Arianne Profile picture
Nov 10 27 tweets 5 min read
The People vs. #DanaRivers, 11-9-22 (week 2 day 3): This day started slow, but got exciting later, so please read through the whole thread 🧐. Day starts with defense doing cross-x of ballistics expert Lau. Mostly just technical questions, nothing significant imho. 1/
Next witness is Timothy Latibeaudiere from the Oakland Police Department. His testimony was very brief --- he just mentioned how he discovered a bloody orange lighter near the bloody fence at the victims' house. There were also footprints nearby. 2/
It's clarified that in fact there were *two* orange lighters discovered at the scene, the one near the fence that the witness T.L. discovered, and one found inside. During defense cross-x, T.L. also answers that he did see an RV parked nearby. That's all for this witness. 3/
Next witness is Inspector Jason Riechers, who is an expert in call detail records, cell towers, and phone extraction. He did analyses on Reed and Rivers' cellphones. He first discusses the call detail records, which are records from the phone providers about when/where data 4/
transactions were taking place involving particular phone numbers. He talks about the various data transactions on Rivers' phone in between Sept and Nov 11 2016 (the date of the murder) --- some of these involved a cell tower near the victims' home, 5/
consistent with the idea that Rivers was near the victims' home during these times. Critically, there is data transmission involving Rivers' phone near the victims' home on the evening of Nov 10th (the murder was around midnight of the 11th). 6/
Riechers goes on to talk about the data he extracted from two phones, one belonging to Reed and the other to Rivers. These data consist of message exchanges, photos, and emails. (It was hard to follow all the slides and readouts, so my details aren't that precise). 7/
Reed's phone had some exchanges with Rivers that IMO were both intimate yet tense (Reichers calls them "amicable"). To summarize: Reed appreciates Rivers' friendship and his dropping his "vulnerability," but both sides fear betrayal. 8/
The witness goes on to talk about the phone extraction from Rivers' phone. Rivers' phone contains texts (personal, but also group chats), images, emails, and web searches that seem relevant to the case. Starting with the texts --- 9/
In group chat, Rivers tells Sandra, president of the Deviants biker group, at 11:15 am on November 10th: "air then gone. Red tag is 2001 but red which is 2016. Casual glance should be ok. I am going stealth to avoid attention, search my bike would not be good [emojis]". 10/
Rivers texts Vanessa (his wife, I believe) on Nov 10th: "...remember P knows where to find me." [Note: it's clarified later in the day that "P" stands for "President," i.e., Sandra]. There are also Nov 10th texts between Reed and Rivers. 11/
From what I can tell, the texts between Reed & Rivers on Nov 10th seem to involve Rivers traveling to meet up Reed. E.g.: There is a reference to "Bay Fair," which I think is a reference to the BART station. Reed at one point says "I'm glad you're here." 12/
Attention turns to images found on Rivers' phone. One has a girl and a burning house and says, "Biker chicks don't mess with team." Another says "My love is like a candle. If you forget me, I'll burn your fucking house down" on image of candle or cup (?). 13/
Then witness goes through various emails and web searches on Rivers' phone that include orders of/inquiries into various accessories for a colt 1911, much like the one Rivers had that was found at the crime scene. One was for a laser grip that was also on the crime scene gun. 14/
There are also orders for Hells Angels patch, colt 45 ammo, recoil spring, thread protector (one of those also found on crime scene, I believe), colt 1911 slide kit, etc. Some of Rivers' web searches were deleted but were still recovered via the extraction process. 15/
There are other emails Reed wrote, including: "In our bike world, I'm very much a 'tip of sword' combat [illegible] protector and enforcer. a 1% in every sense of what that label means." And other snippets involving Sandra and the Deviants. 16/
Defense in cross-x draws attention to a text exchange between Reed and Rivers around 4 pm on Nov 10th. Reed says: "Threatened by rent-a-cop...may retalliate." Rivers: "I'll be there ASAP" and later "I'll be ready to stay around if police show up again." 17/
Defense is trying to portray Reed & Rivers' relationship as cordial the day leading up to the murder. Also, defense emphasizes how Rivers appears to be in Sacramento the morning of the 10th, and it's not clear when he gets to Oakland. 18/
That ends the witnesses for the prosecution! The Defense calls their first witness, Sandra, the president of the Deviants, the motorcycle club Rivers was a member of. Sandra lead the club when she took it over from a previous group in 2009. The club dissolved around 2020. 19/
Sandra says the club was small, all-female, no more than 5 ppl at a time. Most members were moms. The average age was 50+. Members start as "get alongs," then become prospective members, then full-blown members. At each stage you get a patch. You are required to have a vest, 20/
