ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 70

[DeDee]

I agree. It was dark and she was tired and terrified (in a "frozen shock phase"). BK had on a mask over his mouth and nose per the PCA. He was described as 5'10" or taller. Average US white/non-hispanic male is 5'10" (Average human height by country - Wikipedia). Athletic. Bushy eyebrows. Plus, he was walking by her in the dark - not sure how close, but based on what I read in the PCA, it didn't seem like they were super close or made eye contact, though I can't say that with certainty. Still imo it would be pretty hard to be 100% on an ID based on that IMO, and I'd be skeptical of any dramatic ID. Otoh, if I were the defense attorney, I'd love it b/c I'd have something to discredit.

imo If I were the defense attorney and I could get away with it, I'd dim the light in the courtroom and hold up photos of bk and many similar looking men with masks on and ask her to pick. in the dark from across however many feet and from a crack in the door at angle or whatever position she was in, it might be tough.

PBBM

Hold on for me a second, please. Where is it stated that the interior of the 1122 House was dark during the murders? I certainly could have missed that fact so enlighten me, please.

If it is true that Xana received a DD delivery at 4am, maybe the kitchen light was turned on. The DD bag was left behind the kitchen sink even tho, at this point, we don't know who placed it there. Maybe the occupants always kept a kitchen light turned on at night. I just don't think we can assume the interior of the House was dark during the murders.

MOO

 

[Nova]

...

Also, and perhaps you can speak to this?, there are some who have suggested that the defense will attempt to 'tear her down' (paraphrase) or 'grill' her on why she didn't call the police earlier and so forth. My opinion was that a judge would not allow that line of questioning (to what purpose?), however as I am not a defense attorney or a prosecutor, I really felt uneasy about that possibility. But I'm not sure how possible that scenario might be....

I don't know about "tearing her down", as the defense may decide that doesn't make BK look good to attack a survivor. But I would expect the defense to argue that the delay in calling 911 indicates the surviving roommate(s) weren't as alarmed as DM's eventual testimony makes her seem.

"So then you went back to bed for almost eight hours. You certainly didn't think four of your closest friends were laying dead in the house, did you?"

As always, IANAL and IMHO.

 

[Gemmie]

If she recognized the intruder, they would have had the person in for questioning immediately. "Hey, the guy I saw was Joe Smith from XYZ fraternity." So the police bring in Joe for questioning.

You don't have to know someone's name to have recognized them as someone you've seen around. I guess that's what I was getting at in my post. I just didn't say it very well. lol

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

A hypothetical - if DM had slept through it all, and therefore had nothing at all to add to the case, would BK have been found? Or found, but much later? What do you all think?

IMO yes. I think 5' 10", athletic, bushy eyebrows is probably descriptive of quite a few men. IMO it's the least compelling thing in the PCA. It's nice that it fits his basic physical description within pretty common parameters. Idk how tall he is, but if he's 6 feet, and she said 5' 10" or taller, then brown hair and 5' 11" open up a bigger range. same for 6'0 and 6'1". to me, jmo, the physical description is just not enough. Average height for white/non-hispanic man in us is 5'10" (Average human height by country - Wikipedia) And define bushy eyebrow? imo his aren't. it's subjective. when I think bushy eyebrows, I think Martin Scorsese or Dan and Eugene Levy, so the description doesn't even fit imo (maybe I just have a really high standard for bushy eyebrows, though ) And I hope LE has a whole lot more evidence tucked away. IMO in the right defense attorney's hands, what we've read in the PCA could be picked apart, and then they're potentially short of BARD. JMO.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

PBBM

Hold on for me a second, please. Where is it stated that the interior of the 1122 House was dark during the murders? I certainly could have missed that fact so enlighten me, please.

If it is true that Xana received a DD delivery at 4am, maybe the kitchen light was turned on. The DD bag was left behind the kitchen sink even tho, at this point, we don't know who placed it there. Maybe the occupants always kept a kitchen light turned on at night. I just don't think we can assume the interior of the House was dark during the murders.

MOO

I edited accordingly. There are many prior discussions about the degree of light in the house, and while it may not have been / probably was not pitch black inside (moonlight, neon lights, etc.), we don't know that they had glaringly bright lights on either. So going back to my original point, and points made after, the general conditions, the generic description, the fear and shock, the mask, etc. are not conducive to a reliable suspect description imo. jmo. icbw. And of course, once I determined just how dark it was, I would use that to my advantage to chip away at the reliability of the eye witness even more. JMO IMO.

