GUILTY IN - Kimberly Dyer, 31, burned, tortured, mutilated, murdered, Elkhart, 22 Oct 2019 *Arrests*

The newspapers didn't touch on physical evidence very much. DNA was way over my head but it was really interesting. My notes are kind of sketchy; I was trying to listen and write but that didn't work out so well. I wasn't able to get everything that was discussed but here are some of the things I made notes on:
******
DNA
Ashley Luther, ISP lab, forensic Biologist
can get up to 4 profiles in one sample
8 of 19 = no DNA testing
Profiles: Kim Dyer, Robert Porter, Mario Angulo, Matthew Murzynski, Donald Owen, Hope Lowery
Submitted for analysis:
Zip tie, red rag, carpet, nails, skin, right/left fingernails
swabs: vaginal, anal and used tampon
swabs: zip on ankles, zip on wrist, garden hose, face, blue latex glove, red-brown stain on wall (5), handle on small and large paint roller, fingerprint lift, hair stuck to wall
Results for insufficient/no DNA:
red rag (no blood), carpet (burnt), hair (no root), skin, nails/left hand, garden hose, gloves, anal swab, vaginal swab and tampon.
****
The way the DNA results were reported was really confusing. O's attorney made it very clear to the jury that Owen was excluded from all the results. Luther mentioned there were 2 unknowns but I don't remember what items those came back on. I'm not going to go through all of the results but here is an example of how they were reported:
Able to develop DNA profile for all 4: none
Able to develop DNA profile for 3:
Nail clippings, right hand:
Porter = moderate support for inclusion
Murz = limited support for exclusion
Mario = favors exclusion
******
 
sorry, new to this and apparently I have no idea what I am doing. I thought I could ask a question and instead it just reposted. Sorry again.
No problem with the quoting. You can just hit the 'reply' button and it will automatically quote that post.
It's good to see new members; feel free to ask and I'll try to answer.
 
No problem with the quoting. You can just hit the 'reply' button and it will automatically quote that post.
It's good to see new members; feel free to ask and I'll try to answer.
Thank you, I was just wondering about Brittany Shank from Michigan that may be connected to Porter. I am unable to find any info other than she is missing. Was she found in the same way Kimberly was?
 
Thank you, I was confused on what I had read. Very interesting they are trying to connect him to Brittany. He has a warrant out for his arrest right now in Elkhart.

State of Indiana v. ROBERT C. PORTER
Case Number 20D06-2203-F6-000394
Court Elkhart Superior Court 6
Type F6 - Felony 6
Filed 03/29/2022
Status 03/29/2022 , Pending (active)
Reference
Prosecutor Case Management Number
20D06-2203-F6-DM2139617
Police Agency Number
22MPD00053
Original County Cause Number
D622F6394
Parties to the Case
Show all party details
Defendant PORTER, ROBERT C.
State Plaintiff State of Indiana
Charges
Show all charge details
01 02/10/2022 35-44.1-3-1(a)(3)/F6: Resisting Law Enforcement-Same as 3929, but def. uses a vehicle.
Chronological Case Summary
03/29/2022
Case Opened as a New Filing

03/29/2022
Case Filed Electronically
Added By EFile Manager

03/29/2022
Information Filed
Redacted Personal Information (COPY)
Filed By:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Information Filed
Personal Information
Filed By:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Appearance Filed
Appearance - Criminal
For Party:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Notice of Exclusion of Confidential Information
ACR 5 - Defendant Personal Information
Filed By:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Information Filed
PORTER CHG
Filed By:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Probable Cause Affidavit Filed
PORTER AFF
Filed By:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Order Issuing Warrant for Arrest
Judicial Officer:
Bonfiglio, David C.

