Son Stuffed Mom in a Wooden Box and Burned Her Body: Police

He said his mother was missing, but. hours later, police found burned remains. in the yard. Bones, even part of what. looked like a human spine. And now, 20-year-old Nicholas Yates, he's accused. of murdering his own mother, Cheryl. And. what investigators say he allegedly. confessed to is beyond disturbing. We. are going to break down the details of. this case with the Indiana criminal. defense attorney. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law & Crime. I'm Jesse. Weber. This is an incredibly chilling case. Cuz.

I want you to imagine someone calling. the police to report their mother. missing. And then hours later, investigators find burned human remains. in the yard. That is exactly what. prosecutors say happened in Clinton, Indiana. And now, 20-year-old Nicholas. Yates, the very person who made that. call, is in custody, charged with. murder. And the affidavit in this case, it lays out what police say is a dark, twisted trail of contradictions, lies, a.

backyard fire. This all started in early. October when Yates reported that his. mother, Cheryl Yates, was missing. But. the story that investigators pieced. together from his own statements, witness interviews, physical evidence, it paints an even darker picture. According to the probable cause. affidavit, Yates allegedly admitted that. he struck his mother during an argument, stashed her body in a wooden box, and. spent hours burning it in a backyard. fire pit. The document describes, quote, "a smoldering pile of papers, bones.

among the ashes, and one bone, quote, particularly indicative of a human. spinal column." Now, we're going to walk. you through how investigators moved from. a missing person call to a full-blown. murder case, and what Yates is now. accused of in his own words. So, let's. get into this. The case begins back on. October 5th. That is when Yates called. law enforcement to report that his. mother was missing. The affidavit states. that deputies arrived at the home in the. 300 block of Davis Street in Clinton on. October 5th, 2025, at, quote,

"approximately 5:36 p.m., Vermillion. County Deputy John Hawkins was. dispatched to 364 Davis Street in. Clinton, Indiana in response to a. missing person report. This report had. been initiated by Nicholas Nick Yates.". Now, according to the affidavit, Yates. told Deputy Hawkins that he had last. seen his mother, Cheryl, on Friday, October 3rd, and that he had been. calling her phone since then. Here's. what's weird. Police say he also told. them that she had taken all of her. clothes, her ID, the bank card, but left. behind her purse, her wallet, and her.

phone. Now, did you catch that? Police. say Yates told them that Cheryl left her. phone behind, yet he also claimed to. have been calling it. I mean, why call a. phone that never left the house, right? Well, when asked about that, according. to the affidavit, quote, "Nick advised. that Cheryl had gotten a new phone, but. she had kept the same number." Deputy. Hawkins then asked to see Cheryl's. phone, but Nick advised he had sold it. because he needed the money. Now, deputies asked if they could enter the. residence. Yates apparently said he need. to talk to two people that he asked to.

move in, saying that they would need to. know what was going on. And when pressed. whether he knew of anyone who would want. to harm his mother, Yates responded, "No, she was the sweetest person.". Inside the house, deputies, they noticed. that Cheryl's pill planner, her. medication, was taken the morning of. October 3rd, but not afterward. Outside, deputies find this, quote, "smoldering. pile of papers" near a burn pile. According to the affidavit, Yates told. them he had burned DCS papers belonging. to his mother because he didn't want to.

get in trouble for having confidential. information while she wasn't there. But. as investigators dug deeper, that is. when they made a gruesome discovery. The. affidavit reads, "We proceeded to the. backyard where we discovered bones. within the burn pit. The shape and. appearance of the bones would lead one. to believe that they perhaps were human. bones. Particularly indicative of a. human bone was one bone which appeared. to be that of a human spinal cord." So, after being read his rights, Yates. apparently initially denied any. involvement, but as the interview.

continued, that is when his story. reportedly began to shift. We are going. to get to that in a moment. But first, to help me break all of this down, I. want to welcome back here to Sidebar, Indiana criminal defense attorney Andrew. Baldwin. Andrew, thank you so much for. taking the time. Appreciate it. Good to see you, Jesse. How would you approach a case where you. have this accused who initially reports. a missing person, but then allegedly. provides inconsistent statements to. police? This is again the allegation. that Yates did with his mother's.

