Crimeatorium
Part 3: The State of Iowa vs Cristhian Bahena Rivera | The Murder of Mollie Tibbetts
Wed, 08 Jan 2025
Part 3Before we begin, I want to take a moment to reflect on the life of Mollie Tibbetts, a young woman whose light touched everyone she met. Mollie Cecelia Tibbetts was born on May 8, 1998, in San Francisco, California, and raised in both San Francisco and Brooklyn, Iowa. She graduated from BGM High School in 2017 and was pursuing a degree in psychology at the University of Iowa, driven by her dream of becoming a child psychologist to help children struggling with mental health issues.Mollie loved life, and it showed in everything she did. She excelled in writing and speech, sharing her thoughts on complex topics like mental health and self-esteem. She made friends everywhere she went, and children adored her. She worked at a summer camp where her laughter and warmth left a lasting impression. She was a runner, a dancer, an actor, and a singer. But above all, Mollie was a young woman filled with kindness, ambition, and an undeniable joy for life.In July 2018, Mollie disappeared while on an evening jog near her hometown of Brooklyn, Iowa, sparking a massive search effort that united the community and drew nationwide attention. Sadly, her body was discovered weeks later.This episode covers the court trial in full, edited for length and clarity.Contact:[email protected] Blog for updates and insights:https://crimeatorium.com/blogSupport:Donations are appreciated, if you would like to help support the show, use the link below and buy me a burrito and a Diet Pepsi:http://Ko-fi.com/crimeatoriumFor $3 a month, you can support this show on Patreon, in return you will receive ad free, early, and bonus episodeshttps://www.patreon.com/crimeatoriumIf you like the podcast, please share it on social media and with friends, and take a minute to leave a review for Crimeatorium on Spotify, Podchaser or Apple Podcasts.https://www.crimeatorium.com/rate/Music:im Kulig (timkulig.com)Titles: Crimeatorium IntroLicensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0997280/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1Thank you for listening!Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/crimeatorium9009/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
State of Iowa may call its next witness.
Our next witness is Pamela Romero. Can you please state your name for the record?
Yes, my name is Pamela Romero.
And how do you spell your last name?
R-O-M-E-R-O.
Ms. Romero, currently how are you employed?
I am the Learning and Development Specialist at West Liberty Foods, located in West Liberty, Iowa.
And what is West Liberty Foods?
It's a turkey process meat factory.
And how long have you worked for West Liberty Foods?
It's going to be two years in June 26 of this year.
Do you have any prior law enforcement experience?
Yes.
Can you please describe that for the jury?
Yes. I graduated from Cedar Rapids Police Academy back in 2015. And I started working with the West Liberty police department for two and a half years later transferring to the Iowa city police department for 11 months. And I'm currently a part-timer with West Liberty police department.
So when would you have left law enforcement? Do you recall?
Yes, it was December of 2018. Ms.
Romero want to direct your attention to July of 2018. Did you become aware of an investigation that was being conducted in Poweshiek County involving the disappearance of Molly Tibbetts?
Yes, I was made aware.
Okay. And were you requested to assist law enforcement in speaking to potential Spanish speaking witnesses?
Yes. The first time that I got involved, I was with the Iowa City Police Department and they told me that they needed assistance with the Hispanic community for me to go ahead and do interviews in Spanish.
And how many days in July did you spend in Poweshiek County assisting in the investigation in that manner?
One day.
Moving forward to August 20th of 2018, were you contacted by law enforcement in Poweshiek County to come to Montezuma to interview a person identified to you as Christian Rivera?
When I was contacted, I was not made aware that I was going to go ahead and interview.
At some point, were you told that you were needed to assist in the interview of the defendant?
Yes.
I'm sorry, go ahead.
When I got there.
When you arrived in Montezuma?
Yes.
And why were you chosen to be the person to interview the defendant?
I was brought to the understanding that Mr. Rivera spoke Spanish, so me being a native speaker, it will be easier for me and him to communicate.
And were you briefed at the time by officers that were involved in the investigation as to what the facts were of the investigation to that point?
Yes, DCI agents and FBI agents.
At the time that you were requested to assist in the investigation, had the body of Molly Tibbetts yet been located? No. Whenever you came to Montezuma, did you come with any other Iowa City police officer?
Yes. At that time, I was traveling with Sergeant Fink.
Sorry, say that again.
Sergeant Fink.
F-I-N-K?
Yes.
And what is Sergeant Fink's first name? Is it Jeff?
Yes.
Sorry, that's okay. Whenever you left Iowa City, where was the first place you went to then in Poweshake County?
We went to the sheriff's office in Poweshade County.
Is that where you met with other officers that you just described?
Yes.
And you were briefed on the investigation at that point?
That is correct, yes.
Was that the time when it was decided that you would attempt to interview the defendant, Christian Bahena-Rivera?
Yes.
When was the first time that you met the defendant?
It was at that time. He was sitting out at the lobby, and I was told by the DCI agents that he was out there, so I went out there to introduce myself.
I told him who I was, so I'm Officer Romero with Iowa City Police Department at the time, and told him, thank him for being there and for being patient, and to let him know that I was gonna go ahead and be a few minutes for us to go ahead and bring him back.
Okay, so you went out initially and introduced yourself?
Yes.
Then you went back to where?
Back to the room where the other agents were at.
After speaking with officers, after introducing yourself to the defendant, did you then go back out to the lobby to get him, to bring him back to attempt an interview?
Yes.
Was the defendant cooperative?
Yes, he was.
Where did you take him to be interviewed?
We took him to one of the back interview rooms.
Did you take his phone away from him?
No.
Were you pleasant with him?
Yes.
In the manner that we're speaking here today?
I believe this is the same tone that I was using with him.
Whenever you showed him back to the interview room, did you point out the exits to him?
Yes, I made sure I knew where the exits were before I took him down. When we were walking down, it was myself and Mr. Rivera, and I show him there's the exit sign right there. That means that that's an exit door.
Was there a door on the room that you conducted the interview in?
Yes, there was a door which I showed to Mr. Rivera that the door was unlocked.
You're telling me you could leave at any time?
Yes, I did.
Was he agreeable to speak with you?
Yes, he was.
So up until this point, what language were you speaking with the defendant?
Spanish.
Right. When the interview began shortly after, what language were you speaking with the defendant?
Spanish.
All right. And was the interview recorded?
Yes, it was.
Recorded by video?
Yes.
And audio?
Yes.
If we were to sit and watch the video and audio of this recorded interview, would we see two people speaking in Spanish?
You will go ahead and see three people speaking Spanish.
I'm sorry.
Sergeant Jeff Fink, myself, and Mr. Rivera.
Did the defendant ever converse with you in English?
No.
So unless we understand Spanish, we're not going to understand the video interview by watching it, correct?
It will be difficult if you're not fluent in Spanish just because of the speed of the conversation.
We'd have to be fluent in Spanish in order to understand it, in your opinion?
In my opinion, yes.
Agent Romero, are you able to translate your conversation that you had with... the defendant on the night of August 20th and morning of August 21st of 2018.
Yes.
Have you had an opportunity to review both video as well as transcripts prior to coming in here today?
Yes.
And do you recall the interview also from your own memory as to what was said during that interview?
Yes.
Prior to going into the interview, Agent Romero You did not know the location of Molly Tibbetts' body?
No.
Did you know that Molly Tibbetts' body had been covered by corn leaves and was located in a cornfield? Did you have that knowledge before talking to Christian Bahena-Rivera?
No.
Did you know or have any knowledge as to the injuries sustained by Molly Tibbetts that caused her death?
No.
Did you have any knowledge as to Molly Tibbetts blood being located in the black Chevy Malibu? Did you have that knowledge?
No.
Because at that time, Molly Tibbetts had not been recovered, correct?
That is correct.
And no blood had been found at that point in the black Chevy Malibu, correct? Correct. Because it had not been analyzed yet by the DCI.
Correct.
During your interview with Mr. Rivera, overall, how would you describe his demeanor?
He was friendly. We had a very friendly conversation. I thought so. We were very immersed in the conversation. I was making the questions. He was answering them. Very engaged.
Did he ever appear to not comprehend any question that you asked him? No. Did you ever not comprehend any answer that he gave? No. At the beginning of the interview Ms. Romero did you speak with the defendant about the vehicle that he drove?
Yes. At the beginning of the interview, I spoke to him about his work of employment, family history, and the vehicles that he had, who he lived with, and his residence, and just rapport building.
Okay. Let's just speak specifically about the vehicle. We'll get into the other things. Okay. Did you talk to him about the vehicle that he drove?
Yes.
And what did he tell you about the vehicle that he drove?
He actually told me that he had two vehicles. One was a black Malibu, Chevy Malibu that he had purchased from one of his cousins.
And then he also mentioned another vehicle, an Altima, that he stated that he usually drove in the gravel back roads of the town because the information that he gave me is the reason why he did that is because the vehicle was not up to date with the registrations, the Altima. And the Black Malibu, it was fine, so he said that he drove that one around town.
During the interview with the defendant, did you allow him to keep his cell phone?
Yes.
Did you allow him to use his cell phone whenever he wanted to?
Yes.
All right. During the first part of the interview, you had mentioned earlier that you talked to him about his family.
Yes.
Did you talk to him about his job?
Yes.
What did he tell you about his family and his job?
He told me that he had been here seven years in the United States, four years in Brooklyn, working in the farms that he stated that he was working at. He gave me information about cousins, uncles living in the closed areas.
You had mentioned earlier that this was what you call a rapport building.
Yes.
Is this something that you had been trained on with regard to conducting an interview?
Yes.
What's the purpose of report building?
Getting to know the person that you're talking to.
And during this part of the interview, were you able to get to know the defendant?
Yes.
Did you ask him where he was currently working?
Yes.
Where was that?
Yarrabee Farms.
And did he tell you what his jobs were at Yarrabee Farms?
Yes, he did. He told me that when he started his employment with Jeremy Farms, he was milking cows. And later he told me that he moved to another position, that it was a lot easier, which was cleaning the sections.