Order Signed:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Warrant or Writ of Attmnt for the Body of a Person Issued

03/30/2022
Automated Paper Notice Issued to Parties
Order Issuing Warrant for Arrest ---- 3/29/2022 : ROBERT C. PORTER

03/30/2022
Automated ENotice Issued to Parties
Order Issuing Warrant for Arrest ---- 3/29/2022 : Vicki Elaine Becker

03/30/2022
Notice Issued
Sheriff Notified of Warrant via Email

This is not the official court record. Official records of court proceedings may only be obtained directly from the court maintaining a particular record.
 
@karenbbmiller Thanks! He has so much stuff going on that it's hard to keep up with him. He's currently in custody in the St. Joseph Co jail.

His new case shows he was charged on 02/10; he has a case where he was extradited to MI
20D05-2201-MC-000345. He had that hearing on 02/01 and went back to MI several days later. I thought that charge was for MI but apparently, he committed that crime in IN.
 
Case: 21A-CR-01465
The appellee's brief for Mario's case was filed today. There are some things in there that I didn't hear during the trial or read about in the news. I'll post some of them in the coming days.

It's always hard to read about what they did to Kim and my heart hurts for her family.

IMO everyone who was at that house contributed to the crime in one way or another. Any of them could have stopped it and didn't.

I really wanted them all to pay.
 
Jose Lopez, Jr., witness for the prosecution:
[snips from the brief]
Pg 11
Kim Dyer and Jose Lopez, Jr. (also known by the name Capillo) met each
other at some point in 2019 and eventually began dating. Lopez knew Angulo
through his mother, and Lopez and Angulo had a close relationship. Angulo
spent a lot of time around members of a gang called the Latin Kings, and he
eventually joined as a member or otherwise became closely affiliated with
them. Snitching is a cardinal sin to the Latin Kings.
Pg 12
One evening, in the late fall of 2019, Dyer went to Saunders’s house; also
present was an acquaintance of hers named Robert Porter.
They found a notebook with the names of a majority of the people who were
inside the house. People started thinking that Dyer was working with the
police. Murzynski blamed Dyer for his brother being sent to prison.
Pg 13
Porter offered to stand guard over Dyer during breaks in the interrogation.
Lopez went to Saunders’s house and was told by Angulo that Dyer was in the
basement. Angulo showed Lopez a notebook and accused Dyer of being a snitch; he appeared to be “in charge” of what was occurring.
Angulo told Lopez that they could not let Dyer go because there were worries
that she would snitch again. Lopez went to the basement. He saw Dyer in a room
to his right; she was sitting on the floor looking scared, and her hair was wet.
Porter was standing guard next to her, and he was holding a rifle.
Lopez only got a quick look at Dyer. He knew that Dyer was in deep trouble.
Lopez tried to persuade Angulo that Dyer should be released, but Angulo
would not agree. Lopez left Saunders’s house.
At some point, the general mood towards Porter changed; Angulo and Lowry
asked Porter if he had raped Dyer while he had been standing guard over her.
Pg 17
Lopez returned to Saunders’s home; it was dark outside again, and the lights
inside were off. Angulo sat with Lopez in his truck and said that he needed his help.
Angulo said, “It’s done, you know. I took care of it…. I took care of Kim. She’s
done.”. Angulo asked Lopez to help him dispose of Dyer’s body, but he refused.
Eventually, Lopez pretended to agree to help and was allowed to leave.
He never saw Dyer again.
Pg 19
Lopez went back to Saunders’s house a few days later, and all of the carpet
and the furniture had been stripped out, and the walls had recently been painted.
On November 6, 2019, Lopez told officers that Dyer had been killed and directed
them to Saunders’s house.
 