 

[Nova]

She would have seen him in the media, his photo is all over the place, investigators don't need to show her photos. If witnesses couldn't testify because they see media photos of defendants in high profile murder cases then alot of murderers would walk free.

Witnesses go to court all the time and get asked to point out the defendant during their trials, to identify the defendant. Most are exposed to their photos in high profile cases.

If she sees his face and recognizes his face, good for her. The jury decides the credibility of a witness.

2 Cents

I'm not sure eyewitnesses aren't regularly told to avoid media, including photos. (Jurors are told to avoid such exposure, and sometimes are sequestered to insure compliance.)

Again, if she only IDs him--as opposed to the few characteristics we have been given--AFTER the media explosion, the jury may (and probably should) find her ID less credible. If they get to hear it at all.

I'm not saying DM has never seen a photo of BK. I suspect LE showed her at least one. If she didn't ID him from that photo, she may have been warned off from other media coverage.

All speculation at this point, because we don't know what all DM actually told the investigators.

 

[Ursamajr]

Could possibly be that.
how do you go in a house, when it's dark, and know your getting to the victim you want ?

We can assume from the PCA that he visited the house (possibly multiple times) in the time leading up to the killings. If so, this is what he saw. If he was planning or had a target this sure helped. (Edit: adding that oops I’m just realizing I’m replying to old messages. Ignore me.)

 

[Boxer]

See, I don't think that's specific at all. I think it could describe a ton of people. Yes, I realize it's combined with everything else, but I am talking solely about the description, nothing else. I don't feel the description is specific. In a college town, it probably describes half the male student body. MOO.

MOO it’s very specific.

Thrre is a mystery person behind a curtain, describe that person, the task is to describe their:

Gender
Height
Body build
Notable facial feature if visible

MOO
She was right on each count.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

We can assume from the PCA that he visited the house (possibly multiple times) in the time leading up to the killings.

is there GPS data that puts him there? I've only read cell tower, and that's not enough to be sure he visited the house, just that he was in the vicinity.

Cellphone Data Shows Idaho Suspect in Crime Scene Area Around Time of Attack: Affidavit

Court documents unsealed Thursday say cellphone data show that the man accused of killing four University of Idaho students had visited the area near the home where the Nov. 13 attack occurred about a dozen times since June.

www.nbcphiladelphia.com

Evidence against Bryan Kohberger is not "irrefutable proof"—attorney

"There is a lot of smoke here, but no definitive fire," Duncan Levin, a former prosecutor who is now a defense attorney, told Newsweek.

www.newsweek.com

 

[Boxer]

I'm not sure eyewitnesses aren't regularly told to avoid media, including photos. (Jurors are told to avoid such exposure, and sometimes are sequestered to insure compliance.)

Again, if she only IDs him--as opposed to the few characteristics we have been given--AFTER the media explosion, the jury may (and probably should) find her ID less credible. If they get to hear it at all.

I'm not saying DM has never seen a photo of BK. I suspect LE showed her at least one. If she didn't ID him from that photo, she may have been warned off from other media coverage.

All speculation at this point, because we don't know what all DM actually told the investigators.

MOO Her interview with police detectives would have been almost immediate.

 

[Boxer]

I don't necessarily disagree. I was responding specifically to the line that bushy eyebrows makes the case. I think that's the weakest part of the PCA. MOO.

Why? BK’s eyebrows are one of his most noticeable distinguishing features.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

Again, true, but I didn't say it ruled him out. I just said it wasn't specific.

right. It doesn't rule him out, but it's not specific enough to make him the only logical choice just based on physical description. IMO. now if he had a giant green face tattoo and is 7'6", then we're talking, but 5'10" or taller, meh, not so much imo.

 

[Kdot112]

'NO GENIUS'

Idaho ‘killer’ Bryan Kohberger is a fantasist with no common sense & returned to scene to live out dream, expert claims​

The U.S. Sun
Luke Kenton
1/22/2023 update

ACCUSED Idaho killer Bryan Kohberger is an "obsessive fantasist" who was fixated on the idea of murdering but lacked enough common sense to adequately cover his tracks, a forensic psychologist claims.
... [...] ...
"When news of the murders first broke, it appeared as though the culprit had pulled off the perfect crime, with police seemingly struggling to find leads, leaving the victim's families furious.

However, since Kohberger's arrest last month, the evidence disclosed by investigators revealed the Ph.D. criminology student allegedly made a host of rookie errors that led police right to his door.

Veteran forensic psychologist Dr. Joni Johnston told The U.S. Sun that his purported mistakes show Kohberger to be an "obsessive fantasist" rather than the criminal mastermind he may have believed himself to be.