Before we move on to the next section of the interview, Ms. Romero, overall in this interview and interaction with the defendant, did you take frequent breaks?
Yes.
Of all of the interactions that you had with him, was it always you and Jeff Fink that were in the room, or were there times when one or the both of you would leave?
There were times that one of the other ones will live. I was all the time with Mr. Rivera.
Did you provide him food?
Yes, I did. And the hours of the interview, I believe we gave him approximately eight to nine breaks.
And did you provide him a full meal at one point?
Yes, there was a sandwich, and I even asked what beverage was his preference, and I provided that to him.
And you allowed him time to eat that meal?
He had approximately 23, 25 minutes to eat.
And again, was he always tracking questions that you were asking him?
Yes.
Did he appear sleepy to you at any time?
Yes, maybe towards the end. I mean, at the end of the interview, everybody was tired. I was also tired myself.
After the initial part of the interview, did you then turn to whether or not he knew, the defendant knew or had seen Molly Tibbetts?
Yes.
Do you recall how far into the interview with him as far as time that you raised Molly Tibbetts for the first time?
Yes. I do not recall the exact time, but it was approximately an hour, an hour and 45 minutes into the interview.
And do you know if it was before or after he had had something to eat?
I do not recall.
Did you then begin to gather facts or attempt to gather facts about the defendant's possible knowledge of Molly Tibbetts' disappearance?
Yes.
What does he initially say with regard to Molly Tibbetts?
Mr. Rivera told me that he had no idea who she was, and she told me that he had never seen her.
Did you have a photo of Molly Tibbetts that you showed the defendant?
At that time, I pulled out one of the posters, the flyers that had Molly Tibbetts' face. I put it in front of Mr. Rivera and he looked at it and he goes, yes, I have seen them around town. They are all over town. And at that point, he also added that he remembered seeing Molly's boyfriend at one of the local gas stations.
But initially he denied having ever known Molly Tibbetts. Is that true?
That is true.
or having any contact with her.
That is true. He stated he kept a copy of the poster flyer and his car.
At all points forward in the interview, Ms. Romero, with the defendant, was your understanding that you were talking about the disappearance of Molly Tibbetts with the defendant?
Yes.
And when you used the terms her or she, were you referring to Molly Tibbetts?
Yes.
Was it your understanding that the defendant did the same?
Yes.
Was there a time then, bringing in Molly Tibbetts to the interview, was there a time during the interview that you then showed him a photo of a vehicle that was taken from surveillance in Brooklyn from the home of Logan Collins?
Yes, so I was provided with three pictures of a black vehicle that was obtained, I was told, by one of the DCI agents from the Logan Collins surveillance video. That photo showed the black Malibu.
And had you received those three photos at one of the breaks that you had taken during the interview?
Yes.
While you were at the Poweshiek County Sheriff's Office?
Yes.
Did you show those photos to Christian Bahena-Rivera?
Yes, I did.
Hang on a second. Sorry. How did you display them to him?
I was just going to say that I laid them out in front of him, the three pictures together. I said, can you please look at them for me? He looked at them, and his response was, yes, that is my car.
Did you even have to ask him if it was his car, or did he just volunteer that?
He volunteered to say that that was his car.
These were still shots taken from the surveillance camera, is that right?
That is what I was told, yes.
Did it have a time and date stamp on it?
Yes, they did, which I pointed out to Mr. Rivera. He stated that, yes, it was 1948, the time, and July 18, the date.
Okay, so 1948 would be 7.48 p.m.?
Yes.
And the date would have been July 18th?
Yes.
So that date and time stamp would have been on the photocopy of the photo that you showed him?
Yes.
Did you ask him if he was the sole owner of the Malibu?
I asked him if he was driving the vehicle that date and time. He said, yes, that was me. I asked him, is anyone else in the car with you at that time and that particular date? He goes, no, it was just me.
Were you aware at that point that a runner had been seen on the surveillance video taken from Logan Collins' residence?
Yes. It was one of the pictures. It was shown that there was a person.
And did you point that out to the defendant?
Yes, I pointed out to the person that was running, and that's what I told Mr. Rivera. You see this person that is running? He said yes, she was running.
So he used the term she?
Yes.
Now the picture that you would have shown him would have been essentially a shadowed dot. Is that right?
That is right.
All right. Was there any way to tell in the photo that you used with the defendant if it was male or female?
No.
And he used the term her?
Yes.
Ms. Romero, at this point, did the defendant then describe seeing anyone running in Brooklyn at about that time on that date?
Yes, he went on describing that it was a female girl running.
Did he say at this point how many times he observed this female runner while in Brooklyn?
Mr. Rivera told me that he saw her three times. He saw her first turn around, came back. He stated that she even waved at him and smiled and then he went back and that is when he continued doing what he was doing at that time.
What was it that he was supposedly doing in Brooklyn?
He stated that he was trying to find his way around town, that he was heading to his uncle's residence to obtain a vacuum cleaner.
So he told you that he saw a female running. Yes. On three different occasions. Did he ever place himself out on the county blacktop east of Brooklyn?
The way that Mr. Rivera described that first sight of the female was it was in a paved road near a curb.
Did he ever indicate that he got out of his car or engaged her in any way?
Not at that particular time.
So he never would have had any contact with Molly Tibbetts other than, at least that's what he said, never had any contact with her other than seeing her?
At that time, yes.
After seeing her the last time, the third time, where did he say he went in Brooklyn?
Mr. Rivera told me that he lost track of her, that he lost sight of her, and continued on his way to pick up the vacuum cleaner.
Did he then say where he went?
And to town, I am guessing because he told me that he was going to his uncle's residence, which was in the trailer court inside Brooklyn.
Did you have a discussion with the defendant about the appearance of the female runner that he saw?
Yes, I asked her what he thought of the female runner first, and his answer was I found her attractive. I asked him what she was wearing. He said black shirts, maybe a top sport bra, and he continued describing. He did not say the name of it, but he just said one of those things that you put on to measure your steps or to hold your cell phone.
Or to what?
Hold your cell phone? Hold the cell phone.
Did he ever use any other term other than attractive to describe the runner that he saw?
He stated at one point that he thought that she was hot.
Ms. Romero, during this conversation, does the defendant ever admit to you that he had anything to do with harming Molly Tibbetts?
Right at that time, he said no.
A break was taken after this discussion?
Yes.
During that break was, uh, Christian Rivera, uh, placed into custody.
Yes.
All right. And did the interview then continue in the vehicle later on that morning?
Yes.
So later on in the morning at approximately 4 30 a.m. Did you Christian Rivera or Christian Bahena Rivera and another officer leave the sheriff's office?
Yes. Officer Kivi, an agent from FBI and myself and Mr. Herrera left the office.
And where did you go?
We went to Mr. Rivera's residence and the farm that he worked at. I believe it was a property. Yes. All right.
That's an area in southeast of Brooklyn, correct?
I'm not familiar with the area, but yes, that's Poweshie County.
Then did you proceed to a rural area in far eastern Poweshie County?
We landed in Cornfield.
Okay, I'm going to show you a photo. Do you see States Exhibit 3 there on the screen, Ms. Romero?
Yes, I do.
This location that is on the map is 2478 460th Avenue. Do you see that?
Yes, I do.
What kind of road is that?
Gravel road.
Is it, even for a rural county, is that area pretty rural?
Yes.
Okay.
It was a corn field. It was corn fields all around us.
Okay, that's a good point. This is August of 2018, correct?
Yes.
So the corn is up, right?
Yes, it was August 21st already, yes.
Right. The corn is up and at least about head high. Would you agree?
Yes. The grass was pretty tall, too. All right.
The nearest town to where this location is that you went with Mr. Rivera, the defendant, is nearest the town of Guernsey. Is that right?
Yes.
And it's almost to the Iowa County line. Would that be true?
Yes.
Were you in the vehicle with the defendant roadside at that location that we see here on Exhibit 3?
Yes.
We're going to look at Exhibit, I believe it's 25. Exhibit 25, is this the general area that you would have been parked roadside with the defendant, Christian Bahena-Rivera?
Yes, that's where we were parked.
Okay. To the right on this photo, there is an opening to a cornfield. Is that correct?
That is correct.
And through that area, who was located there?
Molly Tibbetts' body.
Did you ever go out to the location of the body?
Yes.
Okay. Were other officers present at this location?
Yes, they were.
Okay. Which direction are we looking here? We would be looking back to the east. Would that be accurate?
That will be accurate.
Okay. And then exhibit number 26, if we can see that. The opening to that cornfield there is on the left on exhibit 26. Do you see that?
Yes.
And generally, does this area show where you were parked in the vehicle with the defendant?
Yes. We were close to that white vehicle.
Say that again.
We were like in front of that, where that white vehicle is right now, like in front of that. Like those vehicles were not there then, but it was close to that area.
So a little bit further up the road is what I'm hearing you say.
Yes.
And this is looking back to the west. Would that be true?
That will be true.
Was there any fence between the two posts or to cross into the cornfield?
No, there wasn't.
Ms. Romero, whenever you got back into the vehicle, did you read the defendant's Miranda warnings?
Yes, I did. So inside the vehicle was Mr. Rivera, myself, and Sergeant Jeff Fink.
And did he wave those?
Yes, he wanted to talk to me.
And did you then ask him what happened between he and Molly Tibbetts?
I asked Mr. Rivera to give me all the details that he could remember since he approached Molly Tibbetts.
All right. What was the first thing the defendant told you about seeing a female on July 18th of 2018 near Brooklyn, Iowa at or near 7.45 p.m.?
He told me he saw her running again three times. One of those times he parked his car behind her, ran after her or jogged after her, came close to her that she noticed him. She turns around. makes the attempt to use his cell phone to call the police. At this point, Mr. Rivera told me that he got angry and that that is when they started fighting.
Okay. All right, let's break that apart just a bit. So the defendant on this occasion, this is while you were seated in the car roadside that we just saw, correct?