Jose Lopez was convicted for Class A felony drug dealing in 2004. He was sentenced to 30 years, 7 of which was on reporting probation. He was released in April of 2015; he violated his probation and it was a warrant for his arrest that opened the door to solving Kim's murder. He did a plea deal and was sentenced to serve the 7 years in the DOC.
20C01-0409-FA-00136 = Sentenced on 07/23/2021 (He testified in April 2021)

When he was arrested on Nov 6, 2019, he was sitting in his truck in the Old Orchard parking lot, late at night, asleep with his truck lights on. LE found a gun and ammo in the truck and he was taken to jail. It was at this time that he started spilling the beans about the murder. In court, he tried to make himself look like a good guy by saying he went to LE over concern for her. Mario's atty called him out on that. He also lied about the part he played in Mario's arrest. It was only after M's atty produced the particulars that he admitted to setting him up for the arrest.
20D01-1911-MC-003877 = Probable Cause for the gun possession below.
20C01-1911-F4-000073 = Dismissed on 07/23/2021 (He testified in April 2021)

In the summer after the murder, he picked up 2 more drug charges. Those are still pending, one is and F3 (3-16 yrs) and the other is F2 (10-30). Vine shows he's still in the Elkhart Correctional System but I'm not sure where he is. The DOC site shows him in Central Office Admin Inbound (where ever and whatever that is) and the Earliest Possible Release Date: 12/18/2023. My suspicion is that he's languishing somewhere, running out the time on his Class A Felony.

I wonder how many people's lives Lopez ruined through his meth dealing. How much meth did he contribute to the party at Old Orchard? Was he the one who took Mario in the wrong direction? How much did he contribute to Kim's addiction? What was the rest of his involvement that night?
 
Here is the appellee's argument. It contains parts that are over my head to the point that I can't even provide a brief summary. The parts in bold are the 4 main points. Part II was divided into parts A and B, with B also being divided into 1 and 2. The arguments where I put ### seemed (IMO) to be the major sticking points.

ARGUMENT
I. [Pg 26]
Joinder was not the cause of Angulo’s inability to call Owen as a witness;
accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the
State’s motion to join him as a defendant.

II.
[Pg 31]
Angulo did not preserve his claim regarding the cross-examination of
Porter for appeal, and he did not have a constitutional right to present
testimony amounting to double hearsay to the jury.

A. Angulo waived his claim that he had a right to cross-examine Porter
about an unrelated potential murder; in any event, the trial court
properly excluded this evidence. [Pg 33]
B. Angulo did not have a right to examine Commander Daggy about
Williamson’s claim that he heard Porter admit to killing Dyer. [Pg 39]
1. Angulo did not follow the procedures to use Commander Daggy’s
testimony for impeachment, so it could only have been offered for
its truth. [Pg 41]
###[Pg 43]Additionally, Porter’s credibility was not particularly important
to the State’s case because his testimony was that when he left, Dyer was still alive.
It was Angulo’s confession to two people and Lowry’s testimony about seeing
Angulo slice Dyer’s neck with a broken bottle that was the critical evidence
connecting Angulo to the murder.
2. [Pg 44] Angulo did not have a Sixth Amendment right to present
unreliable double hearsay.

III.
[Pg 48]
Sufficient evidence supports Angulo’s conviction for robbery.
### [pg 49] Moreover, Angulo’s claim that only Porter’s testimony supports the conviction is not supported by the record. Elkhart County Lieutenant
Michael Carich testified that he interviewed Angulo on December 19, 2019.
During that interview, they discussed Porter’s jewelry, and Angulo admitted
that “he had beat[en] up Robert Porter and that he took Robert
Porter’s jewelry from him”. A confession that has been admitted into evidence
is direct evidence of guilt. Angulo did not object to the admission of Lieutenant
Carich’s testimony, and accordingly, it was admitted as direct evidence that
he used force to take jewelry from Porter.

IV.
[Pg 50]
Angulo’s sentence is not inappropriate in light of the
nature of his offenses and his character.


CONCLUSION
This Court should affirm the trial court’s judgment.
 
