibility himself. Other than the parts that he blocked from his memory.

As for police tactics, I can’t think of one valid reason why it’d require 15 police officers to request one farm worker come along into town for voluntary questioning, especially as he’d already been stopped two days earlier and did not attempt to flee.

Maybe because a lot happened in those two days. They apparently determined that this guy might have kidnapped a girl, bashed her head in, threw her in the trunk then dumped he in a cornfield.

They were going to look for and detain a murder suspect---they had no idea what to expect.

It didn't matter how he behaved 2 days earlier. Suspects tend to be much more violent once police zero in on them, and have more evidence. It would have been irresponsible for 2 officers to waltz in there alone, not knowing if he was going to put up a violent fight in reaction.

When police serve warrants, or pick up murder suspects, they often roll with SWAT just in case there is gunfire.

I also don’t recall having read LE already knew CR was associated with the black Chevy Malibu prior to the day of his confession.

"Law enforcement has said they used surveillance footage to connect a Chevrolet Malibu seen near Tibbetts' running route with Bahena Rivera, whom they approached at Yarrabee Farms, his place of work, on Aug. 20, 2018.

Bahena Rivera was asked to come from the farm to the Poweshiek County Sheriff's Office for questioning that day, officials said. He complied."

Mollie Tibbetts case: Unidentified fingerprints, blood found in Cristhian Bahena Rivera's trunk, records show

They went to his workplace because of their video of the Malibu, following the victim while she jogged.

If he had sole access to the black Chevy Malibu, I also wonder why he was driving his girlfriends car on the day of his arrest and what was his stated reason for borrowing her car that day? The accuracy of some of the media reports I do wonder about as well because I don’t believe anyone but the registered owner can give permission for investigators to conduct a lawful search of a vehicle, regardless of who’s known to have been driving it.

I would guess he didn't want to drive his car because he had recently murdered a girl and stashed her body in his car trunk. It's not surprising he wouldn't want to be driving it around while all the news was asking for witnesses to her possible abduction.

And that is incorrect, that police cannot search a car, if the person driving it is not the registered owner. They search cars all of the time without the owner's consent. If they have the driver's consent OR probable cause, they will do so.

“The Freses added that 15 law enforcement officers arrived at Yarrabee Farms, which they said could be seen by Bahena Rivera, an undocumented immigrant, as a projection of authority.”
Mollie Tibbetts case: Unidentified fingerprints, blood found in Cristhian Bahena Rivera's trunk, records show


“....Prosecutors say the deputy did not stop the car, but instead, followed it until the driver stopped himself and the deputy approached them. The driver, was Cristhian Rivera. The deputy asked him about the Tibbetts disappearance, Rivera said he had no involvement and was allowed to leave.

Authorities next spoke to Bahena Rivera when they arrived at his employer's dairy two days later. They noticed Rivera was driving a different car, this one, belonging to his girlfriend. Rivera allegedly gave permission to investigators to search both vehicles and voluntarily went with deputies to the sheriff's office for questioning...”
Mollie Tibbetts blood found in suspect's trunk, investigators say

What is the problem if the suspect saw the 15 officers as a 'projection of authority.' They are, in fact, representing the authority of the state/county to investigate the murder of Mollie. I don't see the problem. JMO

 

[Seattle1]

This is concerning but I think it will all end up right. If I remember it all right LE had security cam video of him following her which is why they went to talk to him. Probable cause. Prior to him being in custody or being arrested, prior to the need for him to be read his rights, he gave permission to search the car and Mollie’s blood is in his trunk. I don’t see how any of that could be excluded as evidence. And that evidence just by itself, in my opinion, points to his guilt.
If the extra blood is related to the murder it is either the suspect’s or somebody he knows or somebody at the farm and he should just say if someone helped him. Matching it shouldn’t be a problem. If it is some unknown person I don’t see how it could be related. I would think it’s from the previous owner of the car or a previous victim. As long as the prosecution doesn’t let the defense spin it up crazy it should be OK, but hopefully the court will let it all stand as is. Just my thoughts. Trying to be positive.

Although the black Chev Malibu used in the murder of Mollie was said to be owned by CR, I don't believe it's known how/when he acquired the vehicle. If there was blood other than Mollie's found in the trunk, there could be numerous reasons why -- but nothing should take away from the fact that Mollie and her blood were in that car that CR was seen driving on the very street and date she was abducted. It also doesn't point to an accomplice.

It's very possible that the unmatched evidence located in the Malibu trunk belonged to a previous owner or any individual(s) that borrowed CR's vehicle.
In the Colorado murder of K. Berreth, blood and DNA of the previous condo owner was also collected from inside her condo and entered in evidence. That unidentified blood/DNA was waived around for months by the defense until matched to the previous homeowner.

I believe the evidence supression hearing was very thorough and the Judge didn't buy similar claims put forth by the defense. It's there right to attempt to show cause in a higher court (where I think they will also fail). MOO

 

[MistyWaters]

This I also wonder if there’s any truth to this defence allegation -

“......Rivera's attorneys filed a motion to suppress evidence in March and again in August, requesting that the judge exclude as evidence at trial his statements and physical evidence, arguing in part that his Miranda rights were violated, that he was offered promissory leniency — a promise that something could be gained from confessing....”
Mollie Tibbetts case: Unidentified fingerprints, blood found in Cristhian Bahena Rivera's trunk, records show
(same link to other quotes below)

Because it’s well established if a suspect is questioned for hours and hours on end, deprived of sleep, lacks understanding the intricacies of the justice system, and is unduly fearful of authority obtaining false confessions becomes quite possible. One of the ways that occurs is by LE asking leading questions.

Without seeing a transcribed transcript of the hours of questioning I’d also be curious to know how many times he was asked “did you kill her and then place her body in the trunk?” and, as a hypothetical example, after the 25th time he finally answered “yes” - well indeed, that’s still considered a confession. Because LE obviously knew blood was found in the trunk as it was being tested all the while CR was being questioned.

“Around 11:30 p.m., after a few hours of interviews, Bahena Rivera was detained and was read an incomplete version of his Miranda rights, court records show. Division of Criminal Investigation Special Agent Trent Vileta said during testimony in November that a Miranda warning was read after blood that matched Tibbetts' DNA was found in the Malibu's trunk.”

I guess in some ways I’m seeing shades of Brendan Dassey and whether he’s truly guilty or innocent, how his confession was obtained by observing the videos of LE questioning tactics on the Netflix documentary. I think it left many people feeling somewhat unsettled on the topic of LE and promissory leniency in general.

If indeed there was enough enough to charge CR without his “confession”, why didn’t LE just arrest him and the basis of the physical evidence?

I also wonder what this eludes to -

“The state chooses not to specifically respond to the characterizations of the evidence made by the defense as it relates to DNA mixtures in the trunk of the Malibu," Assistant Attorney General Scott Brown wrote in the state's resistance. "Suffice it to say that the state disagrees with those characterizations in the defense motion."

If I was a juror, I think it would ultimately become very important to me to hear recorded evidence of CR leading LE to the body. And I’d want to feel confident he did so freely by retracing his movements, removing any doubt in my mind that he had access to second-hand information or that for some very far-fetched unthinkable reason, LE didn’t utilize prior knowledge to lead him there.

But this is only just my opinion.....why I also think this case is becoming not quite a slam dunk conviction in view of the information that’s began to creep out by the defence team at this point in time. I have no idea if CR will be proven guilty or innocent but this case will be an interesting trial to follow, that’s for sure. Justice for Molly is what’s most important at the end of the day.