Yes.
He admits seeing Molly Tibbetts?
Yes.
he indicates that he followed her yes okay whenever you say that he said that he followed her did he indicate that he followed her in his car for a period yes did he then tell you that he stopped his car he said i parked my car yes and he got out of his vehicle and i started jogging behind her Is there another officer in the vehicle that you were in interviewing him that also spoke Spanish?
Yes, Sergeant Jeff Fink speaks Spanish.
And does Officer Fink ask him if that was on 385th Avenue?
Yes, he did.
And what did the defendant respond?
Mr. Rivera confirmed that it was.
confirmed that he had seen Molly Tibbetts on 385th Avenue?
Yes.
You told us that he jogged towards her and that a cell phone was used. Is that correct?
That is what he said. Mr. Rivera said that she made the attempt to use the cell phone, later telling me that she told him that she was going to call the police.
And what was the defendant's reaction to Molly Tibbetts' threat to call the police?
Mr. Rivera said that he got angry.
Did he indicate that there was any type of physical altercation?
After he stated that he got angry, he stated that they started fighting.
Was he any more specific at this point as to what the fight was?
He said that Molly tried to slap him and was screaming at him.
Did this make him angry?
Mr. Rivera said that this is when he became angry.
Now, What is the next thing that Christian Rivera told you that he remembers while he was on this road with Molly Tibbetts?
So once Mr. Rivera told me that he got angry and he remembered them starting fighting, he stated that usually when he becomes angry or when he gets mad, he blocks out. So the next thing that he told me was that he remembered him driving.
and looking down into his legs and finding the earbuds that belonged to Molly, and that is when he remembered that he had Molly in the back of his vehicle in the trunk.
He did not tell you that he remembered putting her in the trunk?
He stated that he did not remember putting her inside the car. He did not remember how she got there, but he did remember how he took her out of the vehicle. Okay.
But he did remember her being in the trunk?
Yes.
And where were the earbuds at specifically in his car? The earbuds he described, where did he put them?
He stated that he was driving, looked down on his legs. That's how he put it, and that's when he saw them.
Did the defendant indicate to you where he took Molly Tibbetts?
Yes, at the location where we were at at.
To a cornfield?
To the cornfield.
Does the defendant describe at this point any injuries to Molly Tibbetts' body?
He remembers that there was blood. He told me that he took her out of the car, put her on top of his shoulder, carried her inside into the cornfield, laying her down, covering her with corn leaves, and leaving right away.
Is he specific at all concerning the injuries to Molly Tibbetts as to what part of her body those injuries were located?
At one point I asked him, was it the head that it was bleeding? Was it the forehead? He stated with his hand in motion, the neck.
So did he actually say the neck or did he just point to his neck?
He stated and he pointed to the neck.
Did he describe for you how her body felt when he carried her?
I asked him how her body felt against his body when he was carrying her. He told me that it felt like a person that had just fainted.
Did the defendant ever tell you or remember for you any weapon that was used to cause the injuries to Molly Tibbetts that would have caused her to bleed?
No, he did not.
He couldn't remember it?
He could not remember.
Is it fair to say that in your conversation with Christian Rivera roadside at the cornfield that the recall by the defendant was not complete?
Yes, I was trying to get more details from him.
And it was not complete in terms of he never discussed a weapon that was used to harm Molly Tibbetts?
That is correct.
He did not provide you turn by turn a drive that he took to the cornfield, correct? Correct. And there may have been some other details left out, is that right?
Yes.
Did the defendant provide you any information concerning the condition of his clothing?
Yes, he told me that he had no shirt on because it was stained with blood. I'm sorry, I didn't... He had no shirt on because it was stained with blood. Or it could be bloody.
He had no shirt on at what point?
When he was carrying her inside the cornfield.
After he covers Molly Tibbetts with corn leaves, did he leave right away?
Yes, he said I left right away.
You asked him again in this part of the interview concerning putting her in the car. Do you recall that?
Yes.
He doesn't remember putting Molly Tibbetts in the vehicle, but remembers taking her out. Is that accurate?
That is accurate.
After going through this statement with the defendant, did you press him then for more details?
Yes, I did.
Because of those gaps that we just mentioned, is that right?
Yes.
Did you want to get all of the information that you could possibly get from the defendant?
Yes.
That was your goal?
That was my goal.
Did you ever then press him then on more details? How did you go about doing that?
Yes, so I went to ask him, Mr. Vera, please just let me know, give me more details how she got into the car, what happened to her, what did you do to her. His answer was, I brought you here, didn't I? So that means that I did it. I don't remember how I did it.
So he tells you that you were pressing him for more details?
Yes.
He tells you that he brought you all the way out to her?
Yes.
So that means I did it, right? It was a question, is that correct?
That is how he put it, yes.
And then he follows that with, I don't know how I did it, is that correct?
That is correct.
Did you press him at one point on more details by asking him what changes?
He goes, nothing changes. I brought you out here. And then he restates what he told me earlier.
All right, and towards the end of this interaction with the defendant, You come back to asking him about being scared when Molly Tibbetts threatened to call the police. Is that right?
Yes.
What was his reaction or what was his answer to that particular statement?
He said that he got scared, but he got angry too.
And he was angry about her threatening to call the police?
Yes.
Did you ask him after this happened, did you think about it?
Yes.
What was his answer to that?
He goes, not really.
And when people, you asked him, when people were looking for Molly Tibbetts, did you ask him, what were you thinking?
Yes.
What was his reaction to that?
I remember he just shrugged his shoulder and he goes, I didn't think about it.
Did he say that he felt bad?
No.
Did he say that he blocked out everything or tried to?
The part where he got angry, yes.
This interaction with... Christian Rivera or Christian Bahena Rivera at the roadside lasted how long in the car?
Again, I don't have exact times, but it was probably an hour or so.
Okay. And at any point in time, did you go back into the cornfield to observe the area where Molly Tibbetts had been found?
No.
Did you drive back to the sheriff's office with the defendant?
Yes. No, not with the defendant.
Okay. But you went back?
Yes.
The man that you've just recounted, these statements that he gave to you on August 20th and 21st, is he seated here in the courtroom?
Yes, he is.
Please point to him and describe what he's wearing.
He is right there, and he is wearing a light blue shirt with the gray dress pants.
Your Honor, the record should reflect that Ms. Romero has identified the defendant, Christian Bahena-Rivera.
Record will so reflect.
That's all I have.
Thank you. Ms. Freeze, you may cross-examine.
Ms. Romero, you said that Mr. Bahena made a statement that kind of gestured a slitting of a throat. Is that correct?
My mistake, it was not the slitting of the throat. It was just more of a sign. Like he went like this through to the neck.
All right, and so what did you understand him to mean when he did that?
I was asking him where there was blood, either head, forehead, and I myself went head, forehead, which he said neck, and he went like this.
So my client specifically said that there was blood on her neck, is that right? That is what I understood from him, yes. And from what you understood was that her neck was bleeding, is that correct?
No, at the time he just said that there was blood in the neck and that's how I took it.
You understand that our injuries are not consistent with that? I was not aware of the injuries. You don't know anything about the injuries in this case, is that right?
I know what the information that they have given me, yes, but not any details or anything in particularly.
That would be a different area for someone else to testify to, is that right? That is correct. Someone that has expertise in what her injuries were, is that correct? Yes. But from what Mr. Bahena said is that there was blood specifically on her neck, is that right?
When I asked him, I asked him again, was there blood in the head, forehead? He pointed to his neck like this and he said in the neck.
And when he pointed to his neck, he had his thumb and his forefinger around his neck as if someone was being strangled.
Again, he just said that. I did not think of cuts, strangles, or anything like that. I just was trying to understand where he saw the blood.
You've pressed my client many times for more details. Is that right? Yes. You told him several times that you didn't believe that he didn't remember these details. Is that right?
I did not tell him that I did not believe him. I told him that I understood if he had that condition. I even remember saying that that could be a condition when someone blacked out. But no, I do not recall saying that.
But as far as what exactly happened, you know, whether a knife was used or some sort of an object, you just don't know. Is that right? That is right. And that's because my client did not give you that information. Is that correct? That is correct. Now, he did lead you to the body. Is that right? Yes, he did. And what he did is he said, this is where this happened. Is that right?
He showed me the cornfield and he goes, this is the cornfield where I came, took her out of the trunk. carry her on my shoulder, went inside the cornfield, drop her on the ground, cover her with leaves, and I left right away.
Now you were very clear to him that you wanted more information, is that right?
In the car, yes, when I was doing the interview, I wanted more details. I was trying to have him remember what happened between the time that he stated that he did not remember how she got in the car, but he remembered when he took her out of the car.
Now, he wouldn't provide you with those details. Is that correct? That is correct. And specifically, when he asked or when you were pressed for details, he said, I brought you here, right?
He kept restating that, yes, I brought you here, didn't I? I brought you here, didn't I?
And another thing that he said to you is, what changes? Is that right? Yes. He knew that. I mean, many hours before, he was detained on an immigration hold. Isn't that right? Yes. He was detained around 11.30 p.m. at night. And when he was talking to you at this cornfield, that was approximately 5 or 6 o'clock in the morning. Isn't that right? We left the office at 4.30 a.m.
And he knew once you were there that he was going to be arrested for her homicide. Isn't that right?
At that time, when the 1130 interview with the ICE agent, at that time he was under custody.
And specifically, though, ma'am, between 5 and 6 in the morning when you are at that cornfield, he has brought you to the body. He's led you in the cornfield. Isn't that right? That is right. And he knew that he was going to be placed under arrest for her homicide, isn't that right? What he was thinking, I'm not sure what his thoughts were.
Well, he had no reason to believe that he wasn't going to be held accountable, isn't that right? I guess not. And you asked him for more details, right? Yes. And he was simply unwilling to give them to you, is that correct?
