BREASIA TERRELL: Iowa vs. Henry Dinkins for July 2020 Kidnapping and Murder of 10-year-old *GUILTY*

1601940522637.png 1594491180661.png

Davenport Police need help locating missing child

The Davenport Police are asking for the public’s help in locating a missing child.

Breasia Terrell, 10, was last seen in the 2700 block of East 53rd Street in the early hours of July 10.

www.ourquadcities.com

Davenport Police need help locating missing child

The Davenport Police are asking for the public’s help in locating a missing child. Breasia Terrell, 10, was last seen in the 2700 block of East 53rd Street in the early hours of July 10. She …
www.ourquadcities.com www.ourquadcities.com
www.ourquadcities.com

Davenport Police conduct investigation of missing 10-year-old girl at Credit Island

Davenport Police are searching for a missing 10-year-old girl by the name of Breasia Terrell. The last time anyone saw her was this morning on E. 53rd St., near Lorton Avenue. She has been reported…
www.ourquadcities.com www.ourquadcities.com
Davenport Police conduct investigation of missing 10-year-old girl at Credit Island

Davenport Police are searching for a missing 10-year-old girl by the name of Breasia Terrell.

The last time anyone saw her was this morning on E. 53rd St., near Lorton Avenue.

She has been reported missing since around 3 a.m. and was last seen wearing a white t-shirt, shorts and flip-flops.

Early Friday night, around 4:30 p.m., police brought their search to Credit Island at the family’s request.

They say this was a frequent fishing spot for Terrell and her family.

Police were joined by the Davenport Fire Department in this investigation.

Crews brought out a boat, used sonar equipment and took pictures of the area, looking for any signs of Terrell’s whereabouts.



1594491196657.png


MEDIA - BREASIA TERRELL: Missing from Davenport, IA since 10 July 2020 - Age 10
 
Last edited:
Click to expand...
GrandmaBear said:
MAYBE Culberson didn't know he was an RSO but I've never heard much like how long this relationship, did she know he was not to be at her apartment but living where registered, etc. Don't recall the apartment details, was it a typical one bedroom? I find the testimony by the brother kind of damning, he isn't spending time with his own son but both are with her on the bed.
Click to expand...
Andrea Culberson was in a relationship with Dinkins for 6 years per her testimony. As for the apartment, it was a 1 bed/1 bath that she was the leaseholder for. The bed story was interesting and not explored a lot probably because it would open the door to the RSO status and the attorneys are keeping away from appellate issues. IMO

GrandmaBear said:
Did Culberson know about the drugs and the gun, etc. and anything about this man?
Click to expand...
No one mentioned drugs in testimony. Andrea was asked if she was aware of Dinkins having a firearm and she said she did not.

GrandmaBear said:
What bothers me is her putting Breasia back at the apartment, that sighting that she changed on wasn't it? Because that's the part that messed things up imo to a point.
Click to expand...
Andrea did not change her testimony of this. She woke up around 3am and Dinkins wasn't there; walked into to the bedroom to get to the bathroom and noticed Breasia wasn't there. She tried calling Dinkins and realized that his phone was in the apartment. Around 330am is when Dinkins returned the first time; went to his closet and picked up something then left. Andrea stated as he left she looked out the window and saw Breasia standing next to the passenger side door of the Impala.

GrandmaBear said:
Did we know he was ever with at a point? Until this triall I mean? I don't think we did, did we?
Click to expand...
Can you elaborate? I'm not following this thought at the moment.

Recap from day 11 testimony
Witness: Sean Johnson Davenport Police Detective

Witness: James McMillan FBI Special Agent
[coordinated searches; the Davenport Police Department had access to the defendants cell data and were still working from the inside out to help include/exclude those closest to the missing child]

Witness: Ian Saginor FBI trace soil evidence analyst

Witness: Evan Obert Corporal Davenport police department SVU

Witness: Jennifer Pullen DCI criminologist
[photographed & video recorded area of crime scene including remains; was interesting to watch as it clearly showed the remain in detail]

Witness: Mark Poulos Rock Island police officer (retired)
[part of Big River Dive Team who was tasked to recover items from the Kunau Implement]

Witness: Stephen Ebel Big River Dive Team

Witness: Benjamin Wilson Big River Dive Team

[State advised they intend to close their case in chief on Monday, August 28th, 2023]
 
kdg411 said:
Andrea Culberson was in a relationship with Dinkins for 6 years per her testimony. As for the apartment, it was a 1 bed/1 bath that she was the leaseholder for. The bed story was interesting and not explored a lot probably because it would open the door to the RSO status and the attorneys are keeping away from appellate issues. IMO


No one mentioned drugs in testimony. Andrea was asked if she was aware of Dinkins having a firearm and she said she did not.


