ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 64

Status
Not open for further replies.
I imagine he was following line of millions of other students regarding student loans:

- "Punting" the debt waaay down field while hoping for loan forgiveness from Washington.

I dont believe any payments are due until the student graduates. As BK was enrolled in a doctorate program, he might not have "graduated" in the technical sense.

So he was planning to go to law school? Or be a psychiatrist?
He had three to five more years of school left.
No way a criminologist makes enough to pay off over $300K in student loan debt, not counting the interest.
Yes, the first payment isn’t due until after final graduation. That is when the interest begins.

While avoiding his forensic science classes he also seemed to avoid finance classes.
A lot of common sense lacking, IMO

JMO
 
I imagine he was following line of millions of other students regarding student loans:

- "Punting" the debt waaay down field while hoping for loan forgiveness from Washington.

I dont believe any payments are due until the student graduates. As BK was enrolled in a doctorate program, he might not have "graduated" in the technical sense.
He was a TA
 
DM may be strong enough to put him away.
Unless the prosecution is holding back on what she knows, I can't see the value in her testifying at all. Timeline perhaps, but that can be established better through other means. As an eyewitness she just doesn't offer enough compelling detail to implicate BK.

And in no universe can I imagine BK's legal team putting her on the stand to repudiate testimony she never even made.
 
Imo Someone that's stressed reassuring themselves is not strange.
At least I hope not. Because I do it.
It’s not strange, but I think why it’s being discussed now is the similarity between what police reportedly heard BK mumbling to himself, and what DM reportedly heard the night of the murders. We are considering that DM actually heard BK talking to and reassuring himself.

‘I'm fine, this is okay.'
(Heard by police, BK reassuring himself)

‘It’s ok, I’m going to help you.‘
(Heard by DM)


 
Unless the prosecution is holding back on what she knows, I can't see the value in her testifying at all. Timeline perhaps, but that can be established better through other means. As an eyewitness she just doesn't offer enough compelling detail to implicate BK.

And in no universe can I imagine BK's legal team putting her on the stand to repudiate testimony she never even made.
Agree that unless there is more to Dylan's statement, there isn't much there to implicate BK.
 
Yes, DM seeing man in black leaving through kitchen to back door, he was upstairs first.

Jmo
I wonder if DM also smelled blood and that was part of why she was so traumatized. I remember coming home from work one day and knowing as soon as I opened the front door that our pregnant guinea pig had given birth because I could smell blood, even though our guinea pig was upstairs. And that was just a little bit of blood from a tiny animal.
 
I imagine he was following line of millions of other students regarding student loans:

- "Punting" the debt waaay down field while hoping for loan forgiveness from Washington.

I dont believe any payments are due until the student graduates. As BK was enrolled in a doctorate program, he might not have "graduated" in the technical sense.
Upon graduation you can’t just punt your debt down field. Of course there are going to be students that are unemployed and need to defer or need to set up an income based repayment plan but the majority of graduates tend to repay their student loans. Unfortunately, due to changes in state tax laws students are paying much higher tuitions than I did when I went to school in the late 70’s early 80’s. We’re an anomaly in the way we invest in our children in the US, i.e. we don’t. Presently we’re happily paying for our two son’s tuition so they won’t be burdened by the exorbitant cost of college. I believe more than JMO.
 
Quite possible.
By her door- near her door- those are still vague descriptions and it seems odd to me that only 1 print was found. And the slider is near her door.
I will be stunned if that's all that was found. I believe that's just all they put in the PCA. Unfortunately, this is starting to look like a game of Telephone. It starts out as a bloody footprint in the hall and ends up as a bloody car in the driveway.
 
ADMIN NOTE:

gliving has asked permission to post a video from Chronicles of Olivia because it contains an interview with the Goncalves family. We are approving it with the following limitations:

This is not blanket approval for linking to the source at other times or for other cases. It is being approved on a one time basis only and strictly for discussion of what Kaylee's family has to say, with no discussion of the podcast hosts / interviewers.
Thanks! This interview occurred two days before the arrest of suspect Bryan Kohberger but for whatever reason was only released yesterday.

 
Last edited:
Unless the prosecution is holding back on what she knows, I can't see the value in her testifying at all. Timeline perhaps, but that can be established better through other means. As an eyewitness she just doesn't offer enough compelling detail to implicate BK.

And in no universe can I imagine BK's legal team putting her on the stand to repudiate testimony she never even made.

The prosecution unveiled the protection DM had, by putting her in the PCA. She could have been a surprise witness used only if needed during trial, but they did not make that choice. I wonder why?

Was the PCA not strong enough without her eye witness of his height, build, and bushy eyebrows at that time of the morning?
Were PD all over the area given the physical description DM gave them, and tasked with connected that description to a white Elantra?
If so, it was DM’s description that made WSU red flag BK, with the bodycam from his Oct stop in Pullman.

She also heard his voice, or at least a male voice.
Yes it could have been someone else, but her description is compelling and also lines up with the shoe print on the floor.