This was filed on May 4 and was transmitted to the Court of Appeals. An oral argument was not requested. The brief was mostly about point 1.
****************
PG 4: APPELLANT’S REPLY BRIEF

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT
Contrary to the assertions of the State, Mario’s argument that the trial court impinged upon his fundamental right to present a complete and meaningful theory to the jury has not been waived. The posture Mario’s case is distinguishable from the wealth of cases requiring an objection to evidence when offered in addition to a pretrial motion to preserve a matter for appellate review. To hold as the State does would require defendants to violate a trial court’s order, which is untenable and likely to prejudicially impact their case. As such, this Court should consider the issue preserved for appellate review.

However, even if the issue is considered waived, this Court can and should review the issue as fundamental error has occurred. Mario was denied constitutional and fundamental rights. Such should not be dismissed or disregarded as not constituting fundamental error.

1. Mario’s Denial of Opportunity to Present Complete Defense Was Not Waived, or Constitutes Fundamental Error
...
Permitting a conviction to stand that is the result of an unfair trial that violated due process rights is a blatant violation of the protections guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. Mario has a “fundamental right to present witnesses” in his defense.
 
I never gave it any thought as to prisoners having access to their trial transcripts. I just assumed they had access but now I wonder. Owen has tried twice to get his transcripts and discovery but he apparently isn't going about it in the right way. Just for the record, I'd really like to see them, too. I think some of the info still sealed.

This is from his murder case 20C01-1912-MR-000006 :
07/09/2021
Administrative Event
Defendant as a self-represented litigant files letter to the clerk of the court on June 18, 2021. The Court denies all relief requested for the following reasons: the defendant advised the Court that the defendant intended to appeal his sentence and conviction in this case and requested the appointment of counsel; the Court appointed counsel to represent the defendant in his appeal, but counsel has not yet filed an appearance; the Indiana Court of Appeals will order the court reporter to prepare a record which will include a trial transcript, if the defendant desires a trial transcript outside of the appeal process, the defendant will be provided with a trial transcript upon his payment to the court reporter of the cost for the same; the Court does not have discovery to provide to the defendant as requested; and finally, the defendant will be advised of the contact information for his appellate attorney upon the attorney for filing an appearance of record court. cj
Noticed: Becker, Vicki Elaine
Noticed: Owen, Donald R JR
Noticed: Majerek, Jeffrey
Noticed: Schwartz, Fay
Noticed: Duerring, Marielena
File Stamp: 06/27/2021

04/01/2022
Motion Filed
Defendant files Motion for Copy of Transcripts and Discovery hpd
Filed By:Owen, Donald R JR
File Stamp:04/01/2022

04/04/2022
Administrative Event
Court declines to accept for filing or to act upon motion for copy of transcripts and discovery purportedly filed by the defendant as a self represented litigant because the defendant is represented by counsel. cj
File Stamp:04/02/2022
 
Several years ago, the South Bend Tribune and ProPublica teamed up to do a series on the Elkhart Co. justice system.

Accused in Elkhart (the series)

Elkhart's my hometown and I always had faith in the system. People would tell me how corrupt the system was but I always considered most of that to be sour grapes because they broke the law and got caught. This series has been a real eye-opener.

This article details the problems the SBT had trying to get public transcripts/appeals on several murder cases. In the recent cases I've been following through MyCase, the appeals are available and some of the probable causes are, too.

When Public Records Aren’t Public
 
Appellee's amended brief argument:
pg 22] I. The State presented sufficient evidence that Owen was a major participant in the killing of Dyer and that the killing was in furtherance of criminal gang activity
pg 23] A. Owen was a major participant to the murder of Dyer
pg 27] B. The murder of Dyer was committed to advance the interests of the Latin Kings gang

29] II. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying Owen’s proposed jury instructions; in any event, any error in the instruction of the jury was harmless
30] A. Owen’s proposed instruction number two was properly rejected because it was likely to confuse the jury about “major participation”
31] B. Owen’s proposed instruction number seven also was properly rejected because it was argumentative and likely to confuse the jury
34] C. Any error in the instruction of the jury was harmless

37] III. The trial court did not abuse its discretion during sentencing
38] A. The non-LWOP aggravating circumstances—used only to support the term-of-years sentence—were supported by the record
41] B. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by accepting the jury’s recommendation to sentence Owen to life without parole for murder
42] C. Even if Owen had shown that the trial court erred during sentencing, any error was harmless
 
Thank you, I was confused on what I had read. Very interesting they are trying to connect him to Brittany. He has a warrant out for his arrest right now in Elkhart.