Again, I will not say the word unwillingly. He kept stating that when he got angry, he blocks out. So I'm not sure if he was not willing to do it or he was just describing a condition that he had. Again, it's not my area. Now you're trained in interview techniques, is that right? I received, like I stated earlier, 16 hours of the CTK class. Have you ever heard of the term false confession?
It was brought in one of the classes of the training, yes. Explain for the jury what a false confession is. Sorry, but I will not be able to do that because I do not have the knowledge of what it is exactly.
Explain what you were trained at the interview technique schools that you were at.
I do not remember going into details with a false confession. My training was how to direct an interview, how to do report building, how to go ahead and get to know the person that you were interviewing. how to conduct the interview and manage like that.
Now, ma'am, you have some very reputable skills that I would assume, given your dual language, is that you did interviews quite a lot in your capacity as a law enforcement officer. Is that right?
It all depends what you mean quite a lot. Again, I started my career with law enforcement and I was doing this for two and a half years almost at the time. So I was still brand new to all of it. And I was, yes, conducting interviews in a small town of West Liberty, which I There were not a lot of interviews to be done. It all depends what a lot means to you.
It was generally known in the community that you were a native Spanish speaker. Isn't that right? That is correct, yes. And so if there was someone that was investigating a case involving someone that spoke Spanish, they would often bring you in to assist. Isn't that right? Yes. And have you ever been asked to assist in another jurisdiction such as this case? No. All right.
Now, ma'am, I want to talk to you a little bit about report building. That's something that you've learned at the academy?
Yes, a little bit in the academy, but again, the report building skills that I learned were mostly at the CTK classes. And specifically, what is rapport building? Again, just getting to know the person that you're talking to, anything about family, history, employment, anything that we can go ahead and get out of the specific person.
And it sounds to me like you talked to my client for about two hours just doing general rapport building.
Again, I do not recall the exact times, but yes, the interview was long.
You did speak to him about a number of different things. Is that right?
That is right. We spoke about family. He gave me a list of uncles and aunts. You talked to him about his employment and where he worked.
Is that right? Yes, that is right. You also talked to him about family.
how often he worked is that correct yes and he talked to you and ma'am i do have your trans or not your transcripts but the transcripts here if you'd like to look at them but he talked to you about how often he worked at the dairy farm is that right yes he did he told you that he worked long hours is that right seven days a week yes five to five sometimes All right.
And so he goes into work at 5 o'clock in the morning, is that correct? That is correct. That's what he told me. And then he would leave work at 5 p.m., is that right? Yes, he said the 12-hour shift. And he would work seven days a week on his on week, is that right? Yes, he told me that there were some every other weekend or something like that, that he was off.
So generally there would be one week that he would work every single day, 12-hour days, is that right? That was my understanding when I spoke to him. And then the next week he would have two days off, is that right? He said every other weekend, so yes, that's what I understand. And that second week, so he'd work five of the seven days, is that right?
I did not ask what week he was on at that particular time, so I'm not sure.
Well, let me ask a better question for you. Generally, if it was a two-week period, he would work 12 of the 14 days. Is that right? Yes. And so I understand you don't know about what days were off, but he would work 12 hours a day, 12 of the 14 days a week. Is that right? Again, he told me he went in at 5 a.m., come out at 5 p.m. And you didn't have anything to dispute that, is that right? No.
He talked to you about his family in the area, is that right? Yes. You were able to connect to him that you both immigrated here to the United States, is that right? Yes. You told him that you immigrated here when you were 10, right? Yes. And he said that he came to the United States when he was about 17. Yes, if I recall correctly, yes. Did he tell you the area or the township that he was from?
Yes, he did.
Where was he from? I do not recall the name of the town, but he was from the south part of Mexico. The state, I believe it was Guerrero.
That's what I thought was the town, so it sounds like you're following this better than me. Did you ask him about his parents and if they're still alive? Yes, I did. And did he tell you where they were? They said that they were both in Mexico. So they were still in Mexico in Giro, is that right? Yes. Did you ask him about if he had any siblings? Yes, I did. And did he tell you about his family?
Yes, he did. And what family did he have other than his parents in Mexico?
Well, in Mexico, I do not recall anymore besides the parents, but I believe he mentioned a brother or sister. But we mostly focus on the family that he had here and around the area.
All right. And my notes, and I don't think I want to make you go through the interview here, but it said he had two siblings. But your understanding is he had a sibling or two that were still with his parents. Is that right? That was my understanding, yes. He also told you that he's building a house in Mexico. Is that right? Yes, he did.
And how is it that one works in Iowa, you know, 12 out of 14 days of a week and still is doing that in Mexico?
Again, everybody, I don't know how he's doing it. The things that I know is that that's what a lot of immigrants do. That is what my parents did. We came here for a better life and we were building a house, meaning that someone does the construction work while you send money to them.
And it's not unusual for someone that is an immigrant in this country to still be sending money home to their family. Is that right? That is right. And is it unusual for a family to be separated where, you know, part of the family immigrates to the country and the other part of the family stays there?
That's not unusual.
Why would a family do that?
Because of their immigration status?
Now, with Christian, him sending money back to his family to take care of his family Is that something that's unusual? No. Now, the money that someone can make in the United States versus in Mexico, is that significant?
I will say so. To be honest, I came here when I was 10, so I do not have any knowledge of how much money you can go ahead and make in Mexico.
Right.
Did he tell you that he spent time with this child?
Yes, he stated that he drove down to the Cedar Rapids area where she was living with the mother and that he used to bring her over to Brooklyn.
So his daughter would stay with him, you know, those two days out of every 14 days. Is that right?
All right.
My client also talked about his family that is in the Iowa area. Is that right? Yes. And specifically, he told you that he chose the location that he did because he had uncles in the area. Is that right? Yes. He told you that he had uncles in Tama County. Is that right? Yes. I think he said he had four different uncles in Tama. Again, I do not recall the number, but yes, there were quite a few.
He also told you that he had family in Brooklyn. Is that right? Yes. It sounds to me like he had some aunts that would take care of him and kind of take cook food for him when he had a lunch. Is that right?
That is right. He stated that the uncle's wife was the one who prepared his food.
He also showed you a picture of his daughter, is that right? No, I do not recall that. You don't recall him showing you a picture of his daughter? No, I do not remember that part. If I showed you a copy of your transcript, would that assist with that? Yes. All right. This was over an 11-hour interview, is that right?
That is correct.
And I'm not expecting you to remember every single detail. But it does show that you asked to see a picture of his daughter, is that right?
I'm not seeing where I asked him to show me the picture. I was asking him for the cell phone number. And right now, when you see my cell phone, I have in the background my own baby. And that is what I saw in his cell phone. He did not show me the picture like this and when this is my daughter. It was just in the background of the cell phone. And I asked, is that your daughter? He said yes.
All right. That makes sense. So because it talks and I don't have it right in front of me, I can bring it up. But there's some sort of a statement that you say, oh, that's your daughter. Is that right? Yes. And then you say, oh, she's cute. Is that right? Yes. So you didn't ask to see a picture of his daughter, is that right? No.
So after the rapport building that happens, and we talked about some of the things you talked about, but you got to know him fairly significantly, is that right? Yes, I believe that we spend time talking. The next thing, you did talk to him some about his status. Is that right? Yes. And we already talked about he came to Mexico when he was 17. Is that right? Yes.
You talked to him about how it is that he's able to, I guess, function in the United States without a legal status. Is that right? Yes. And my client didn't make any sort of statements or try to represent to you that he was legally in this country. Is that right? No, he was very upfront with you that he was here illegally. Is that right? Yes.
He was brought here when he was 17 and he's just remained. Is that correct?
He told me that he had been in the United States for seven years and four in Brooklyn.
One thing that you were very clear to him on the outset is that you were not here to investigate his immigration status. Is that right?
I do remember telling him a couple of times that I was not interested in his status.
And so specifically, you said you were worried about this girl's disappearance. You were not the immigration police. Is that right?
At one point, I did mention that, but not at the beginning of the interview.
Well, why don't you look at page 26 now? And you were very clear with him that you are not here to investigate his immigration status. Is that right? Yes. And he was very clear to you that he was in this country illegally. Is that correct?
He told me that he was using another name and social security number.
And specifically that he was working under the name of John Budd. Is that right? Yes. He talked to you about using that name. Is that right? Yes. He said that he has no credit cards, debit cards or anything like that. Is that correct? Yes. Basically, he uses that name so that he is able to work. Yes. And then he cashes the check and operates with cash, is that correct?
Yes, that's what he told me.
Now, the statement that you had about immigration, that you were not here to arrest him for immigration, you genuinely believed that at that time, is that right? Yes. Now, there were people that were not in the interview room that were making the big picture decisions on the case. Is that right? Yes.
How many other people were there working on that case from the FBI, DCI, any sort of law enforcement agency?
I'm not able to tell you that. I don't know.
From what you saw, were there more than 10 people?
Not that I remember. I mean, I do remember like four, five of them.
Well, you are aware that when my client was brought into custody, that his vehicle was also being processed. Is that right? At the beginning of the interview, I was not aware of that. You were made aware of that at a certain time. Is that right? That is right. And specifically, you were told at that point in time that there had been hair that was found in Mr. Rivera's vehicle. Isn't that right?
Later on in the interview, yes. And explain to me, who told you that there was hair that was found in the vehicle? I do not recall who told me that. At that time, you were made aware that my client's vehicle was being searched and was being processed by the Division of Criminal Investigation, is that right?
Again, I'm not sure who was investigating the vehicle. I was aware that the vehicle was being investigated, but not sure who it was.
And I'm not asking you when, but at some point in time during that night, you became aware that simultaneously, as my client's being interviewed, his vehicle is also being processed. Is that right? That is right, yes. And one of the things that you were told... was that there was hair that was found in that vehicle. Is that correct? Yes.
And it was believed that that hair may be from Molly Tibbetts. Isn't that right?
I do not recall telling him that it was from Molly Tibbetts. I believe I told him that there was hair found with the information that I got from the outside, but I did not mention Molly Tibbetts.
