GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 August 2014 - #38 *Arrest*

[catpatrol]

Brittany Feagans ‏@BF_StarNews 2m2 minutes ago
#BREAKING: #EnriqueArochi indicted on 4 counts of sexual assault of a child; same 16yo involved

 

[daisytrail]

Robert Wilonsky ‏@RobertWilonsky 26m26 minutes ago
Collin County grand jury has indicted Enrique Arochi in case of Christina Morris, who has been missing since summer

https://twitter.com/RobertWilonsky/status/575412085149933569

I guess they got the "intent" covered with intent to inflict bodily injury, intent to violate or abuse sexually, and intent to terrorize.

Why do they repeat themselves in the document? Does anybody know?

 

[MIKAYOYO]

What does that mean? 4 counts? They can only prove they had sex four of the 10-15 times??

 

[zippixx]

What does that mean? 4 counts? They can only prove they had sex four of the 10-15 times??

I was wondering that too.. maybe 4 times before she was 17...?

 

[zippixx]

Why do they repeat themselves in the document? Does anybody know?

Well, it's 3 different "intents", but happens to have the same formal wording other than the "intent". (if that makes sense...lol)

 

[catpatrol]

Why do they repeat themselves in the document? Does anybody know?

Because it's the government...? lol

 

[catpatrol]

Ray Villeda ‏@RayVilleda 2m2 minutes ago
#EnriqueArochi atty: "Enrique denies the allegations in the indictment and will enter a not guilty plea..." asking for a fair trial @NBCDFW

 

[SteveS]

Why do they repeat themselves in the document? Does anybody know?

They are reciting the charges in a way that details each of the ways the GJ believes he may have violated the AK statute. A single violation is what they have to prove in court, and by stating it in multiple variations, they only need to prove any one of them in order to get a conviction on the AK.

It's the same thing I noted re the arrest warrant - they offered multiple wording to prove the AK, not just one.

Look for the court case to proceed the same way. They'll attempt to prove each and every variation was true, knowing that it only takes one to get the conviction.

 

[zippixx]

Ray Villeda ‏@RayVilleda 2m2 minutes ago
#EnriqueArochi atty: "Enrique denies the allegations in the indictment and will enter a not guilty plea..." asking for a fair trial @NBCDFW

No big surprise there...

 

[MIKAYOYO]

No big surprise there...

On both indictments, I wonder?

 

[SteveS]

Brittany Feagans ‏@BF_StarNews 2m2 minutes ago
#BREAKING: #EnriqueArochi indicted on 4 counts of sexual assault of a child; same 16yo involved

This is a good thing, because it opens the door to 4 convictions of up to 20 years, not just one. He needs to tell where CM is and the multiple SA cases have to add more pressure to do a deal.

 

[zippixx]

On both indictments, I wonder?

Are you surprised he's pleading not guilty on both charges?

 

[MIKAYOYO]

Are you surprised he's pleading not guilty on both charges?

Yes. I figured he'd cop a plea on the SA charge. MOO

 

[zippixx]

Yes. I figured he'd cop a plea on the SA charge. MOO

Ahhh...ok. Good point.. I imagine he still could, since they haven't formally entered a plea, yet

 

[daisytrail]

So they must at trial prove all three intents connected with the aggravated kidnapping?

• intent to inflict bodily injury
• intent to violate or sexually abuse
• intent to terrorize

I certainly do not see any problem with the first part, given what has been revealed so far, as long as EA's team is not able to raise reasonable doubt that EA abducted Christina. I don't see much problem with the third part, given that being abducted in and of itself must be a terrifying experience. As to the second on the list, that makes me wonder what is the difference between violate and sexually abuse, since they have the word or between the two. Does anyone know?

 

[zippixx]

They are reciting the charges in a way that details each of the ways the GJ believes he may have violated the AK statute. A single violation is what they have to prove in court, and by stating it in multiple variations, they only need to prove any one of them in order to get a conviction on the AK.

It's the same thing I noted re the arrest warrant - they offered multiple wording to prove the AK, not just one.

Look for the court case to proceed the same way. They'll attempt to prove each and every variation was true, knowing that it only takes one to get the conviction.

So they must at trial prove all three intents connected with the aggravated kidnapping?

• intent to inflict bodily injury
• intent to violate or sexually abuse
• intent to terrorize

I certainly do not see any problem with the first part, given what has been revealed so far, as long as EA's team is not able to raise reasonable doubt that EA abducted Christina. I don't see much problem with the third part, given that being abducted in and of itself must be a terrifying experience. As to the second on the list, that makes me wonder what is the difference between violate and sexually abuse, since they have the word or between the two. Does anyone know?

It takes one of the three.. (see quote (BBM) above from SteveS)

 

[heather.scissorhands]

I'm so glad this happened today. Now, let's hope he tells where the heck he took her!

I have said over and over again that I know he's guilty of something, I'm just not sure what happened and if there are accomplices. I have a lot of hope that the truth will come out.

 

[daisytrail]

It takes one of the three.. (see quote (BBM) above from SteveS)

So basically they are focused on proving that when Arochi took Christina that was planned, that is to say, premeditated, wholly against her will, and in no way a consequence of some sort of accident?

I notice that they make no claim that she was dead when he put her in the trunk or that she is dead now. The language is general in that respect.

 

[cluciano63]

He is not going to "tell" anything...he is pleading NG. Maybe he will reconsider when murder charges come. Jmo

 

[daisytrail]

I don't think murder charges will be coming unless Christina is found, or he makes a plea deal, or some sort of compelling new evidence is developed.