Deceased/Not Found IL - Yingying Zhang, 26, Urbana, 9 June 2017 #11 *GUILTY*

If he cared about Michelle, he would not have been having an affair with facebookWoman since 2016.
fBI would not have needed to interview 'multiple sexual partners of his.
If he cared about Michelle and his marriage he would have done a heck of a lot more to get his act together.
He only cared about Michelle as a bread winner.
She spoilt him completely.
She was his enabler.
But there is nothing to suggest she was a co-conspirator.
Or that she has special powers to make him talk.
OR that he would tell her anything at all.
His court room persona was an act.
BC is blaming Michelle just as much as he is blaming TB.
Recall the convo with TB where he told her that Michelle had told the police everything.
How can speculation on Michelle lead to the retrieval of YY's body?

If she had left the car empty, he would not have been able to cruise around town looking for victims. Presumably she paid for the duffle bag too and knew what he had told the doctors. I'm not saying it was her fault, but she enabled him somewhat IMO. He may have told her what he did also, but told her to say nothing and he would take the blame. We really don't know what went on between them. Did she really sleep behind a barricaded door? If so, I think she had to know or at least suspect what had happened, or know what happened to YY.
AJMO
 
If she had left the car empty, he would not have been able to cruise around town looking for victims. Presumably she paid for the duffle bag too and knew what he had told the doctors. I'm not saying it was her fault, but she enabled him somewhat IMO. He may have told her what he did also, but told her to say nothing and he would take the blame. We really don't know what went on between them. Did she really sleep behind a barricaded door? If so, I think she had to know or at least suspect what had happened, or know what happened to YY.
AJMO

Any chance the infamous 200 miles were used in cruising around town looking for a victim?
 
Remember though, 10 DID vote for death. So, for those ten, everything WAS bad enough to outweigh all the mitigating evidence. The prosecution's case was enough to get them to vote for death. I submit it was two who had a soft spot for drunks/substance abusers, coupled with the fact that he wouldn't be a threat to harm more women (or anyone else, for that matter) since he would be in prison, that let him live.

This is why I *hate* that death penalty imposition has to be unanimous. IT is nearly impossible to get 12 people to hold the same opinion about any matter, no matter what it is. When only 1-2 jurors can stop the will of 10-11, then it means that instead of mitigating factors likely being truly present such that a significant percentage of society as a whole could see them and agree with them, we have a situation where 1-2 outliers have a particular hangup or soft spot that they can't see past.

IF it is unsolved, it will be because he won't help solve it. He has nothing to lose now, especially if he doesn't appeal. If he doesn't communicate what he did with her, then it means he is more than happy to know that her family and friends will suffer from ambiguous loss forever.....

The 'death' part of the penalty was well sorted out during and prior to jury selection, it got the works, outside professionals even engaged by both sides, jury questionnaires... every single juror selected for that trial had convinced a large panel of lawyers and a judge that their own principles, beliefs, moral and ethical selves were not in opposition to death as penalty.
So, in a way it is moot because death rarely means actual death and on the rare occasions it happens it's usually very many years after the trial and several long winded and extraordinarily expensive appeals.

So their verdict was not about their moral convictions on death or life..
It concerned the severity of the crime and the implications and collateral damage to all and sundry.
They voted for guilt because they had no choice. All of them.

So, taking death squeamishness out of the result, whether it's one or all 12, what could be their possible reasons for not going for the higher, more severe punishment because they too know that a DP is rarely a DP and is many years away.

We do not actually know that their amateur pharmaceutical analysis of drug interactions came from the 2 that voted against the most severe punishment.

I would really deeply love to hear their thoughts and rationale.
I wonder whether it is because they felt that insufficient evidence was presented to prove he did what he actually said he did on the tape?
It's a possibility.

The Future dangerousness is also strange because prisons are actually pretty dangerous places.. I was reading an article yesterday on Colombo's max security prison, hoping spitefully they would send him there...
 
Any chance the infamous 200 miles were used in cruising around town looking for a victim?
every chance, Michelle was gone since early Thursday night...
could also have been used immediately after he picked her up, he could have driven her well out of town...
no way to know he didn't just use it to either torture her or burn her things...
 