"There’s clear evidence this was pre-planned for months or weeks ahead of time," said Johnston, "but this crime was certainly not meticulously planned.

"He drove his own car [to the murder scene], he brought his own phone with him, he left his knife sheath there - so that doesn’t sound meticulous to me.

"Instead, it seems to me like someone who is very obsessive and fantasizing about [the act of killing] and thinking about it.

"Thinking about what weapon he's going to use, and think about what time he's going to go in, and thinking about how he's going to get in, and watching the house perhaps.

"But it appears he then had no common sense in terms of thinking about: 'OK, how am I not going to get caught?' - the basics.

"I’ve heard a lot of people say: 'Well, why wasn’t he focusing on forensics as a criminology student?' But he was basically studying the criminal mind, not forensic science," she added.

"I don't think he was studying how to make sure blood spatter goes in the right way, or anything like that; I think he was focusing on the psychology of it.

"I think it was very obsessively pre-planned, and I think he was obsessed with the fantasy of it all, this is my theory."
... [...] ..."

Expert reveals why 'fantasist' Idaho 'killer' Bryan Kohberger returned to scene

I agree completely (if he is the killer of course). From what I gather, he became focused on fulfilling his fantasy of carrying out the attack itself at the detriment of other aspects like not getting caught. Part of it is due to the difficulties surrounding attacking a house of that nature.

Getting away with it became secondary on accident. This part of his plan likely faded away as he made visit after visit and realised “hey, this place is always full of tenants and strangers, just pulling off the initial attack may be a challenge”.

Rather than ditching the whole idea, he became immersed in the aspect that there was never really a good night to attack the house.

His fantasy clouded his judgement and he decided to go for it on one of the “best nights” (aka no gathering). Even though it was still a full house by all other standards. He runs into a bunch of people, drops evidence, is heard, is seen, etc. Decisions like this go to show that planning might not have been at the forefront by the time things were carried out.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

Why? BK’s eyebrows are one of his most noticeable distinguishing features.

I think this is subjective as I noted above. I don't see his eyebrows as bushy but jMO. imo his most distinctive feature is his imo hawklike nose and forehead ridge. I think different people see different things, and the eyebrow description may not be an easy sell. IDK, I don't see it.

 

[jepop]

I don't know about "tearing her down", as the defense may decide that doesn't make BK look good to attack a survivor. But I would expect the defense to argue that the delay in calling 911 indicates the surviving roommate(s) weren't as alarmed as DM's eventual testimony makes her seem.i
"So then you went back to bed for almost eight hours. You certainly didn't think four of your closest friends were laying dead in the house, did you?"

As always, IANAL and IMHO.

Yes, I can see that, thank you! Just not sure what it proves or how it could be made relevant? She didn't think that her friends were dead at 4.20am. So she would answer yes to that hypothetical question. Nonetheless, she still saw someone in the house and her friends were still dead the next day. So the question would be designed to discredit her re the "shock phase" statement and through that her reliability/credibility? If Defence insinuates she lied about being alarmed maybe she lied about seeing anybody? Or could the defense insinuate that because she didn't call the police, she hallucinated seeing anyone or that she is lying about seeing anyone? That line of questioning makes sense to me if that was to be the defense's approach. Is that a credible/fertile approach for the defense?

MOO, hypothetical, speculation only.

 

[DeDee]

A hypothetical - if DM had slept through it all, and therefore had nothing at all to add to the case, would BK have been found? Or found, but much later? What do you all think?

Well, Kemug, since you are asking for opinions, I don't think the eye witness' account matters all that much. Will a Judge allow the Prosecutor to ask BK to don a mask during the trial aka OJs glove so the eye witness can testify that indeed that is the person she saw walk past her?

They have BKs DNA on a knife sheath that was left next to a victim. They have BKs car's activities. The DNA and car's arrival at the CS location at the time of the murders should have been adequate for a PCA. Franky, I was appalled they exposed this young lady by mentioning her in the PCA as having seen someone close to matching BKs physical description walk past her to the sliding door.

I still don't understand the "frozen state" the PCA mentions because, att, she should have been unaware of horrendous murders that happened on the same floor as well as above her room.

Hopefully, by now they have BKs cell phone's activities and perhaps a boatload of all kinds of scientific and types of electronic evidence, including, but not limited to, more DNA at the CS. I also hope LE has continued to search for the weapon or at least tracked down his purchase of one.

This potential perpetrator is slick. I expect he has cards he's not showing. Be ready because he is eager to be exonerated, according to BK.