State of Indiana v. ROBERT C. PORTER
Case Number 20D06-2203-F6-000394
Court Elkhart Superior Court 6
Type F6 - Felony 6
Filed 03/29/2022
Status 03/29/2022 , Pending (active)
Reference
Prosecutor Case Management Number
20D06-2203-F6-DM2139617
Police Agency Number
22MPD00053
Original County Cause Number
D622F6394
Parties to the Case
Show all party details
Defendant PORTER, ROBERT C.
State Plaintiff State of Indiana
Charges
Show all charge details
01 02/10/2022 35-44.1-3-1(a)(3)/F6: Resisting Law Enforcement-Same as 3929, but def. uses a vehicle.
Chronological Case Summary
03/29/2022
Case Opened as a New Filing

03/29/2022
Case Filed Electronically
Added By EFile Manager

03/29/2022
Information Filed
Redacted Personal Information (COPY)
Filed By:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Information Filed
Personal Information
Filed By:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Appearance Filed
Appearance - Criminal
For Party:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Notice of Exclusion of Confidential Information
ACR 5 - Defendant Personal Information
Filed By:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Information Filed
PORTER CHG
Filed By:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Probable Cause Affidavit Filed
PORTER AFF
Filed By:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Order Issuing Warrant for Arrest
Judicial Officer:
Bonfiglio, David C.

Order Signed:
03/29/2022
03/29/2022
Warrant or Writ of Attmnt for the Body of a Person Issued

03/30/2022
Automated Paper Notice Issued to Parties
Order Issuing Warrant for Arrest ---- 3/29/2022 : ROBERT C. PORTER

03/30/2022
Automated ENotice Issued to Parties
Order Issuing Warrant for Arrest ---- 3/29/2022 : Vicki Elaine Becker

03/30/2022
Notice Issued
Sheriff Notified of Warrant via Email

This is not the official court record. Official records of court proceedings may only be obtained directly from the court maintaining a particular record.
Hi Karen. James Baysinger and Hide And Seek Podcast just got news, they are receiving Brittany's case files! Hopefully this will break her case open. Just letting you know, bc I see your interest and I too am new here trying to put the pieces together.
 
Mario's case went to the Court of Appeals last month and is waiting for a decision.
Owen's appeal has gone to the Indiana Supreme Court and it's been determined that it merits oral argument.

06/08/2022 = Transmitted to Supreme Court

06/10/2022 = Order Scheduling Oral Argument
The Court has determined the above-captioned case merits oral argument. The argument will be conducted in the Courtroom of the Indiana Supreme Court, 317 Statehouse, 200 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana on, Thursday, September 15, 2022 at 10:00 a.m.
Judicial Officer:Rush, Loretta H.
Serve: Duerring, Marielena
Serve:Rokita, Theodore Edward
Serve:Christofeno, Michael Angelo
Serve:Trial Clerk 20 - Elkhart
Serve:Comer, Evan Matthew
Serve: Dayton, Samuel Joseph
Serve:Becker, Vicki Elaine
 
Mario is still waiting to have his appeal decided.
Owen's hearing was rescheduled:

07/08/2022
Order Scheduling Oral Argument
The oral argument currently scheduled in this matter on Thursday, October 20, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. is RESCHEDULED to Thursday, October 27, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. All other provisions in the Court's order dated June 10, 2022 remain in place.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
193
Guests online
1,879
Total visitors
2,072

Forum statistics

Threads
589,170
Messages
17,914,915
Members
227,742
Latest member
Snugglebear
Back
Top