You went in and you confronted my client saying that there was hair found in the vehicle. Is that right?
I informed Mr. Rivera They were telling me that there was hair found in the vehicle.
And you essentially were saying, hey, explain this. Is that right?
Yes, which he stated that it was hair from his daughter.
You later found out that the statement or what you were told was not true. Is that right?
Later on, again, I do not recall that. All right. I did not... People were not there telling me, yes, this is true, this is not true. I was given the information, going in there, conducting the interview.
Right, so it would be for this jury to listen to the evidence and to find out if hair was actually found in the vehicle. Is that right?
That is someone else's part to explain.
But one of the things that you confronted him with is that there was hair in his vehicle. Is that right? I informed Mr. Rivera that there was hair. And as far as the immigration, what you told him, it turned out to be a lie. Is that right?
No, it wasn't a lie. I was not there for immigration status. I was not there to ask him about his status at all. I was there, again, to conduct an interview, and that's what I did.
one of the tactics you were taught to use is to present a suspect with information that ties them to the crime isn't that right yes and sometimes investigators use false information to present to a suspect isn't that right yes and the information that you told him that you were not worried about his immigration status that changed at 11 30 p.m isn't that right
That did not change because I was not interested in his immigration status.
Well, at about 11.30 p.m., he was placed in custody for immigration. Is that right? By ICE agents, correct. Okay, so a break was taken in the interview, and he was put in custody for being illegally in the United States. Is that right?
That's what I understood at 11.30, yes.
My client had just gotten off of work or was finishing the day at work when he was brought in. Isn't that right? I'm not sure.
I was not given that information. Well, that's what he told you. He told me that he was at work when they went to talk to him.
And the interview started at about 5 o'clock p.m.? Approximately 1706. And 1706 would be 506? 506, yeah. So that would be approximately the end of his day at the dairy farm, is that right? With the information that he gave me, yes. And that interview continued through the night, isn't that right? Yes.
So he was given breaks, but he was essentially in a small room at the sheriff's office from 5 p.m. at night until...
4 30 the next morning is that right yes that was an 11 hour interview with approximately eight to nine breaks that he was given he was given food he was given breaks to use the restroom he was um given numeral number of like breaks to just be by himself yes
His family came and asked to talk to him. Isn't that right?
I'm not sure what the family asked. I was told that there was family out in the lobby, and I went outside to talk to them.
So you talked to his family. Were you able to get their names? No, I was not. There were two people there. Is that right? I recall seeing three of them there. When you talked to them, you suggested that they go home.
I told them that I wasn't aware of how long this was going to go ahead and go for, that it was late, that if they wanted to go home, that they could.
Did you ever offer them a chance to speak with my client? No, I did not. Did you ever tell my client that his family was there to speak with him?
Not to speak to him. I made Mr. Herrera aware that he had family out in the lobby.
You made him aware that he had family out in the lobby? Yes. If my client says that you never made him aware that he had family out in the lobby, you disagree with that? It was recorded, so it will go ahead and be in the transcripts. All right. So you believe that it's in these transcripts somewhere? Somewhere, yes. All right. Did you offer him a chance to go speak with his family?
No.
You just told him that they were there?
At the beginning of the interview, I told him he had his cell phone with him. I told him he was free to go whenever he wanted to. He continued to stay. He continued to talk to me.
At some point... in the interview, you talked to my client several times about helping himself. Do you recall that?
The word help, it's translated in a different concept in Spanish, so I'm not sure what you are referring to when I said help.
You believe that the transcript is wrong is what you're saying?
I'm not saying that it's wrong, but in my opinion, there are parts that me being a fluent Spanish speaker, I will say that they're not translated the correct way, but that is just my opinion.
Ma'am, these transcripts, First of all, they've been authored by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Is that right? Yes, that's what I was told, yes. So that's their translation, is that right? That's what I was told, yes. And what you're saying is that their translation is not what you believe the translation is?
In my opinion, again, there are parts in the transcripts that I believe were not translated the correct way. And the reason why I'm saying this is by looking at the video and reading what they translate it.
Would it be fair to say that there's different dialects of Spanish? Yes. Explain that for the jury.
There are different words that you can go ahead and use to describe something. Like, there are parts of Mexico that, when you say cookie, it could, for other MIBs, like slapping someone in the face. So it's different words that describe different things. It's just hard to explain.
And so my client, he's from Guerrero, Mexico, is that right? Guerrero, Mexico, yes. You say it much better than me. Where are you from in Mexico? I'm from the north side. I'm Durango. As far as dialects, can you give this jury any information on different dialects?
Not really, but I do understand that there is different forms that we talk. Like anywhere in the United States, if you are from the north, if you're from the south, they can go ahead and have different accents, different dialects, and that is the same way that has happened in Mexico.
For example, using the term hey, you know, or hello, are there different ways to say that depending on where you are from?
Yes. It will be like saying soda or pop. I mean, in the United States, it's just different.
All right, so let's go to page 11 first, and I'll give you a little bit of direction. What number of the transcript? It is 20-27-35, and it's about towards the middle, and I don't want you to read it to me, but let me know when you've had a chance to read the phrase. I think you use help two different times. Have you seen it? Yes.
And what you say is, you say, you can help me understand so you can help yourself. Yes. And at that point, you're, I guess, suggesting that you are able to help my client. Isn't that right?
No, that's not the way that I see it. When I said help me understand in Spanish, it would be ayúdame a comprender. Help me understand what you're trying to say. It's like talking to a kid in school. Help me, guide me to what you are saying. So that is the meaning of the word help in there.
You use that phrase multiple different times. You say, let's help each other out. We're here to help each other out. You agree with me on that. Is that right? That is correct. Another thing you say, and I can go through the different transcript places, but you're telling me that we're here to help you out. That's another phrase that you used several times, ma'am. You recall that? Yes.
And at that point you say, we're here to help you out. Yes. Aren't you telling my client that you're there to help him?
Basically what I'm saying, what I mean with that is I am here to hear you out, to see what you have to say.
You say that you're telling him that, but that's not what you said. Is that right?
Again, it's just difficult to explain in Spanish because when you say it in Spanish, I'm going to go ahead and talk Spanish. I'm going to go ahead and translate what I said. So help me understand. Again, I was trying to get the information that he needed to tell me.
Okay. So it would be fair to say that these transcripts you don't agree with everything that is said in here. Is that right?
Again, it's not that I don't agree, it's just that in my opinion, because I believe, again, different dialect, different words being used, it's just not the way that I will translate it myself.
Would you agree with me that if you were to translate it yourself, it would probably be about 10% inaccurate? I will not say that, but I will be able to understand it better, yes. All right. You think that you would be able to explain it better. Is that right? That is right.
And someone, and again, it looks like it's transcribed by a Kathy Yanez, but someone has a disagreement with you on how this translation would read. Is that right? What do you mean? The person taking down this information takes it down differently than you would. Is that right? Yes. And that may be different from what my client would. Is that right? It could be.
Another thing is that he's also being interrogated, and you'd agree with me that this was an interrogation, correct? I do not agree with you on that. Okay, well, he was a suspect here. Is that right?
I did not make him aware that he was a suspect. I did not have anything to hold him as a suspect at the time of the interview.
How many times have you interviewed a witness for 11 plus hours, ma'am? That was the first time, yes. All right. And in this case, he was not only interviewed for 11 plus hours, he was interviewed right after he finished a long day at work. Is that right? Yes, that was the Anderson. And he's not somebody like you and me that goes and sits at a desk all day, correct?
With the job description that he gave me, he was not. He's cleaning pens, is that right? Yes. He's scooping poop. Yes. He's on his feet or some other machinery all day, is that right? I did not ask him that. I'm guessing. This man, he works a tough job for 12 hours a day, 12 out of the 14 days a week. Isn't that right? That is what he told me, yes.
And then he's brought in and he is questioned from you on and off for 11 plus hours. Isn't that right? The interview went for 11 hours, yes. And it was not until the very end, the last couple of hours, that he was willing to give you really any information. Is that right? That's not the way that I took it. Okay. He agreed that he saw her out running. Is that right? Yes.
But other than that, he did not give you any significant information until the last couple of hours. Okay. He did give me information. Okay, what information did he give you? It will be recorded in the transcripts. Okay, that's fair. This man fell asleep multiple different times during this interview, is that right? Not to my knowledge, no. Well, he was given breaks, is that right? Yes.
And during those breaks, he fell asleep... Multiple different times.
I was not aware of that.
So you don't believe that my client fell asleep during this interview? I did not see him fall asleep during the interview. And you disagree, noticing that he was tired?
I do not disagree with you. At the end of the interview, he looked tired. I looked tired. Everyone was tired.
Well, let's turn first to... 20 27 35 and if you could go to page 15 and i'm sorry go to page 21. if you could read it's about 10 lines in do you recall ma'am and and just to be clear this transcript at 20 27 35 that deals with the military time stamp is that right yes So that would have been at 8.35 at night that night, is that correct? Yes. So about three hours into the interview.
Okay.
And at that point in time, it appears that you're walking back into the room, is that correct? Yes. And what is it that you acknowledged to my client? I said, you fell asleep. And so do you recall walking back into the room and seeing that he was asleep? No, I do not recall that.
I asked him because it took a little bit to come back.
what does he respond back to you he did not admit or anything he just goes and just a little bit yes so you're telling this jury that you agree that you said that is that right yes or are you saying that it's an inaccurate translation no i'm telling you that i do remember telling him that because i took a long time to come back from that break
and what i'm telling the jury right now is that at the time when i that i spent with chris mr rivera and all of that time mr rivera did not put his head down did not act as he was sleeping when we were in the conversation he was very engaged he was answering the questions that i was making and at no point i saw him sleeping all right let's go to page 22 now ma'am it's the same transcript
And if you could read the last portion and just let me know, have you had a chance to look at it or do you need more time? And just to kind of, I guess, bring you to where you were in the conversation, he's talking to you about a date that he was supposed to have with a woman. Is that right? Yes. And he did talk to you about that he was supposed to have a date with a woman on July 19th.