whereabouts and phone. How would you. approach a case like that? Well, I find that these cases, and this. may be shocking to some people, are. actually some of the more easy cases to. strategize about because you're working. with a a pile of uh. dog poop here at the beginning, you. know, and you're trying to like how what. do I how do I polish this? How can I. extricate my client from this? And I've. actually had cases with burned bodies a. couple of times, and so, here's what I. would do. I'd I'd ask for a speedy.

trial. I think that in Indiana, that's. 70 days. In most states, that's 70 days. You do not want to give the state an. opportunity to start taking the bones to. wherever they would take them to start. studying to see if what he, Nick, the. accused, said is even accurate. Uh. because ultimately, the defense here is. not that difficult. It's something other. than murder. What he details in his. confession, if you want to call it that, is that he got upset at his mom, and in. the heat of the moment, he struck her. And then, after striking her, she fell.

and injured herself. And it's not that. crazy that somebody that is so concerned. about being thought of as a murderer, even though it was. more of an accident following a battery, that that person. uh does the things that he did, takes. the body, uh. tries to burn it. I mean, I'm not saying. saying that that's No, of course. I know. I know. I I want that. understood, but I'm saying it it's at. least arguable to a jury. And you do not.

want the prosecutor to have that much. time to to kind of think this thing. through. So, speedy trial. >> That's an interesting perspective. I was. going to ask you, you know, when you're. dealing with a burn pile, when you're. dealing with bones, what kind of testing. would the defense do on this? Or would. you just say, "Hey, listen, let's own up. to it, right? Let's own up to the. burning. There's nothing more to look. here." But you're concerned that if you. get into the weeds with testing, your. experts, the prosecution's experts, then. they could get a little bit into, "Well, we can tell what kind of wound this was. We can tell maybe a series of events.".

That's what you're saying, right? That's. what we're talking about testing. Right. Now, I don't know what the. condition of those bones or if there's a. skull, cuz it sounds like he's trying to. claim that the skull hit um. uh a wooden uh crate or something, and. um that's what caused ultimately her. death. And if the skull's around, yeah, you. definitely don't want to give them time. to to test the skull. Um and that then. they could say, "Well, this this story's. not adding up with the evidence that we. see.". >> Right. By the way, you know why we're.

able to bring you stories like this? It's not only because of the amazing. support that we get from all of you out. there, but also from our incredible. sponsor, Morgan & Morgan, America's. largest injury law firm, a firm with. over a thousand attorneys. You know why. they're so big? Because they win a lot. They have recovered over 25 billion. dollars for more than 500,000 clients. In fact, in the past few months, a. client in Florida received 12 million. dollars after the insurance company. offered just 350,000 dollars. Out in. Pennsylvania, a client was awarded 26. million dollars. That is 40 times the.

insurer's 650,000 dollar offer. You have. another client in Pennsylvania who. received 29 million dollars after being. offered only 500,000 dollars. And even. if you think that your case isn't worth. millions of dollars, why not start a. claim and fight for what you deserve? Morgan & Morgan makes it so simple, you. can start a claim from your phone in. just eight clicks. So, if you're. injured, you can easily start a claim at. forthepeople.com/lccsidebar. by clicking the link below or scanning. the QR code on screen. Okay, so let's get into this. This.

probable cause affidavit lays out, in. what I will say is chilling detail, how. investigators say Yates' story began to. unravel almost immediately. Yates was read his rights, and he. initially claimed he hadn't seen Cheryl. in a month. Police say that Yates also. showed them an app that displayed. Cheryl's last known location at a bingo. hall, and that this was on October 3rd. But when pressed further, Yates admitted. it was actually him at the bingo hall,

that he was using his mother's cell. phone. Apparently told deputies he was. there with friends, later sold her phone. at a Kroger kiosk. And remember this. version of the story, because later, we're going to revisit the timeline from. the accounts of other people who appear. to contradict what Yates said. So, Andrew, going back to this, do you. immediately accept that this is, like. you said, a confession? Or what are the. common legal strategies for challenging. or contextualizing what a defendant. says? And as you and I both know, this. is why a a suspect uh defendant usually.

