IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 *Arrest* #40

Status
Not open for further replies.
Whatever CR told LE is devastating to his defense. So one of the first things his lawyers will do is look to see if there is some way to get it excluded. They will need to look at certain things: when was he questioned? By whom? Where? Was he in "custody" or was he free to leave? Did he know he was free to leave or did he think he was in custody. Was he given Miranda warnings? When, and was that recorded? Did he ever ask for a lawyer or infer he wanted one. If they can't get those statements CR made thrown out, things get really difficult for his attorneys. I wouldn't be surprised if the initial contact with him was informal, no Miranda. But then when he was formally interviewed he would have been Mirandized and the interview recorded. I'd like to know where that took place. Part of the report we have seen about him saying she was left "face up" I would guess were comments made in response to questions asked. They would ask him about details of the scene where her body was and then see if it matched up when they actually got there. Apparently it did, at least in that respect.
I wish we could see the initial interview!
 
Ummmmm I do not think Mexico would pay the bill and they certainly do not want him back there. They have enough and this is one less in their prisons which is where he really needs to serve his sentence because they do not have nearly what our prisoners get in USA prisons. Sure we have some bad ones but all theirs are bad.
Actually they do pay, here is one article on it. They are very protective of their citizens. It used to only be death penalty cases. Embassies are there to help their citizens.
How Mexico Saves Its Citizens from U.S. Executions - The Atlantic
 
I agree, I don’t think he expected to get caught either. Possibly he had no idea there was such a thing as security cameras because he had several weeks to concoct a story about why he was driving around town. And maybe he did initially have a story? - he went from point A to B and directly home again. LE says no you were at C, he adds a little more to the story......but then what about D....or E grilling him until he breaks, leading to his confession.

Which brings me to another thought....Mollie’s dad. Did the family truly believe (or at least hope) she was being held alive or was that somewhat of a heartbreaking yet intentional ruse to trick the perp into thinking LE was totally clueless? I think of us here and all these past threads, 1000s of comments relating to the ambiguity of released information - was she taken while jogging or not, what was her route, what of dinner at her mothers, when was the Snapchat sent, what’s with was she home at 9:45 using her computer, questions, questions, so much confusion.... looking back, I now think that total lack of clarity in information being released was very intentional.
I wonder if he could have kept her phone and turned off all tracking. Maybe they knew her phone was active but couldn't find it.
 
Yes I understand that. I meant did he (CR) have a reason? Like I posed her to face heaven or something?
Police often ask for details in interviews. So, it’s likely the police asked the suspect about how far in the corn fields she was hidden, how she was facing, and whether she was concealed in any way.
 
"A critical break in the case was finding a local person with security cameras showing Tibbetts jogging, Rahn said.

"Through that we were able to identify a vehicle that we believed belonged to Mr. Rivera," Rahn said.

"From that we were able to track his patterns and the routes that he took. We were also able to find Mollie running on this video and we were able to determine that he was one of the last ones to have seen Mollie running."

Body found believed to be missing Iowa jogger; murder charge filed
This is what I've read and also what is said in the press conference. Does anyone know if there has been anything written or said about the footage since? Something more detailed about the chronological order of things? I guess it isn't that important in regards to what information the public has been given, but I'm just curious. I have a need to put the events in logical order in my own head. Thanks!
 
Does anyone have a link to the 1 on 1 interview with Rick Rahn and a reporter? Not from the PC, but it was a 1 on 1 thing. I know it's somewhere in the previous threads, but I can't find it. Lasted about 3-4 minutes. TIA
 
He must be a defence lawyers worst nightmare if he waived the right to speak to an attorney.

But now I wonder, in Iowa is it a legal right to seek legal advice prior to being questioned by LE?

It's legal in all 50 states to ask for an attorney before speaking to LE for any reason!

I'm still making a cultural milieu argument (for invalidating his Miranda) that CR was incapable of understanding (or truly accepting the fact that) the Miranda explanation of his right to an attorney or to not self-incriminate was true, or applied to him. In his home country, with a crime of this severity, you tell the police what they want to hear, or things will go very badly for you. The only thing LE wanted to know was the truth, and he told them that, or some version of it, because (no matter how nice they were to him) he truly believed that the rubber hoses (or a phone book and a nightstick) would be produced when the Federalies (he had an ICE interpreter and FBI were involved in this case) questioning him lost their patience. I grew up in a New Orleans LE family back in the day. I've heard stories of how some officers would claim bragging rights for making a suspect void on themselves during questioning, and the enhanced interagation techniques used to reach that point.

The bottom line is that CR lead them to the body because he was truly afraid that LE would harm or kill him if he did not, because that's the way it's done back home!

Not necessarily a defense attorney's worst dream, but maybe the best if being unable to ask for an attorney invalidates the Miranda based questioning. About the only thing left in play would be the body (because of inevitable discovery in the Fall), and the wealth of forensics the State now has.
 
Last edited:
I thought it was because the FBI took over the case. One of Mollies possible run routes had 70 houses. I'm not sure how long it would take LE to canvass 70 houses; but not to long.
well, it makes sense that they needed people home to be available to answer questions.
 
