| |

Leida Margaretha files to suppress statements made to police citing language barrier & lack of Miranda

ByAsa Hawks

Leida Margaretha files a motion to suppress statements she made to police in her felony identity theft case

90 Day Fiancé Season 6 star Leida Margaretha is facing numerous felony charges in Wisconsin after she allegedly stole money from multiple former employers. A little more than a month before Leida is scheduled for a plea/sentencing hearing in one of the cases, she has filed a motion asking the judge to suppress any and all statements she made to officers during their investigation.

LEIDA FILES TO SUPPRESS STATEMENTS SHE MADE TO POLICE

In Winnebago County, Leida is charged with two felony counts of identity theft in order to obtain money or credit. The felonies stem from fraudulent charges Leida allegedly made on behalf of two small businesses between September and October of 2023.

From Starcasm’s previous post about this arrest:

Essentially, Leida was hired by two small businesses as a part-time bookkeeper/data entry person through a temp agency. After hiring Leida, the businesses noticed charges to their account they did not authorize. Those charges were later linked to Leida.

The charges were linked to Leida through a trucking company she and husband Eric Rosenbrook own called Proud American Logistics, LLC.

As part of their investigation, police spoke with Leida multiple times.

On March 5, Leida’s attorney filed a motion to suppress her statements to police claiming Leida was not read her Miranda rights. The motion also cites the fact that English is not Leida’s first language.

Leida “moves the court for an order excluding as evidence all statements, oral or written, allegedly made by the defendant to law enforcement officers or any other governmental officials or their agents,” reads her motion.

The motion claims Leida’s statements “were involuntary under the due process clause
or without first advising the Defendant of the constitutional rights under Miranda.”

From the motion’s conclusion:

After arrest and incarceration, Winnebago County Sheriff Officers did question and interrogate the Defendant without first advising the Defendant of her constitutional rights under Miranda. Further, such statements were involuntary and/or were a product of improper measures where the Defendant was not understanding the officers given the language barrier.

The judge has yet to rule on Leida’s motion. She is due back in court for a plea/sentencing hearing on April 13.

WHAT DID LEIDA TELL POLICE?

Starcasm previously shared information from the criminal complaint against Leida in this case. The complaint included examples of some of the things Leida told officers during their investigation.

The complaint seems to confirm that much of what Leida told police was prior to being read her Miranda rights. It also reveals that Leida essentially confessed AFTER being read her Miranda rights.

Towards the end of the complaint the officer states: “It is believed the statements of Leida Margaretha are made contrary to her penal interest.”

From the criminal complaint:

On Friday, October 6, 2023, Lt. Neuman went to make contact with LEIDA at Company 1 as she was scheduled to work that day. Lt. Neuman made contact with LEIDA in the parking lot of Company 1 when she was arriving at work.

They talked about her job responsibilities and LEIDA eventually admitted she is part owner of Proud American Logistics. Lt. Neuman asked if her company had an account with Kwik Trip and LEIDA agreed that Proud American Logistics had an account with Kwik Trip for fleet fees.

Lt. Neuman questioned LEIDA about how Company 1’s checking account was used to pay for Proud American Logistics fees from Kwik Trip. LEIDA made several excuses and claimed the information must have gotten “mixed-up” at Kwik Trip and used Company 1’s information on accident.

Lt. Neuman told LEIDA that was not possible because Company 1 does not have an account with Kwik Trip but LEIDA continued to say it was some “mix up” or “mistake.” LEIDA then claimed it was possible that her bookkeeper “Laura” had mixed up paperwork from Company 1 that LEIDA had with paperwork from Proud American Logistics.

Lt. Neuman again said that was not possible as Company 1 did not give her their bank account information so it would not be on paperwork she had access to. LEIDA continued to say it was a mix up but eventually said this was wrong and that she needed to make it right and take care of the situation.

Lt. Neuman then stated he believed she obtained Company 1’s checking account information and used it to pay for fees and invoices from Kwik Trip for the company she co-owned. He asked if he was wrong. LEIDA replied, “no, you’re not wrong.”

LEIDA continued to contest how that payment was made and said she was not the one to actually make the payment.

Lt. Neuman arrested LEIDA at that time and made contact with CG to alert her to the arrest. Lt. Neuman also advised that Company 1 may want to reach out to their customers to see if any of them had fraudulent transactions.

After Lt. Neuman’s arrest of LEIDA, he read her Miranda warnings, LEIDA agreed to speak with Lt. Neuman further and agreed to give him the passcode to get into the laptop she had in her backpack with her at the time of her arrest.

LEIDA stated she had obtained Company 1’s checking account information off of a piece of paper in her office and confirmed she had removed paperwork from work without permission. LEIDA admitted she gave the information to her bookkeeper and told her to “try and use it” so her bookkeeper did so.

LEIDA stated she had sufficient funds to cover the invoice from Kwik Trip so she did not have a reason to misappropriate Company 1’s funds. LEIDA stated she knew it was wrong and later told her bookkeeper not to use that bank information anymore.

Lt. Neuman searched LEIDA’s backpack after her arrest and found several folded up pieces of paper in the front zipper pocket which had routing numbers and account information on them for different businesses along with a credit card number and security code that LEIDA said belonged to her father-in-law. One specific piece of paper had handwritten information on it for Business V1 which included Business V1’s routing number, account number, a phone number, the number of employees, and “Revenue: $169,665.”

Johny Yates was the first to report on Leida’s motion to suppress statements.

Asa Hawks is a writer and editor for Starcasm. You can contact Asa via Twitter, Facebook, or email at starcasmtips(at)yahoo.com

Similar Posts