Is that right? That is correct. And you talked about it with him a little bit that he had even bought the woman flowers. Is that right? Yes. He had had arranged through his cousin to get flowers because he's working normally during the day. Is that right? Yes. He had said that he had cleaned his car so that it was ready for this date. Is that right? Yes.
He said that he was going to take this woman to Des Moines to go out to eat. Is that right? Yes. He said that they had bet on a soccer game or something. Is that right? That is right. And he said that he lost, so he was buying. Is that right? Yes. And he told you that that date was supposed to be on July 19th of 2018. Is that right? That is correct.
And what he told you is that that date never happened because the tornado? Yes. What was the answer you said? Because of the tornado, he was not able to visit. This woman, she lived in Marshalltown, is that correct? Yes. What happened to be is that this tornado in Marshalltown hit the day after Molly Tibbetts went on this run. Is that right? I do not recall. Okay.
But he said he was planning to take her on the date and this tornado hit at the same time. Is that right? Yes. So going back to this interview, you're talking about this different date and who bought the flowers and everything. Is that right? Yes. And at that point in time, you excused yourself so that he could eat. Is that right? Yes. And what is it that he says?
He goes, I am going to sleep here, question mark, so I can start making myself comfortable, right? That was a joking matter. I took it because he chuckled. And I said, no, no, don't get too comfortable. All right. I'll be right back.
And keep moving down the transcript, ma'am. I told him no, no. You don't need to keep reading it, but go ahead and read it to yourself.
Okay.
So where exactly do you want me to go from here? If you could go to 24, page 24. And what's shown is that you go back into the room. Is that right? Yes. So you gave him a break. Is that correct? Yes. And at that point in time, you asked him how he was doing. Is that right? Yes. Yes. And my client told you that he was sleepy.
Is that correct? Well, I did not ask him. It was Sergeant Jeff that made the question, how are you doing? And he responded, sleepy.
So at that portion of the interview, my client acknowledged that he was tired. Is that correct? Yes. If you could go to 220904, that's the next transcript. And so that would be about 10 o'clock at night. So this would be at about 1150 at night. Is that correct? Yes. Again, I do not remember the exact times. Well, the transcript would have been, it's labeled that it's 235034, correct? Yes.
So that would correspond with about 1150, right? Right. And at the beginning of that transcript, you asked my client if he's sleepy. Is that right?
Yes, I said, are you sleeping, Christian? And he says a bit. Yes, his response was a bit.
Now I'd ask you to go to page 32. Yes. At that point in time, you also ask my client, you say, you are sleepy, right? Yes. And he says yes. And again, chuckles. Now, ma'am, I guess I can show portions of the video if need be that my client's sleeping, but I want to make clear. So are you saying that he was never sleeping when you were in the room, or are you saying that he was never sleeping?
I'm saying that he was never sleeping when I was in the room. He did not make any indicators. Whenever I make the question, as you can see, he chuckles. He jokes around with it and, again, engages in the conversation with me.
So what you're telling this jury is that he was joking around about being sleepy?
That's how I took it, not particularly joking around, but when you ask me a question, I answer it and I chuckle or laugh. To my interpretation, that will be that I'm being serious. So you don't believe that he's sleeping? Again, he was not sleeping when I was making contact with him.
Mr. Brees and Mr. Brown, could I have you two approach, please? The jury, that completes our service for today. Ms. Romero, I'll remind you, you're still under oath. When we last concluded, the defense had cross-examined the witness, and we're up to Mr. Brown. Do you have any redirect?
Yes, sir. Thank you.
Good morning, Ms. Romero.
Good morning.
The interaction with the defendant that you had at the sheriff's office, was it ever verbally confrontational?
No, it was not.
Were you pleasant with the defendant?
Yes. I will say it was a very friendly conversation.
Okay. And you did confront him at times with certain information. Would that be true?
That is correct.
You were asked a question concerning a hair that you were told was found in the vehicle of the defendant, is that right?
Yes.
You were provided that information from other officers, correct?
That is correct.
Did you ever examine the vehicle?
No, I did not.
Did you ever directly speak to any of the witnesses who examined the Malibu, that vehicle?
No, I did not.
I want to talk to you a bit about the demeanor of the defendant in your interaction with him, okay?
Okay.
The defense spent a fair amount of time asking you whether or not the defendant appeared sleepy to you or sleep-deprived. Would you agree?
Yes.
All right. Whenever you interacted with him during the interview, was the defendant able to track your questions?
Yes, Mr. Rivera was able to track the questions.
Was there ever a time during the interview where you asked him a question where he appeared not to follow what you were asking?
No.
Did he ever ask for any clarification on any matter that you remember? No. Now, part of the interview that we saw in the room at the sheriff's office, do you recall that?
Yes.
The defendant's phone is sitting in front of him. Is that right? That is correct. Up until 1130 on August 20th of 2018, did you ever try to prevent the defendant from using his phone?
No, I did not.
Sorry?
I did not.
Actually, we see in the video, would you agree with me, that he does attempt to use his phone on multiple occasions?
Yes. Objection.
Overruled. Go ahead.
What's the answer to that question?
Yes.
At those points where the defendant is seen with his phone, would he have been free to go?
Yes.
You would have allowed him to leave if he wanted to walk out the door?
Yes.
In fact, did you show him... Or how did you show him that he could get out of the sheriff's office at Power Sheet County?
When I was walking back with Mr. Rivera to the interview room, I showed physically the exit door with the exit signs, and I told Mr. Rivera that he was free to go at any time. When we went inside the interview room, I even moved the lock to the door to make him aware that it was unlocked, that he could go ahead and leave at any time.
And he never did that, correct?
Correct.
He never left the sheriff's office on his own?
He did not.
He was put into custody shortly after 1130 on August 20th of 2018, is that right?
By the agents, yes.
Now, I wanted to clarify a couple things relating to translation. Tell us again your knowledge of the Spanish language. How would you characterize it?
I was born in Mexico, so that is my first language. That is practically what I used. As a lot of you can tell, I have an accent with my English. Spanish is my primary language.
So regardless of the transcripts that you've been shown, you were at the interview of the defendant, correct?
Yes.
You engaged with him?
Yes.
All right. Did you have any difficulty understanding his answers to your questions?
No.
Did the defendant ever express to you any difficulty understanding your questions or statements that you made to him in Spanish?
No.
At the outset of the interview, after introductions and some other basic information, was it made clear to the defendant that you were there to talk about the disappearance of Molly Tibbetts?
I'm sorry, can you repeat that?
At the outset of the interview, after the initial introductions and conversation, was it clear that you were there to talk about Molly Tibbetts?
Yes, after the observation.
How would you have made that clear to the defendant?
We again started showing pictures of the surveillance camera that we had, and I laid them down in front of Mr. Rivera, and he admitted that that was his vehicle.
But even prior to that, the name Molly Tibbetts had been introduced into the interview by you.
Yes, I had a poster flyer of Molly, the ones that they were putting up around town. I laid it in front of Mr. Rivera, and he told me that he had seen them around town.
You were asked yesterday a question by Ms. Freeze where she used the phrasing that her client, meaning Mr. Bahena-Rivera, led you to the body.
Yes.
And you agreed with that. Is that right?
That is correct.
And by the body, I mean the body of Molly Tibbetts.
Yes.
Did you have any personal knowledge as to where Molly Tibbetts was located at the time that you were at the sheriff's office with the defendant?
I did not.
To your knowledge, did anyone in law enforcement have knowledge as to the location of Molly Tibbetts while you were at the sheriff's office?
Objection, calling for hearsay and speculation.
Overruled. Go ahead.
Not to my knowledge, no.
So no one in law enforcement had communicated the location of Molly Tibbetts to you?
Correct.
Would you or anyone in law enforcement have knowledge that Molly Tibbetts would have been found with corn stalks covering her body?
No.
And lastly, Ms. Romero, did you or any other person in law enforcement that would have informed you know that Molly Tibbetts would have been located in a cornfield in the eastern part of Powshey County?
No.
The defendant told you in your interview in the car what with regard to bringing you to that location?
He stated how he made contact with her. He stated that he did not remember how he put her inside the vehicle, but he did remember getting her out of the vehicle, coming to the cornfield, bringing her into the cornfield, dropping her down, and leaving right away, covering her with corn leaves and leaving right away.
And he indicated to you that he brought you there, correct?
Yes.
That's all. Do you have any recross?
No further recross. Thank you.
Judge, our next witness is Amy Johnson. Ms. Johnson, good morning.
Good morning.
Okay. Can you please introduce yourself to the jury, state your name, and tell us where you work?
My name is Amy Johnson. I work for the State of Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation Criminalistics Laboratory.
And how long do you work for the DCI Crime Lab?
I have been there for 19 years now.
And what are your current duties with the crime lab as it relates to crime scene duty?
I am on call. approximately every six weeks with the criminalistics laboratory and we are available to be called out anywhere within the state during that time that we're on call to process crime scenes.
On this particular occasion, were you working as a crime scene technician on this case?
Yes, I did.
All right. I'm going to direct your attention back to August 20th of 2018. Were you called to Poweshiek County in reference to a vehicle that needed to be processed?
Yes. Actually, we were told that there were two vehicles that were available to be processed.
What two vehicles were you asked to process?
It was a black Chevy Malibu and I believe it was a tan Nissan Altima.
And did you proceed then to Poweshiek County? Yes, my partner and I. Who was your partner at the time?
John and Barry.
And you and Ms. Berry, what time did you arrive in Poweshiek County?
Approximately 5.15 p.m.
And what location in Poweshiek County did you go to?
It was the Sheriff's Office, Sally Port, where the vehicles were maintained.
Sally Port is basically just a garage? Correct. And it was at the Sheriff's Office?
Yes.
Were both the Altima and the Malibu at the garage? Yes, they were. Now with regard to the Chevy Malibu, was a decision made to transport that vehicle to another location to examine it in more detail?