Andrea did not change her testimony of this. She woke up around 3am and Dinkins wasn't there; walked into to the bedroom to get to the bathroom and noticed Breasia wasn't there. She tried calling Dinkins and realized that his phone was in the apartment. Around 330am is when Dinkins returned the first time; went to his closet and picked up something then left. Andrea stated as he left she looked out the window and saw Breasia standing next to the passenger side door of the Impala.


Can you elaborate? I'm not following this thought at the moment.

Recap from day 11 testimony
Witness: Sean Johnson Davenport Police Detective

Witness: James McMillan FBI Special Agent
[coordinated searches; the Davenport Police Department had access to the defendants cell data and were still working from the inside out to help include/exclude those closest to the missing child]

Witness: Ian Saginor FBI trace soil evidence analyst

Witness: Evan Obert Corporal Davenport police department SVU

Witness: Jennifer Pullen DCI criminologist
[photographed & video recorded area of crime scene including remains; was interesting to watch as it clearly showed the remain in detail]

Witness: Mark Poulos Rock Island police officer (retired)
[part of Big River Dive Team who was tasked to recover items from the Kunau Implement]

Witness: Stephen Ebel Big River Dive Team

Witness: Benjamin Wilson Big River Dive Team

[State advised they intend to close their case in chief on Monday, August 28th, 2023]
Click to expand...
Six years is then I'd say then she knew he was an RSO and not in compliance I'd also guess. Six years and did not know he had a firearm I'd find doubtful although possible. I lived with secretive spouse so can allow the possibility but still think it unlikely.

I think the bed story was pertinent but yes probably not gone into much for the reason you stated. I think the brother knew what was going on on the bed wasn't right and I'm sorry but I'd have to say Culberson either was part at that point or was not clueless to it either as the brother had enough sense to sense it/know it.

I don't know if Andrea changed her testimony, I'm trying to recall but I think what it was is she never mentioned him coming back at first when this disappearance first happened, until far later. Or was it something that she did give a different version, unsure but I read it in the past week or since this trial started most likely in something you or someone else posted, not sure, sorry.

The part you said you are not following what I meant was I don't THINK I ever knew he took his son with on part of these travels. Did we know that before this trial started?

I so appreciate you answering my questions and recapping this trial. From the recaps and numbers of very relevant witnesses, it appears the State was well prepared and put on a very solid case? I see it says they expect to rest on Monday.
 
GrandmaBear said:
don't know if Andrea changed her testimony, I'm trying to recall but I think what it was is she never mentioned him coming back at first when this disappearance first happened
Click to expand...
Her 'story' has not changed according to LE who recorded and interviewed her on the day Breasia went missing.

GrandmaBear said:
The part you said you are not following what I meant was I don't THINK I ever knew he took his son with on part of these travels. Did we know that before this trial started?
Click to expand...
This is/was the case surprise that was not reported in MSM.

The case presented by the State is very strong, imo.
 
kdg411 said:
Her 'story' has not changed according to LE who recorded and interviewed her on the day Breasia went missing.


This is/was the case surprise that was not reported in MSM.

The case presented by the State is very strong, imo.
Click to expand...
Maybe with regard to the gf it was just that LE didn't share that part of things until later after she went missing and not immediately. Maybe that's what I am thinking of. They held it back for a bit perhaps.

Yeah it was a surprise to me with the son/brother. I didn't think we knew about it prior but my memory with all the cases these days, especially when they go dormant for a bit, I don't trust always so just wondered if I forgot the brother had been with for part of the time. But we never knew then. That's what I thought.

The other surprise was him saying he saw Breasia shot. I don't know what that is but it appears it can't be corroborated. I will always wonder about it though because he seemed to be a very solid witness with a good memory for a child. It's hard not to want to believe him then with that too...I do worry the defense will make a point of that to discount his testimony to the judge. I wonder. I don't think they will tear him apart or they could have on cross but they make make the point on closing, etc. or with other witnesses?

A strong case by the State. I personally think he is nailed. Of course defense hasn't had its turn yet. I don't see where they can do a whole lot but who knows what tack they will take... That yes, she was with him but he didn't harm her and someone took her or she took off? I mean what do they have? I see little. And I think the State has proven their case. so I guess they can argue otherwise on that but I don't see it going anywhere or working.
 
kdg411 said:
Day 12




After watching this trial from day 1, I believe the State has proven their case. It'll be interesting to see if the defense has any witnesses.
Click to expand...

Love you for keeping me informed. I hate that I haven't been able to watch this as it is certainly one I would be if not working. As can be seen here and out in the internet world, it truly isn't garnering much attention. I find that really sad. There are a few who back in the beginning touched on it but they haven't followed up on it now at all. Busy with other cases I suppose since then.

I trust your opinion implicitly that they have proven their case. Just in the summaries you've posted, I have come to the same conclusion. State looks well prepared with relevant witnesses and testimony and evidence and looks as though they have put on a solid and orderly case with each facet of Dink-ins' activities, etc.