retains counsel and doesn't say. anything, because you don't want to have. to clean up everything afterwards. But. the how how do you challenge it? Yeah, Gerry Spence, one of the most. famous criminal defense lawyers in the. country, always said, "When you are. explaining, you are losing." And you. always have to explain away, or try to, your client if they've said things. So, the first thing you try to do is get the. confession tossed, get it thrown out. There is a little window here from. reading the the probable cause.

affidavit. I don't think it works, but. it if you're going if you're not going. to file a speedy, it would be worth. going down this road. And that is. in Indiana, we have these things called. Pirtle rights. And that is before you go. into somebody's house, before you go. into somebody's car, you have to let. that the person know that you don't have. to let me into your house. You do not. have to let me into your car. And I just. had a case 2 weeks ago that the judge. tossed ever tossed the the major pieces. of evidence because of a violation of. Pirtle. Well, what is it? If you are in.

custody, and this is where they probably. lose, but if you are in custody, they. are required to read you your Pirtle. rights before you walk into the house. Well, in this case, like you just said, Jesse, they were talking to him and they. realized the police realized that his. story was inconsistent. And in fact, I. would say that he committed a crime. right in their presence. He could have. committed a misdemeanor in that he lied. to the police. It could be obstruction. of justice. And that was from when he. said, "My mom was at the bingo hall.". "Okay, no, I was at the bingo hall.". Well, now he's lied, and now the. argument, the legal argument from the. defendant would be, "Now you know that.

he's committed a crime, yet you're you. should be reading him his rights right. then, and then you didn't read him his. Pirtle rights right after that, and then. you asked him permission to go into his. house. Everything once they go into the. house, including looking at the burn. pile, all of that evidence should be. tossed. You might want to go down that. road, and you might want to use that. certainly as leverage if you can try to. convince the prosecutor that we're going. to win on this, so why don't we get this. knocked down to a voluntary manslaughter. or reckless homicide and avoid all that. all the uh drama of a trial and the and. the time.". Because a lot of this is bad evidence. I.

mean, previously mentioned that. investigators actually made a specific. note of when they were questioning Yates. because when police asked whether anyone. might want to harm Cheryl, Yates. responded, "No, she was the sweetest. person." But according to the affidavit, officers emphasized the way that Yates. used the word was, that that was a red. flag. So, this is why Andrew and I are. talking about what our avenues defense. could explore here since this could be a. really problematic case for them. Well, after hours of questioning, Yates. allegedly admitted what happened. That.

he told police that the two had argued. on October 3rd after Cheryl told him to. either move out or she would. And for. context on what that argument might have. been about, according to the affidavit, Sheriff Mike Holkamp spoke with Cheryl's. supervisor at her workplace, Robert, who. advised he had seen Cheryl leave work on. Friday, October 3rd at approximately. 2:30 p.m. Further conversation with. Robert revealed Cheryl had her cell. phone with her and she had made a. comment while at work stating she was. going to kill him, referring to Nick,

when she got home. According to Robert, Cheryl had said that Nick has been. spending all of his money and Cheryl has. been paying all of his bills. Well, after this apparent argument, police say. that Yates told them in detail what he. reportedly did to his mother, and we. will get to that first. But Andrew, back. to you, you have this case's police. report that an argument may have. triggered an alleged crime. How do we. evaluate these claims from co-workers or. friends, family members talking about. what the victim may have said about her.

relationship, any clues about what may. come, um you know, talking about that family. dynamic. Uh what are I'm I'm I'm. assuming these will be essential. witnesses at a trial. From a defense. perspective, how do we view these. witnesses? Well, um I think the I'm. going to kill my son probably said in. just like parents say about their, you. know, their kid who gets arrested or. or is dating somebody that they don't. like. I'm going to kill him. It's probably that and and that's prob I.

don't know what they don't talk about in. the PCA, the tone. But I could make that. a central piece in a way of the defense. because it's now it's it's all of a. sudden if you're talking about heat of. passion, trying to get that murder. knocked down to a voluntary manslaughter. or reckless homicide, then it's now you. have a piece of evidence that's like. we know that she was angry at him, and. we know that therefore a an argument. started, and that's where the heat of. passion comes in. And so, I think that could be central. Now, you might have some evidentiary.

