Nov 21, 1974 Judy Rivera
Additional evidence found New Rivera defense motions to be heard By ALAN ASHBY Sun-Telegram Sun-Telegram Sun-Telegram Staff Writer SAN BERNARDINO - Additional motions by attorneys representing a couple charged with killing their 3-year-old 3-year-old 3-year-old 3-year-old 3-year-old daughter are expected to be taken up at a court hearing tomorrow afternoon. afternoon. Lawyers for Antonio Rivera, 38, of Colton and his ex-wife ex-wife ex-wife Merla Bueno, 35, of San Bernardino, Tuesday filed court papers asserting they have found evidence that the alleged murder victim, Judy Rivera, may have been abandoned in San Francisco and is living with an adopted family under another name. The two defendants are now scheduled to go to trial next Monday, although a motion to continue the trial date for as much as three months was one of several motions filed yesterday. The attorneys attorneys said they were not ready for trial. A child's bones found in the Jurupa Hills south of Fontana in February, 1973, were determined by a coroner's jury last May to have been those of the missing Judy. Other Rivera children testified that Judy disappeared early in 1965, That coroner's jury verdict that the bones -w-ere -w-ere -w-ere -w-ere Judy's, and that the child died at the hands of another not by accident was also attacked by defense attorney's who asserted it was arrived at by an "improper prodecure" because a member of the district attorney's attorney's office aided county coroner Bill Hill in his preparation and prosecution of the inquest. David W. Call, Mrs. Bueno's attorney, asked the court to quash the inquest's finding. Larry Freeman, Rivera's attorney, asked for a change of venue because of allegedly prejudicial reporting of the inquest based on the "outageous, unconstitutional unconstitutional and vicious questioning" of the defendants by Coroner Hill. Attorneys also filed a motion to dismiss the charges in the interest of justice, a motion to unseal certain court records connected to the investigation of the San Francisco girl because the need for secrecy no longer exists, a motion for defense costs (both attorneys are appointed by the court), and a motion motion for a psychiatric examination of a prosecution witness.