This man will never see the light of day again imo. And shouldn't. (I will say the crazy way they let some out these days could change that but in the way of how it was or should be, he won't). I'd have to go back and look but he is also facing, I know he is some serious drug related charges in another county I believe. It makes sense that would not come up in this trial but he is. Just another reason he shouldn't be ever seeing freedom again.

As always, I appreciate that you are watching this and providing info and you even have went above and beyond to answer questions I had. Hope you know I didn't expect you to but do LOVE YOU for it.
 
Day 12 recap

Witness: Branden Stepanski DCI crime lab

Witness: Michael Schmit DCI crime lab

Trial concluded for the day will resume on Monday, August 28th, 2023 @ 0900.
 
Day 14 recap:

Witness: Maureen Hammes Davenport Police Department SVU Detective
[interviewed DL; interview played for court]

State rests.

Defense requests for direct acquittal.
“The State asserts that Mr. Dinkins had the intent to sexually abuse Breasia Terrell and that’s what’s happened.” [also argues that due to the delay in finding her body no dna was left to establish a SA had occurred]

Court denies motion for acquittal.

Per defense attorney Chad Frese, the defenant is adhering to his right to remain silent and not testify. The defense rests their case.

Closing arguments tomorrow, Tuesday, August 29th, 2023 at 0900.
 
kdg411 said:
Day 14 recap:

Witness: Maureen Hammes Davenport Police Department SVU Detective
[interviewed DL; interview played for court]

State rests.

Defense requests for direct acquittal.
“The State asserts that Mr. Dinkins had the intent to sexually abuse Breasia Terrell and that’s what’s happened.” [also argues that due to the delay in finding her body no dna was left to establish a SA had occurred]

Court denies motion for acquittal.

Per defense attorney Chad Frese, the defenant is adhering to his right to remain silent and not testify. The defense rests their case.

Closing arguments tomorrow, Tuesday, August 29th, 2023 at 0900.
Click to expand...
So the defense requested acquittal based on the State asserting he intended to assault Breasia but should not have as they have no evidence of such? Is that what he is claiming is grounds for dismissal? Is he saying they brought something up they shouldn't have? Or is he just saying they have no evidence he killed Breasia because there is no DNA? Not sure I follow.

I've said all along it would be the obvious reason he took her and we've discussed it some that it likely couldn't be brought up. It seems dumb to me that when not a jury trial it wouldn't be obvious to the very judge who decided what was or wasn't to be allowed or admissible at a jury trial anyhow. He knows all the stuff or would anyhow, no? I can't word this right or quite wrap my head around it.

I guess I mean I suppose in this crazy system he is not to decide a verdict based on the sex offender thing nor his intent since there is no proof? Yet he knows of these things of course so if it was mentioned or even inferred, in a way, so what? He is to not take it I suppose into consideration but it isn't anything he isn't aware of. Am I making a bit of sense? It isn't a jury trial where clearly the State saying that if they weren't supposed to might be an issue or sway jurors... Is that what he is claiming that they shouldn't have said such?

Or is he trying to say there is just no proof he killed her because of no DNA and they can't prove his intent because of it?

I'm overworked and the brain is addled.

Regardless I think his goose is cooked. A judge often has more knowledge in any case than a jury would and they are to decide only based on what is allowed regardless which if you think about it is a bit ridiculous but it is the case so I think if defense is arguing the State said something they shouldn't have or the judge shouldn't know, it really shouldn't matter because he knows anyhow but should just not consider it. Right?
 
SheWhoMustNotBeNamed said:
Well, with a bench trial and no one to argue with (jury), I imagine he should announce by tomorrow… Hopefully.
Click to expand...
Not sure when I last ever heard of a bench trial but I guess I expected the judge to sentence immediately or shortly thereafter. Are there family impact statements or no?

I guess I'm thinking of how a judge sentences right after the victim impact statements. Not sure if I have seen a bench trial and sentencing. Can't recall. I certainly have always known of them and what they are...
 
I was headed here shortly to say the very same thing after I caught up with case posts. I had hoped I'd hear of one when checking on break at work today. I don't like the fact we didn't hear one. Hopefully he just wants to look as though he really considered all. However, he heard all through the trial. I sure hope it comes before the holiday weekend.
 
I never thought this verdict would go past the holiday weekend but since tomorrow is Friday, I'm beginning to think it will. I see no reason for this and it concerns me. Her family waits for a result and determination,--her brother, her grandmother, her mother AND even though despicable so does Dink-ins.

Don't care about him but so is her family to go through yet another long weekend without having this finished?
 
Im mostly surprised that nothing has been said about it. Nothing that says he’s reviewing stuff and trying to make a decision. Or even a potential timeline (whether it’s a few days or a few weeks). Just “it’s in the judges hands” and silence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
3,055
Messages
249,239
Members
996
Latest member
scngagirl
Back
Top Bottom