Yes, it was.
2018?
Correct.
And then where was it taken after that to be further analyzed and examined?
It was transported to the DCI laboratory garage.
Okay. Let's talk about your examination of the black Malibu on the 20th of August, 2018 at the sheriff's office. Okay? Yes. What did you do with regard to examining the car, the Malibu?
So we started with taking photographs of the exterior and interior and removing the contents and photographing the contents and logging the contents of the vehicle. And we also... My partner and I took tape lifts of the interior, searching for hair and fibers, and I took samples from some of the stained areas to do presumptive blood testing to determine if they were possibly blood.
And the areas that you took with regard to presumptive blood stains, were any of them positive?
Not on that day.
Okay. They were following, in your following examination, though, at the DCI lab, is that right?
Yes.
Okay, we'll talk about that here in just a second. How long did your examination of the Malibu take while you were at the sheriff's office on the 20th of August, 2018?
I would say it could have been up to three hours before we finished with that vehicle.
Let's continue on with your examination of the Malibu at the DCI crime lab. What day did that occur?
The examination occurred on the 22nd of August.
Okay. And just to make sure we're clear in the timeline, you also were on the crime scene team that went to the cornfield to recover what was believed to be the body of Molly Tibbetts. Is that right? Correct. That had occurred the day before the crime scene. this particular examination. Is that right?
Yes.
So we're taking it a bit out of chronological order. Would you agree?
Yes.
Okay. But I want to stick with the car for now. Okay. Yes. All right. So the Malibu was transported to the lab. Is that right? Correct. Okay. Whenever you, I want to talk in particular about your search of the trunk. Whenever you had a the Malibu at the crime lab, were you able to search the trunk of the Malibu?
Yes.
Were you able to access it easily? Yes. How did you access the trunk? Can you tell us?
I believe we had a set of keys for that vehicle.
Now, whenever you examined the trunk of the Malibu, were there various things that were in it?
Yes.
Can you describe what those were, please?
items included in the trunk of the Malibu were a football, a volleyball, a fishing pole in two different pieces, a bag of like a fish stringer, some bobbers, some other fishing equipment like weights, some plastic bags, paper. Okay.
That's okay. Various items. Would that be true? Yes. Okay. Did you search any of those areas of the trunk, including the contents, for the presence of human blood? Yes. Okay. Can you describe with regard to those items what items you searched for the presence of blood?
There were stains on several of the items located within the trunk and the football and two pieces of the fishing pole were found to have stained areas that were positive presumptive for blood. And then several other areas were tested that were negative for blood. Right.
We'll get to the contents here in just a moment. Was there an area of the trunk near the lid of the trunk that you tested for the presence of blood?
Yes.
And exactly where would that have been located?
It was the rubber seal located near the license plate area on the rear of the vehicle. Okay.
I'm going to have you take a look at a few pictures. I think that may help us, okay?
Okay.
First of all, I'm going to show you, can you see the photos on your screen? Yes. Exhibit 40 and 41 are on your screen. What are these pictures of?
These are pictures of the black Chevy Malibu while it was located in the Powichee County Sheriff's Office garage.
I'm going to show you what's been previously introduced as Exhibit 43. Can you see that? Yes, I can. What are we looking at here in Exhibit 43? Tell us what we're looking at here in Exhibit 43.
This is a photograph of the contents of the trunk as we found it at the Powishee County Sheriff's Office.
And whenever it was transported to the lab, were the contents, did they remain in the trunk? Yes, they did. Exhibit 44, what does that show?
This is a photograph showing the area that tested positive presumptive for blood located on the rubber seal above the license plate of the rear of the vehicle.
What we see here, I understand the area that's important to you, but this is also the plate of the car, is that correct? Yes, it is. All right, it's DKP 055? Correct. Would you agree? Yes. Okay. All right. And the area that you're referring to that tested presumptive for blood at the pointer, does that show the area where the blood was found?
It's located above where your pointer is.
Okay. And this part of the trunk, this black, what appears to be a rubber part of the trunk, how would you characterize that?
I feel that that's the seal for when the door is closed to the trunk.
Let's take a closer look at the stain. Exhibit 45, can you tell us what we're looking at here in exhibit 45?
This is a closer view of the stain without a scale in it, in the photo.
And the pointer that I have, is it the stain, where is it at in relation to the pointer?
The stain is located directly above the pointer.
And did you put some sort of scale or marker into the photo to give us an idea of size? Yes, I did. All right. We'll take a look at States Exhibit 46. Does that show the scale?
Yes.
And again, the spot that tested presumptive for blood is here to the right of the scale. Would you agree?
Correct.
Ms. Johnson, did you find any other stain that tested presumptive for blood at this time while the car was at the crime lab?
Besides the areas that I've already indicated?
Yes.
The football and the fishing pole also had presumptive positive areas of blood. Okay.
How many different stains total did you find that would have tested presumptive for human blood?
Four that we tested.
Now, did you collect a sample of those particular areas that tested presumptive for blood?
For the stain in this photo, I took a swab sample of it.
Okay. Describe for the jury how it is that you would take a sample of the stain that we see here in States Exhibit 46.
So I had two swabs that I added a distilled water to and used those swabs to take a portion of the sample off of the rubber seal. And then I placed those two swabs into a box and sealed it for submission.
All right. So what then happens to that particular swab? What section of the lab would it go to? The DNA section would...
get that sample to analyze.
You have no expertise in DNA analysis, is that correct?
No, I do not.
Do you know Tara Scott? Yes, I do. What is her particular expertise at the laboratory?
Her specific expertise is DNA.
Is she also a crime scene technician as well? Yes, she is. Okay. Somebody that you work with?
Yes.
The other items where you would have taken presumptive blood samples, going back to States Exhibit 43, some of those are shown here in this picture, is that right?
Yes.
The balls that you mentioned before? Yes. Okay, and those would have been submitted to the DNA section at the laboratory also, is that right? Correct. Now, what we also see here in States Exhibit 43 is there is some sort of liner that is in the trunk.
Yes.
And was that liner removed and submitted to the laboratory DNA section for processing?
Yes. All of the fabric-covered sections of the trunk liner were removed from the trunk for DNA analysis.
So describe for the jury how the trunk liner was secured in the car, if you recall.
It had plastic fasteners in certain areas, so we dislodged it from the frame of the vehicle by removing those plastic clips. placing each of those pieces in a cardboard box for submission.
So would those have been submitted to the laboratory once the vehicle had come to the location at the lab where you examined it?
Yes, they were submitted the following day.
Okay, and to your knowledge, who was the criminalist assigned to analyze those items that were seized from the trunk?
Tara Scott.
And that would include the swab taken from the rubber seal of the trunk as well, is that right?
Yes.
Just to make sure we cover everything, with regard to the trunk that we see here in Exhibit 43, including the other parts of it, the rubber seal, the lid, all of it, was there anything else of significance that you located whenever you examined the vehicle on August 22nd of 2018?
We submitted several other items from the trunk into the latent print section for analysis.
Okay. And do you remember what those items were?
Everything that didn't test positive for presumptive blood.
So sometimes an item will get submitted for DNA analysis before it goes to the fingerprint section?
Correct.
And sometimes vice versa, it may go to the other section first?
Yes.
And is there a reason that may be important in a case concerning how a particular item of evidence is analyzed?
Yes, one process may destroy the evidence for the other process to be analyzed.
So the things that tested presumptive for blood would have gone to DNA first, correct?
Correct.
The other items that would not have tested presumptive for blood would have gone to maybe the fingerprint section, correct? Correct. Okay. Whenever you examined the vehicle at the Poweshiek County Sheriff's Office, did you notice the stain that we see here in Exhibit 46?
It wasn't apparent to us at that time. We were searching the interior of the trunk and I feel that it may have been overlooked.
Okay. So whenever you got to the lab, this particular blood stain that we see in Exhibit 46, that's when you noticed it? Yes. At the time that you examined the vehicle on August 20th of 2018, had the body of Molly Tibbetts been located? All right, let's move on to August 21st of 2018. Were you called back to Poweshiek County on that date? Yes, I was. And for what purpose?
Our special agent in charge notified us that there had been a body located and we were requested to process that scene.
Did you proceed to a certain location in Poweshiek County?
Yes, we did.
Alright, I'm going to put on the screen State's Exhibit 2. There is an arrow on this map and the label is 2478 460th Avenue. It's indicated as the body location. Does that appear to be the same location that you would have proceeded to in Poweshiek County?
Yes, it is.
All right. Did you go anywhere else prior to going out to 2478 460th Avenue?
Not on that day.
Okay. You went directly there?
Yes.
All right. And what time were you called?
It was in the 6 o'clock hour in the morning.
What time did you arrive in Powshey County at this location that's indicated on Exhibit 2?
Approximately 9 a.m.
And who else was there?
My partner, Jonna Berry, was with me.
Were other law enforcement present?
Yes, eventually the state medical examiner and his associates were present.
Were you shown to a location at this address generally where a body was located?
Yes.
Did the medical examiner go into that area before you did?
No, I believe we went at the same time.
So who was the medical examiner that came to the location, do you recall? Dr. Klein. Dennis Klein?
Yes.
Who's the state medical examiner, is that correct?
Correct.
All right. At this point, did you begin examining the area in and around the body that was located at that address?
Yes, I did.
Describe for the jury what you would have done initially to search that area.
So upon arrival, my partner and I took photographs and video of the area, including the road leading up to and away from the inlet to the cornfield. And after the medical examiner arrived, we all proceeded back into the location where we were told the body was.
Okay. Let's talk a bit about the roadway that is adjacent to this particular location. Do you recall that?
Yes, I do.
I'm going to show you what states exhibit 25. Do you recognize that? Yes, I do. On the right side of states exhibit 25, this area here to the right, what is that?
That is the inlet to the field where the body is located.
And this road is 460th, is that correct?
Correct.
And this would appear to be facing to the east, would you agree? Yes. States Exhibit 26, which has already been admitted, this is 2478 460th Avenue, would you agree with me?