but nothing else. Sandra emphasizes the group was peaceful and law-abiding. When Reed returned her patch, it wasn't a big deal at all. Sandra says that if you are a member for 5 years or more, you can get a "1%" tattoo (she has one). 21/
This "1%" refers to the small amount of women's motorcycle clubs with a California "rocker" (a rocker is a symbol/patch with a location). She distinguishes her "1 %" tattoo with Rivers' "1%er" tattoo. She also says Rivers was only a member of the Deviants for 22/
a year or so, and hence did NOT get this tattoo with the club's permission. Sandra also says there is no "enforcer" title within the org. Sandra says she never issued any orders directing Rivers or the group to Reed's address on the day of the murder. 23/
Prosecution in cross-x tries to paint Rivers as being super obsessed with the Deviants, while Sandra is more restrained (e.g., Rivers was "loyal," but not necessarily "extremely loyal."). Sandra also says she doesn't recall ever being contacted by defense, unless you count 24/
the lawyer who issued the subpoena a week before, and that same lawyer who questioned her shortly after the murder (tho in that case it was mostly Sandra's wife who was questioned). Sandra also denies that Rivers ever looked over her children. She says Rivers was "family" 25/
only in the sense that all Deviants members were "family," but that she wasn't close to Rivers personally. Overall, Sandra is trying to distance herself from Rivers and portray her club as harmless and irrelevant to this case. The prosecution has put a lot of stock in 26/
this motorcycle club as helping establish Rivers' motive, but Sandra's testimony seems to be calling this motive into question. How will the prosecution respond going forward? Anyway, that's a wrap for today. Sandra continues her testimony tomorrow. 27/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Arianne

Arianne Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AirDhatu

Nov 10
The People vs. #DanaRivers, 11-9-22 (week 2 day 4): This was the most dramatic day so far imo, in terms of lawyers going at each other with objections, as well as the witness testimony. It's also apparently the last day of evidence, which is why we got out early. 1/
The day starts on an almost comical note. Instead of continuing with Sandra, an expert witness testifies virtually on screen at home with a crying baby. He is an expert on the ethnography of tattoos and teaches in Criminal Justice sciences at Illinois State. 2/
He talks about the research he's done with people who get tattoos, as well as tattoo artists. He has seen pictures of the tattoos Rivers has. He says you cannot read much significance into tattoos without knowing more info — the same tattoo can mean different things 3/
Read 30 tweets
Nov 9
The People vs. #DanaRivers, 11-8-22 (week 2 day 2): first witness is Dr. Tom Rogers, who did the autopsies on Reed and Diambu in the coroner’s office. He goes through the various injuries found on Reed, with graphic images of them. He says there were blunt force injuries, stab 1/
wounds, and 2 gunshot wounds. The gunshot wounds had “stippling,” or marks from gunpowder that are present when the gun is fired close to the victim. Also, they both had hemorrhaging, meaning Reed was still alive when shot both times. 2/
Reed had over 40 stab/incise wounds. Some of them had hemorrhaging, and others didn’t, meaning that the assailant stabbed Reed while she was still alive and continued to stab her after she died. 3/
Read 16 tweets
Nov 8
The People vs. #DanaRivers, 11-7-22 (week 2 day 1): Criminologist Helena Wong, who did the DNA testing of the case, continues her testimony. Prosecution asks Wong if she can tell Rivers is trans based on DNA. Wong says yes because DNA reveals "biological gender," 1/
which is male in Rivers' case. This is the first time during the trial that Rivers' trans status is disclosed. Wong & the prosecution go on to talk about the results of DNA tests taken of blood stains from the scene of the crime, as well as from items at the crime scene. 2/
One swab has Diambu's DNA. Most of the rest had Rivers' DNA, Reed's DNA, or a mix. However, the slide of the pistol had 2 DNA donors, neither of which were the victims or Rivers. One of the unknown donors was male and the other's sex was undetermined. 3/
Read 8 tweets
Nov 1
Today I attended opening statements for the Dana Rivers trial. One thing that is surprising is that the defense is NOT using the insanity defense, at least not so far. They genuinely want to show there isn't enough evidence. How are they doing that? 1/
They point out that Dana Rivers' DNA is not found on the firearms. They claim that the fact that Rivers used gloves isn't sufficient, because Rivers' had a cut and was bleeding all over the house. They also said that DNA from an unknown person was found in the house 2/
so it sounds like they are trying to insinuate that some other random person was involved in the killing. Three witnesses were called: the neighbor who made the police call, and the first two police who came to the scene of the crime. Defense keeps trying to nitpick to find 3/
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(