issues. Is it hearsay? You know, she's. she's a no the the mom is dead. She's no. longer able to come in and testify. Yeah, that's what I told my co-worker, and a co-worker saying in court, that's. trying to prove the truth of the matter. asserted, as they say what hearsay is. And so, they might try to keep that out. So, there could be some. some pre-trial motions to keep those. types of. testimony out. So, let's talk about what. happened next. Police say that Yates in. a chilling fashion confessed to killing. his mother. The affidavit reads, "He.

stated he struck his mother in the. throat and her face turned blue. During. the confrontation, she fell backward, hitting the back of her head against the. metal bed frame, and then fell to the. right, impacting her head on a large. wooden chest." Investigators say that. Yates told them that Cheryl was silent. after collapsing, that he allegedly. placed her in a wooden box, left her. there overnight, and then the next day, on October 4th, rolled that box out to. the backyard fire pit and set it ablaze. The affidavit reads, "Placed his mother.

into the burn pit with her still inside. the wooden box and used doors that they. had repurposed as a privacy fence to. burn his mother." Mr. Yates claimed that. he maintained the fire for most of the. day on Saturday. Now, meanwhile, the two. people who had recently moved into that. house, they told police a very different. story, and we're going to get into those. details in a minute. But Andrew, I. always wonder, how do prosecutors, how. do investigators, do they just take all. of this as true? I mean, this is very specific. what allegedly happened. You also take.

it with, my gosh, this is what the. suspect is allegedly saying. Do they. take it all as true? Do they corroborate. it? If he's admitting to such. specificity, does it have to be true? Um. talk to me about that. Well, they better not just take it as. true because I'm going to tell you what. I do as a defense lawyer. If they don't. DNA swab that that chest or or whatever. they called it and the bed frame or look. at it to see if there's, you know, you know, some spots of blood, they.

don't run a serology on on those areas. and and the floor and everywhere else to. see if what his story is whether it's. consistent or not cuz, you know, again, I'm going for voluntary manslaughter or. reckless homicide, and and if his story. ends up holding up as true, then you. might have a legitimate shot at at. getting that type of verdict. But but if. you police officers. law enforcement aren't doing those. things, then boy, we take advantage of. that in the. on the defense side. Yeah, you didn't do.

this, did you? You should have done. that, shouldn't you? And uh it was a. mistake, and the jury deserved to hear. uh that type of testimony, and you know, you try to rile up the jury about. an improper investigation if if you can, if it's possible. >> Right. So, let's go back to these two people. who had recently moved in. Well, earlier. I mentioned that police say Yates told. them that he was with friends at a. Kroger kiosk selling his mother's phone. on October 3rd. But according to the. affidavit, these two people said they. never went with Yates to a Kroger kiosk,

that he spent the day after Cheryl's. disappearance cleaning, including. washing her bed sheets, shopping, paying. for most of the items with cash. WTHR. also reports that later on, the friends. told investigators that Yates had called. them back on September 30th saying his. mom was quote moving out and that he. needed to know by October 3rd if they. wanted to move in. Now, Andrew, you and. I have been talking about possibility of. this being manslaughter versus a murder, right? Does these kind of details. complicate it? You you know, I.

again, I have seen cases before where. somebody looks it looks so bad. They. they went to all these lengths to clean. up the crime scene, make sure they. didn't get caught. It doesn't. necessarily mean that they cold-blooded. murdered somebody. It could have been. someone died under other circumstances, they hid the body in panic. It could be. a manslaughter, but it does raise a lot. of questions about the sadistic nature. of these allegations, right? If someone. is able to do this and cover this up. regarding his own mother, is it a. stretch for a jury to believe, "Wait a.

second. I I I. I'm believing this guy, if he can cold, you know, do this, maybe he really did. murder his mother and not just it was. not just a heat of the moment kind of. thing.". Yeah, I I think it is very hurtful that. he's out spending money and kind of you. get this image in your mind of this kind. of this punk lazy kid that's in this. house, and the way I'd paint it as. prosecutor, perhaps. And as soon as she. dies, is he crying about this accident. that happened after a heat of.