Yes.
And what direction are we facing here?
This is facing west.
And this area here, is that how you gain access to the field? Yes, it is. Between these two posts that are photographed?
Correct.
All right. How far from the location of the roadway until you would have entered the corn to find the body that was located?
From the roadway to the body location?
I'm sorry, from the roadway to when you would have entered the corn to find the body?
The roadway to the corn was approximately 430 feet.
Okay, and you majored that?
Yes, we did.
And I'm going to show you state's exhibit number 27. What does this show?
This shows the area in the corn where... we enter to locate the body.
There is what appears to be some sort of yellow tape that is strung on the corn stalks. Would you agree?
Yes.
What is that?
That would be crime scene barrier tape that was placed in that location prior to our arrival.
What's the purpose of putting that up?
To try to keep people out of the scene to indicate that that's a secure location.
Was there anyone else other than law enforcement that was at the location that we see here in Exhibit 27?
Not during the time that I was there.
Yeah, that's what I'm asking. Other than the medical examiner, correct?
And the county medical examiner was there also.
Okay. And although I don't have a photo of it, if you would turn around and do a 180-degree turn about face and face the road, what would you see?
We would see the grassy area of the inlet.
So from the roadway to the area that we see on the crime scene tape that's in Exhibit 27, would there have been any corn that would have obstructed your view? No. All right. Is there a little bit of an incline or a hill between the roadway and the area that we see here in Exhibit 27?
Yes. The roadway was not visible from the corn location and the... area where the crime scene tape is was not visible from the road.
All right. So if you would turn around in this location, could you see the roadway?
No.
Could you see those vehicles that were parked on the roadway?
No.
How would you describe the remoteness of this area that we see here in Exhibit 27?
It was quite remote. There was a house to the east, approximately a half mile, and a house to the west, approximately a half mile.
Standing here at the area we see in Exhibit 27 on August 21st of 2018, could you see any houses or any other outbuildings from this location?
No.
All right, did you then proceed into the area that we see here in Exhibit 27? Yes. All right, generally speaking, where directionally would the body that was presumed to be Molly Tibbetts, where was that located?
It was approximately 60 feet south of this location, a little bit to the east.
Okay. All right. We're going to get into some photos that show the body and the corn, but I first want you to describe what you initially saw, okay? So whenever you get into the corn, you locate the body, correct? Yes. All right. Tell us what you observed whenever you saw this area.
The area had a little bit of a clearing. There were bent over corn stalks covering what is the body. And so the bent over corn area allowed for a little bit of an opening in the corn.
And was there any particular item of clothing that stood out that identified that area as where Molly Tibbetts was located? Yes. What was that?
Her bright colored running shoes.
You could see those?
Yes.
All right. Was the rest of her body for the most part covered by corn stalks? Yes, it was. All right. I'm going to show you a photograph, which is exhibit 28, which will show this area, okay? What's on the screen now is exhibit number 28. Do you see that?
Yes, I do.
The area that we see here, was it difficult to photograph without removing the corn stalks?
Yes.
Was it fairly dense in there?
It was very dense.
And what is this area in the middle of the photo? What does that show?
The pointer is located near the running shoes that we could see.
Okay. And the corn stalks that cover the rest of the body, do we see that here in this area where the pointer is located? Yes. And were you able to clear this area a bit so you could further analyze it?
Yes, we removed the corn stalks away from the body and we moved away some of the standing corn so that we could process the body.
So I'm going to show you now what's been introduced and admitted as States Exhibit 29. What does that picture show us?
This is an alternate view of the body with the corn stalks on it.
And where the cursor is located, is that the bright colored shoes that had first drawn your attention? Yes. All right. And although you cleared away corn around this area, had you at this time removed any of the dead corn stalks that were covering what was believed to be Mollie Tibbetts?
No.
I'm going to show you what's been admitted as States Exhibit 30. What are we looking at in States Exhibit 30?
This is a view of the body with the corn stalks from her feet showing the view from that location.
And again, these are her shoes that you see? Yes. This photo is taken from the opposite direction that you entered. Would you agree with me?
I would say yes. This is taken basically facing north.
Had any of the corn stalks in this photo been removed at the time that you took the photo?
No.
I'm going to show you what's been admitted as States Exhibit 31. Where my cursor is at, what does that show us? Those are the running shoes again. States Exhibit 32. What does States Exhibit 32 show us?
This is the upper body area of the victim in the cornfield with the corn stalks still in place.
This is a bit of a closer photo. Would you agree?
Yes.
All right. This area that we see here that my cursor is on, what does that show?
This is the left hand of the victim. Okay. The decedent.
All right. And at this time where you see the hand, had any of the corn stalks been removed at this point? Did you and the crime scene team remove the corn stalks from the body that you had located there? Yes, we did. Okay. And when you did that, were you able to get a better look at what was underneath those corn stalks?
Yes, we were.
And before we look at a photo of that, can you just describe what you saw after you removed the corn stalks?
The body was located in a face-up position with the head in a generally northern direction with the arms located at either side of the head and one leg was outstretched and the other was bent.
And were there, other than the shoes, did you notice any other articles of clothing?
Yes, there appeared to be a pink sports bra around her upper torso and black socks.
Other than the shoes? Correct. Okay, so no shorts at this location?
No.
No headband?
No.
By the way, did you ever locate a Fitbit or a phone at this location?
No, we did not.
Did you search for one?
Yes, we did.
And you were unsuccessful in finding either of those items?
Correct.
All right. We're going to look at States Exhibit 33, which shows the body of Molly Tibbetts. Selma put 33 on the screen. You've described what you saw, but let's orient the jury on this photograph, okay? This area that I have the cursor on, what part of the body is that?
Her head was located adjacent to the cursor.
Okay. So this, where the cursor is now, that's her head?
Correct.
Does it appear to be facing the camera?
Yes.
All right. And this area here, what is that article of clothing?
This appears to be a pink sports bra. Okay.
We're going to take a little bit closer look at that. So you can also see her left arm, is that right?
Yes.
That's up above her head? Correct. The area here is Molly Tibbetts' torso? Yes. Correct. And then this area would be where her genitals would be or between her legs, is that right? Yes. That area, does it appear to be more decomposed than the remainder of her body?
It does appear to be decomposed. Okay.
And her legs are, the cursor here, is this her right knee? Yes, it is. And here is her left knee. Is that right? Correct. Are her legs spread apart? Is that what that appears to you?
Yes, they are.
And her shoes that you saw in the corn, is that these colorful shoes here? Yes. And I don't mean to be too graphic, but did her feet appear to separate from her legs? Or do you know?
I don't recall.
That's fine. Actually, the medical examiner was at that location and recovered the body. Is that right?
Yes.
So you didn't have anything to do with that? No. Okay. All right. So after viewing the area where Molly Tibbetts was located, did you also search the area surrounding her in the corn?
Yes, I did.
And did you find any other items of significance? Yes, I did. Were you able to locate Molly Tibbetts' shorts?
I found a pair of black shorts in the cornfield. I understand.
They were only associated with her because they were near her body that you located, correct? Correct. And did you find another article of clothing near where Molly Tibbetts was located?
Yes, two more items.
Okay. What else did you find?
There was a pink band of fabric. and a striped, what appears to be underpants, underwear.
Did you diagram this area to give us a better idea of where those items of clothing were located in relation to Molly Tibbetts? Yes, I did. We're going to look at States Exhibit 24. The sketch that we see here, who created that?
I did.
Okay, in the middle of the sketch, what does that represent?
This is a drawing of the body position as we found it in the cornfield, showing the bent over corn stalks.
This area here, what does that represent on your diagram?
It's indicated as item four, which was the pink sports bra.
So this would be her head area, is that right?
Above that location, yes, that was her head.
The area then that we see on the right that appears to have a number attached to it of 15 feet, do you see that?
Yes.
What is that?
Those are the black shorts located in the cornfield.
And what does the 15 feet represent from where to where?
That was approximately from the location of the body south into the cornfield.
Just to make sure we're oriented correctly, in order to get to the shorts that you see here in the diagram, you'd have to walk further into the cornfield.
Yes.
Is that right? And as we were facing, going into where Molly Tibbetts was located, it would be more to the left. Is that true?
Yes.
Okay. The other item that we see here, there's a 24 feet that's represented there. Do you see that? Yes, I do. What item of clothing was found there? That was the pink fabric. What type of pink fabric was that, to your knowledge? Possibly a headband. So that was even further into the corn. Would that be true? Correct. Going in the same southerly direction?
Yes, southeastern.
Then moving more on your diagram then to the left, so the area that I just had pointed to you, what exactly was that that you found there?
So item number eight is indicating the striped fabric that was consistent with underpants.
And is there a measurement that you have between where Molly Tibbetts was located and where this particular item was found?
I found that to be approximately 34 feet to the southwest of her location.
Again, even further into the corn than the other two items that you found that we've already discussed. Is that correct? Correct. And what was this item of clothing, if you know?
It appeared to be striped underpants.
Did you take photos of those items? Yes. All right. We'll talk about the black shorts first, okay? Yes. All right. This exhibit, which is exhibit 34, I have here labeled black shorts, and it's difficult to see that this is from a distance. Would you agree in exhibit 34? Yes. And as we approach that area that we see that red flag is Exhibit 35. Show a closer view of that.
Yes.
What do we see here in Exhibit 35?
This is the pair of black shorts located southeast of the body with the flag indicating.
Same black shorts that we just saw in Exhibit 34, just closer? Yes. And this item here is what you're talking about. It looks like wadded up, dirty black shorts. Yes. Did you collect those?
Yes, we did.
And those would have been submitted back to the laboratory?
Yes.
All right. Let's move to another, the area where you had indicated there was a headband further back in the corn when we looked at the diagram. Is that right?
Yes.
Did you take a photograph of that area as well? Yes.
Mr. Brown, let me jump in and stop you there. We'll take our lunch recess at this time.