Any chance the infamous 200 miles were used in cruising around town looking for a victim?
Yes, cruising around, at least one failed attempt, could have been more, then YY, then driving to dispose of her remains all around those various small water ways to the SW of his apartment or out in to various cornfields or lakes further away. Lets say 20-40 miles cruising for a victim, then 160 miles disposing of the body. MOO.
 
The 'death' part of the penalty was well sorted out during and prior to jury selection, it got the works, outside professionals even engaged by both sides, jury questionnaires... every single juror selected for that trial had convinced a large panel of lawyers and a judge that their own principles, beliefs, moral and ethical selves were not in opposition to death as penalty.
So, in a way it is moot because death rarely means actual death and on the rare occasions it happens it's usually very many years after the trial and several long winded and extraordinarily expensive appeals.

So their verdict was not about their moral convictions on death or life..
It concerned the severity of the crime and the implications and collateral damage to all and sundry.
They voted for guilt because they had no choice. All of them.

So, taking death squeamishness out of the result, whether it's one or all 12, what could be their possible reasons for not going for the higher, more severe punishment because they too know that a DP is rarely a DP and is many years away.

We do not actually know that their amateur pharmaceutical analysis of drug interactions came from the 2 that voted against the most severe punishment.

I would really deeply love to hear their thoughts and rationale.
I wonder whether it is because they felt that insufficient evidence was presented to prove he did what he actually said he did on the tape?
It's a possibility.

The Future dangerousness is also strange because prisons are actually pretty dangerous places.. I was reading an article yesterday on Colombo's max security prison, hoping spitefully they would send him there...
MOO It is possible that the two jurors were unwilling to impose a death sentence because they perceived that he legitimately sought mental help, and mental health professionals failed him. They might believe that certain antidepressants increase the likelihood of committing violence. They might have issues sentencing BC to death for a single murder, when mass murderers like the Colorado Theater Shooter end up with life in prison. Unless they decide to speak publically, we will never know their reasoning. We can speculate, but only those two jurors know for certain.
 
The outside perspective on the US legal system is interesting. Describing BC as a “devil” really caught my attention.


I saw that too. I don't really know too many of you on here personally. I live here in the US and I personally hate the direction my country is heading. Politics...gun control etc. But I really hate our judicial system anymore. I know it's not the case bc s trial but people with big money get treated far differently.
Can some of you other country people give me an idea what your thoughts on our justice system?
 
I see they call him the devil, is that because of his internet name Akuma, was it?
I don't agree the jury system was set up in response to the Colonial monarchy system was it? I thought the jury system copied the British jury system but not sure about that.
I disagree about juries not having enough legal knowledge, that's the point with juries, the defendant has a jury of peers, not legal experts. I certainly don't believe juries are racist either.
So, not much I agree with in there. :)
 
I saw that too. I don't really know too many of you on here personally. I live here in the US and I personally hate the direction my country is heading. Politics...gun control etc. But I really hate our judicial system anymore. I know it's not the case bc s trial but people with big money get treated far differently.
Can some of you other country people give me an idea what your thoughts on our justice system?
I think it is overall fair. Long winded and can be expensive but fair. BC had the best defence that money couldn't buy - excellent public defending IMO. Not sure if that is the norm with public defending all over the U.S. though.
 
I saw that too. I don't really know too many of you on here personally. I live here in the US and I personally hate the direction my country is heading. Politics...gun control etc. But I really hate our judicial system anymore. I know it's not the case bc s trial but people with big money get treated far differently.
Can some of you other country people give me an idea what your thoughts on our justice system?
The US justice system is very top-heavy with expensive lawyers. It is extraordinarily difficult to understand.
But, I could say the exact same about every system in the so-called civilised world.
Law is a world of it's own, an art and a science . Beautiful when it plays well but overall pretty damn useless for the man in the street.
I constantly strive to find ways to never be forced to use it, it's like a marriage to a casino at best, disappointing and sinister at it's worst.
 
And on another thread, apparently the Feds are planning to act on the death penalty again!

Would have been plenty of room in Terre Haute for BC.

JMHO YMMV
I agree. He should have received a death sentence. Maybe as that execution date approached, he would have been compelled to give up the location of YingYing's body. Now, there is no hope she will be found.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
76
Guests online
2,317
Total visitors
2,393

Forum statistics

Threads
590,011
Messages
17,928,964
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top