Edit: After reviewing the PC, and maybe there is update info since then, all that is clear is that both the Malibu's routes and Mollie jogging were capture on video (it's not specified the car was seen following MT).

It's hard to imagine they would be in the same frame, but it would be easy to see a car drive past just after she jogged through.
 
It's legal in all 50 states to ask for an attorney before speaking to LE for any reason!

I'm still making a cultural milieu argument (for invalidating his Miranda) that CR was incapable of understanding (or truly accepting the fact that) the Miranda explanation of his right to an attorney or to not self-incriminate was true, or applied to him. In his home country, with a crime of this severity, you tell the police what they want to hear, or things will go very badly for you. The only thing LE wanted to know was the truth, and he told them that, or some version of it, because (no matter how nice they were to him) he truly believed that the rubber hoses (or a phone book and a nightstick) would be produced when the Federalies (he had an ICE interpreter and FBI were involved in this case) questioning him lost their patience. I grew up in a New Orleans LE family back in the day. I've heard stories of how some officers would claim bragging rights for making a suspect void on themselves during questioning, and the enhanced interagation techniques used to reach that point.

The bottom line is that CR lead them to the body because he was truly afraid that LE would harm or kill him if he did not, because that's the way it's done back home!
It doesn't matter that it's the way it's done back home. He wasn't abused, and he led the police to the body, and he confessed to stalking her, confronting her, becoming angry when she threatened to call the police, knowing she was in the trunk, pulling her out, stabbing her, leaving her dead in a cornfield. Or he may have stabbed her before putting her in the trunk. The trunk will tell the story there.
 
My fave show, “The First 48”, shows homicide detectives interviewing suspects in every episode. It’s amazing how much they are capable of getting out of individuals. They will befriend them, use the suspect’s religious background to get the person to confess to make it right, tell them it will be so much better for them if they just tell the truth. They will infer that it may not have really been their fault, things just happened, and there might be a way out of this. I am shocked at how many people don’t immediately lawyer up. Sometimes people just have to talk. And it’s a homicide detective’s priority to get as much out of the suspect before they request representation.
 
Yes to protect them from the death penalty which CR does not qualify. Interesting article but I can not say I believe all of it.
But they do have a way of collecting money in large amounts for that purpose. They could pay for CR if they wanted to I guess with some kind of vote. I did not know it exsisted and sounds like they are busy.
 
Following CR’s confession, if the autopsy had revealed nothing other than say, a head injury a possible defence might’ve been he got mad when she said she was calling police as he meant no harm, and grabbed at her to take away her phone. Then she tripped and fell, hitting her head, stopped breathing. He panicked and hid her body (not unlike earlier hit-by-a-car theories here.) Something like that could possibly lead to lesser manslaughter charges. But given the autopsy results of “homicide resulting from multiple sharp force injuries” that’s not going to happen.

JMO
I think he is going to prison for life no matter how many different ways the defense is going to try to twist this.

Because of a few main things.

First and foremost he approached her and not the other way around. That is huge in this case. From what we know so far she was minding her own business jogging alone and he approached her. So it will be determined that he was the aggressor in this case. That is a huge distinction.

Secondly we already know she suffered sharp object injuries to her body. That is huge in this case too. Because he was the one that approached her, confronted her, and since he already admitted to placing her in a spot and covering her with corn and since LE found her dead there then it will be obvious to a jury that he and he alone must have killed her. Unless other evidence or confessions come up then it has to be him and the jury is not dumb. They will not believe that some other stranger or a UFO or something came along and killed her. Video puts him near her at the beginning and his own confession puts him near her at the end.
This is as clear cut a case as the prosecution can hope for.

And finally it is my expectation that the autopsy will provide more damning evidence that we dont know about yet. Once the autopsy gives even more evidence about her wounds or even worse things that he may have done then it will be a done deal. Even if he didnt rape her the autopsy will provide details about the type of weapon that did the sharp force injuries which will limit the weapon to something like a knife. This will be huge for the jury.

No matter what his lame excuses will be about blacking out or whatever it wont matter one bit because he was the aggressor, he confronted her, he killed her, and he put her body somewhere.

It wont matter if she called him every bad name in the book or threatened to call every FBI agent in the phone book. You cannot kill someone for words they say to you. You can only legally kill someone if they threaten your own life and the evidence will clearly show he was the agreessor and the only one fearing for their life was poor MT.
 
Yes. But this says nothing about paying for a private defense.
They cannot supply a lawyer other than a private lawyer because the lawyer must be able to work in the state. Mexico does pay for it, I don't know
if they get the state to reimburse them or not.
How Mexico Saves Its Citizens from the Death Penalty in the U.S.
Here is where Time states Mexico is funding a defense of one of their citizens in US
Mexico Presses U.S to Stay Execution of One of Its Citizens
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
156
Guests online
3,322
Total visitors
3,478

Forum statistics

Threads
592,295
Messages
17,966,825
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top