I don’t think BK’s legal team would necessarily put her on. I do think BK would put her on just to be entertained by the fear he saw


JMO
 
Adding to this, if the defendant represents himself he can call DM as a witness and question her himself.
In Darrell Brooks style he could question his victims and their famileis. The man who ran over children questioned the parents of those children, the sons of women he slaughtered, and the husbands of women who bounced off of the hood of the red suv.

It was sick, but they nailed him. DM may be strong enough to put him away.

JMO

Interesting read on "Navigating the Perils of Pro Se: How to Protect Your Client From Cross-Examination by a Pro Se Defendant" here.
 
Here's the actual quote:

"I don’t believe hearsay is admissible in Idaho under the rules,” LaBar said. “Cross-examination of her is going to be key in the case to possibly get even more holes as far as the identification is concerned.”

In context I think he is saying that putting her on the stand to make that statement will be... problematic, and without her saying it on the stand, it would be hearsay.

Just spitballing here...
Gah! Okay, he irritates me, but that at least makes sense. The headline made it sound like he was saying that her seeing him was hearsay, which was ridiculous. I hate the press sometimes Okay, a lot of the time. Haha.
 
That actually raises a question for me. How, exactly, was the footprint germane to the PCA? It wasn't tied to BK anywhere in the text. As such, it wasn't needed, so I can't figure out why it was even there.
JMO.
The affidavit states that the footprint is consistent with DM’s statement of what she saw regarding the suspect’s path of travel. The affidavit thoroughly ties DM’s statements to other corroborating evidence.

Unless the prosecution is holding back on what she knows, I can't see the value in her testifying at all. Timeline perhaps, but that can be established better through other means. As an eyewitness she just doesn't offer enough compelling detail to implicate BK.

And in no universe can I imagine BK's legal team putting her on the stand to repudiate testimony she never even made.

She also spoke to phrases and specific sounds she heard which will have substantive value, IMO. As noted, the affidavit provides corroborating information to support her statements — and I suspect they’ve obtained more since the affidavit.

I believe she heard and perhaps saw more than we know today and her account will be key. Time will tell.

Sending good thoughts and strength to her during these trying times.
JMO.
 
It’s mainly a question of accuracy. It shouldn’t be changed to ‘ski mask’ unless the roommate said it was a ski mask.

There are other issues, though. How scary was the mask? Nothing at all scary about a Covid mask, where I live. A ski mask would be scary, but maybe they take them in stride, in Idaho. So the type of mask s definitely relevant, but we just don’t know.

MOO

I agree and over time people start considering them facts.
 
Agree that unless there is more to Dylan's statement, there isn't much there to implicate BK.
If I remember correctly, it specifically says she didn't recognize the figure. At best, her description doesn't exclude him.

That being said, I think the other PCA evidence is very strong and they can only have more evidence now that he's arrested. MOO
 
JMO.
The affidavit states that the footprint is consistent with DM’s statement of what she saw regarding the suspect’s path of travel. The affidavit thoroughly ties DM’s statements to other corroborating evidence.
I guess, but simple logistics would put the killer's footprint there unless he floated up and down the stairs to the third floor. It just seems like there is something else going on there, something more, something unspoken. Like they started to tie that shoeprint specifically to BK but then held back at the last minute.
 
If I remember correctly, it specifically says she didn't recognize the figure. At best, her description doesn't exclude him.

That being said, I think the other PCA evidence is very strong and they can only have more evidence now that he's arrested. MOO
Yes agree, there's alot of compelling evidence in that PCA IMO!
 
Not a lawyer, but I believe hearsay for a witness is if DM testified about what someone else told her.

It's not hearsay for prosecutors to read a statement from her, reference her (recorded) interviews, etc to corroborate their story, even if she does not testify. That is all evidence gathered as part of the investigation.

It would be hearsay. He has a right to confront his accusers. (I know that at least one state allows LE to say what a witness’s statement was, in a preliminary hearing only—but that’s different.m)

MOO
 
Dylan for sure because she was awake. But what was Bethany doing at 4? And it seems like they would have said they used Xana and Dylan’s phones because Xana was tik tocking until 4:12 if i am remembering correctly

I’m just thinking they are withholding info about what Bethany was doing at 4am

Not that she was doing anything bad. But they didn’t feel like they needed to include anymore info for probable cause so they left it out ???? Or is that a rudycukous assumption???

All information on the 911 call is being withheld and LE has indicated it was for investigative reasons.

It has been discussed a few times over several threads but there has been no confirmation that anyone has passed out and passed out may have been a term used by dispatch for legal reasons and to protect the dignity of the deceased.

Very few people can legally determine death and frightened roommate or friends are not legally capable. In this case, LE would be able to have legally determined death but autopsies were required to establish manner and time of death.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
137
Guests online
3,966
Total visitors
4,103

Forum statistics

Threads
594,216
Messages
18,000,470
Members
229,342
Latest member
Findhim
Back
Top