MOO

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

Yes, I can see that, thank you! Just not sure what it proves or how it could be made relevant? She didn't think that her friends were dead at 4.20am. So she would answer yes to that hypothetical question. Nonetheless, she still saw someone in the house and her friends were still dead the next day. So the question would be designed to discredit her re the "shock phase" statement and through that her reliability/credibility? If Defence insinuates she lied about being alarmed maybe she lied about seeing anybody? Or could the defense insinuate that because she didn't call the police, she hallucinated seeing anyone or that she is lying about seeing anyone? That line of questioning makes sense to me if that was to be the defense's approach. Is that a credible/fertile approach for the defense?

MOO, hypothetical, speculation only.

I think you make a good point and one I hadn't considered. could the defense somehow raise the specter of doubt about whether she actually saw a man, 5'10" or taller, in a mask with bushy eyebrows, because really, that's as generic as it gets pretty much. imo there might be a way to cast doubt without attacking the witness. jmo.

 

[jepop]

IMO yes. I think 5' 10", athletic, bushy eyebrows is probably descriptive of quite a few men. IMO it's the least compelling thing in the PCA. It's nice that it fits his basic physical description within pretty common parameters. Idk how tall he is, but if he's 6 feet, and she said 5' 10" or taller, then brown hair and 5' 11" open up a bigger range. same for 6'0 and 6'1". to me, jmo, the physical description is just not enough. Average height for white/non-hispanic man in us is 5'10" (Average human height by country - Wikipedia) And define bushy eyebrow? imo his aren't. it's subjective. when I think bushy eyebrows, I think Martin Scorsese or Dan and Eugene Levy, so the description doesn't even fit imo (maybe I just have a really high standard for bushy eyebrows, though ) And I hope LE has a whole lot more evidence tucked away. IMO in the right defense attorney's hands, what we've read in the PCA could be picked apart, and then they're potentially short of BARD. JMO.

Yes, IMO the witness description supported the other evidence LE had already gathered/were gathering. It was the discovery of BK's elantra and the PA plate factor that initially put BK on LE's radar on 29th Nov (see PCA pp9-10).
edited: MOO

 

[Ursamajr]

is there GPS data that puts him there? I've only read cell tower, and that's not enough to be sure he visited the house, just that he was in the vicinity.

Cellphone Data Shows Idaho Suspect in Crime Scene Area Around Time of Attack: Affidavit

Court documents unsealed Thursday say cellphone data show that the man accused of killing four University of Idaho students had visited the area near the home where the Nov. 13 attack occurred about a dozen times since June.

www.nbcphiladelphia.com

Evidence against Bryan Kohberger is not "irrefutable proof"—attorney

"There is a lot of smoke here, but no definitive fire," Duncan Levin, a former prosecutor who is now a defense attorney, told Newsweek.

www.newsweek.com

We do not know if there is or isn't GPS data placing BK at the exact location of the house. We only know that his phone pinged off of the same cell tower that served the house. This is why I used the phrase “we can assume” instead of “we know”. (Edited to add: also why I wrote “if so”.)

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

Yes, I can see that, thank you! Just not sure what it proves or how it could be made relevant? She didn't think that her friends were dead at 4.20am. So she would answer yes to that hypothetical question. Nonetheless, she still saw someone in the house and her friends were still dead the next day. So the question would be designed to discredit her re the "shock phase" statement and through that her reliability/credibility? If Defence insinuates she lied about being alarmed maybe she lied about seeing anybody? Or could the defense insinuate that because she didn't call the police, she hallucinated seeing anyone or that she is lying about seeing anyone? That line of questioning makes sense to me if that was to be the defense's approach. Is that a credible/fertile approach for the defense?

MOO, hypothetical, speculation only.

along the same lines, I had a conversation recently about the brain filling in facts. Then I remembered 'the dress'. this is an interesting approach, imo, and if I were his attorney, I'd maybe shoot for the sweet spot of her being scared and filling in the blanks with most common things - like 5' 10", male, mask, bushy eyebrows, something along these lines, borrowing from the article about 'the dress' below.

The brain cannot be accused of epistemic modesty. It is well-known that in situations like this—where it faces profound uncertainty—it confidently fills in the gaps in knowledge by making assumptions. Usually, its assumptions are based on what it has most frequently encountered in the past. For instance, if the sensory information is more uncertain, observers will estimate object speeds to be slower than they actually are, presumably because slow objects are much more common in the environment than fast ones. (Indeed, most objects in any given field of view don’t move at all.) Color and lighting are no exception.

We Finally Know Why People Saw “the Dress” Differently

The science behind why people saw different colors.

slate.com