passion moment? Is he upset? What What. is he doing? No, he's bringing in these. two people, and you know, he's going out. and buying them dinners and things like. that. It doesn't paint a great picture. for Nick that he's out again spending. money, um kind of lavishing his two friends. that he then brings in. I mean, it looks. like it almost looks like a plan. Like, if my mom doesn't leave, cuz the mom. said she was going to leave, and he. didn't want to be there alone. If my mom. doesn't leave, then I'm going to kill.

her, and then I'm going to take her. money, and I'm going to lavish it on my. friends that I'm moving in. And it makes. that attempted or I'm sorry, the uh. voluntary manslaughter argument, heat of. passion argument, makes it very, very. difficult. Uh just another landmine. you're going to have to figure out how. to dodge at trial. By the way, is this a. case where he would have to testify to. explain this stuff? Yeah, Larry Posner's the king of cross. exam and trial kind of trial tactics, and he never wants to put his client on. the stand. I don't agree with him.

necessarily, but this is not a case. where I can imagine that I'd want to put. this guy on the stand. I mean, he's. already. kind of sunk his boat in the things that. he has said to police, and I don't think. he could probably You know, you try. It's his choice, his his constitutional. choice, and you work with every client. that I have go to trial, we work with in. the event that they're going to testify, but I cannot imagine it would be a good. idea. Legal question for you. Because on. October 7th, prosecutors officially. charged him with one count of felony. murder. He pleaded not guilty. He's.

being held without bond, and the court. records show he's due back in court in. January for pre-trial conference. A jury. trial set for February. Why felony. murder? Well, felony murder we defense. lawyers hate because it's in the. commission of a felony, somebody dies. And if somebody dies in the commission. of a felony, whether you intended to. kill them or did not intend to kill. them, doesn't matter. It's still felony. murder. So, it's kind of a work around. for prosecutors when they fear that. they're not going to be able to prove. intent. I'm not really sure what the.

felony they think he committed is. So, that would be something I normally it. >> be like assault or something like that, right? Aggravated assault. >> be, but that could be an underlying that. that also from a legal perspective could. be part of an underlying element of the. crime and therefore maybe not you can't. use felony murder for that, perhaps. But, you know, commonly just so that. everybody out there knows it's like if. you're if you're the wheelman in a in an. armed robbery and nobody expected. anybody to die and somebody dies and you. had nothing to do with it, that's felony. murder. That's the classic example.

Or if somebody you kidnap somebody and. let's say you, you know, you put them in. a box to hide them and they die, you. know, you might not have intended for. them, but in the commission of a. kidnapping they die. It's like felony. it's felony murder. >> Exactly. Um. this idea of a trial being set for. February feels kind of quick. You. mentioned speedy trial. Uh do you do you. think that's First of all, is that. timeline right? Do you think it'll. actually stay for for February? Probably. not. Most lawyers won't pull the trigger. on a speedy trial just because they're.

not equipped. typically to try it that fast, but I got. to tell you something on a case like. this you got to swing for the fences. You got to disrupt the prosecutor's. rhythm and a speedy trial, that's the. way to do it. I mean, I'm it's easy to. Monday morning quarterback or I guess. this is would be actually Saturday. morning quarterbacking, but that might. be a way to disrupt the prosecutor's. rhythm and also get them to to start. thinking about, man, I don't really I'm. not going to be ready as a prosecutor. and I don't want to release him because. that's one of the remedies for for that.

the prosecutor not being ready in 70. days is releasing the defendant. And so, it could lend itself to. hey, I'm a prosecutor. I don't I'm not. going to be ready. Yeah, I'm ready to. talk voluntary manslaughter. I am. Now, these are all unlikely things. I mean, more than likely the prosecutor this is. a big case it's getting coverage. They're going to be able to try this. case in 70 days. Yet, that might be on. the defense side the very smart move to. make. This is a very disturbing case. Feels like a tough case for defense. attorneys given this alleged evidence,

but I appreciate you breaking it all. down. Trying to think about ways to this. might go. Andrew Baldwin, always love. having you on. Thank you. Great to see you, Jesse. Thank you. That. is all we have for you right now here on. Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so much. for joining us. And as always, please. subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you get your podcast. You can follow me on X or Instagram. I'm. Jesse Weber. Speak to you next time. [Music].