It's possible that DeSales University has asked faculty not to make comments to t he media, and refer all requests to their media contact. I think Ramslaand would glady comply.Hmm
What exactly can she say?
That she didn't see any red flags?
It's possible that DeSales University has asked faculty not to make comments to t he media, and refer all requests to their media contact. I think Ramslaand would glady comply.Hmm
What exactly can she say?
That she didn't see any red flags?
snipped for focus @Sister Golden Hair... define bushy eyebrow? imo his aren't. it's subjective. when I think bushy eyebrows, I think Martin Scorsese or Dan and Eugene Levy,... (maybe I just have a really high standard for bushy eyebrows, though )
And I hope LE has a whole lot more evidence tucked away... what we've read in the PCA could be picked apart, and then they're potentially short of BARD. JMO.
Free speech is a beautiful thing. But then, remaining employed is, too.It's possible that DeSales University has asked faculty not to make comments to t he media, and refer all requests to their media contact. I think Ramslaand would glady comply.
I think the defense will be interested in how DM arrived at her descriptions. Were they spontaneous? Or were there leading questions asked by LE who interviewed her, thus helping her to determine the categories, for example with regard to body build. Did they show her any pictures or give her any information to help her with her descriptions? In Attorney Taylor's Discovery Request to the prosecution she requested disclosure of the identification process of any defendant that was being considered in the case.
Attorney Taylor's Discovery Request, January 10, 2023
13. Identification. Disclosure of whether a defendant, or any other person, was identified by lineup, show up, photo spread or similar identification proceeding relating to the offense charged, and production of any pictures utilized or resulting therefrom and the names, addresses and telephone numbers of all identifying witnesses.
BBM
One of BK's other former professors at DeSales University did make comments to the media about him, so IMO, the university has not asked faculty not to make comments, and it up to them if they wish to comment:It's possible that DeSales University has asked faculty not to make comments to t he media, and refer all requests to their media contact. I think Ramslaand would glady comply.
Really,told the Daily Mail that Kohberger, who was arrested in the murders of four University of Idaho students, was a “great writer” and “brilliant student.”"
Accused Idaho killer Bryan Kohberger was a ‘brilliant student,’ DeSales professor
MB said she only knew BK onlineOne of BK's other former professors at DeSales University did make comments to the media about him, so IMO, the university has not asked faculty not to make comments, and it up to them if they wish to comment:
"A former university professor of Bryan Kohberger said the accused killer was “one of my best students, ever” — and that the then-master’s candidate was one of only two students she has recommended to a Ph.D. program.
Michelle Bolger, 33, an associate professor at DeSales University in Pennsylvania, told the Daily Mail that Kohberger, who was arrested in the murders of four University of Idaho students, was a “great writer” and “brilliant student.”"
Accused Idaho killer Bryan Kohberger was a ‘brilliant student,’ DeSales professor claims
Ramsland said she wouldn't be commenting "at this time" (on 1/2/2023):
"She has not made any public comments since Kohberger's arrest. "I'm making no media statements at this time," she told Newsweek on Monday."
Who is Katherine Ramsland? Serial killer expert who taught Bryan Kohberger.
What could they poke about? De nada.Or she doesn't want anyone poking around . . .
I'm sure Dr. R has had much to say about serial killers in general, but she has steadfastly declined to comment on BK.At the university, Kohberger was reportedly taught by Ramsland, a forensic psychologist who has spent decades studying serial killers.Who is Katherine Ramsland? Serial killer expert who taught Bryan Kohberger
Ramsland is a professor at DeSales University in Pennsylvania and reportedly taught the man accused of killing four University of Idaho students.www.newsweek.com
She has not made any public comments since Kohberger's arrest. "I'm making no media statements at this time," she told Newsweek on Monday.
Ramsland, Ph.D., is a professor and assistant provost at DeSales University. She came to the university "specifically to teach forensic psychology, focusing on her field of expertise—extreme offenders," according to her biography on the university's website.
....
Ramsland holds a master's degree in forensic psychology from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, a master's in clinical psychology from Duquesne University, a master's in criminal justice from DeSales University, and a Ph.D. in philosophy from Rutgers University, according to her biography on the Psychology Today website.
She writes the "Shadow Boxing" blog for the website, which is described as one that "probe the mind's dark secrets."
I must check out her blog....
snipped for focus @Orange Tabby.... I thought trial practice rules dictate that you cannot impeach your own witness. If that’s true, then the defense cannot call her as a witness only to try and impeach or contradict everything she has already expressed to LE...
Yes, faculty have free speech, but usually will comply with the administration's wishes, especially in a situation that would draw this kind of attention to an institution. I'm guessing that Ramslaand has tenure, so remaining employed wouldn't be a concern for her. I don't think that she wants to be asked questions about this case. After all, as a criminal psychologist, she missed the one sitting in the front row (so to speak) of her classes. JMO.Free speech is a beautiful thing. But then, remaining employed is, too.
I'd like to hear from her - maybe in a blog post not an interview.
MOO
It would certainly be interesting if BK wanted Ramslaand called as a witness, especially if she wrote a reference for him for his doctoral application(s). If she did, and they were positive, then she would have to admit that.Free speech is a beautiful thing. But then, remaining employed is, too.
I'd like to hear from her - maybe in a blog post not an interview.
MOO
<snipped for focus> Ramsland said she wouldn't be commenting "at this time" (on 1/2/2023):
Who is Katherine Ramsland? Serial killer expert who taught Bryan Kohberger.
<modsnip>
She was not identifying anyone, that doesn't apply.
Of course her reaction was spontaneous. She was in shock and did her police interview likely that same day or close to it because LE would be interviewing everyone in that house. No one would be leaving, place would be a locked down crime scene.
There is no evidence she was drunk, no evidence she will see photos and change her story as has been previously asserted.
She gave her statement and the prosecution and defense have it. Period. If she changes her statement at trial the defense and/or the prosecution will have her read her statement on the stand and address any discrepancies in front of the Jury.
This just happened in a murder trial. A witness on the stand was sometimes saying different things from their police statements and the prosecution had them read their original statement and then address the discrepency. Happens all the time.
People forget exactly what they said and saw, time goes by, memories fade etc....This is why we have official witness statements WRITTEN and even VIDEO RECORDED with the police at the time crimes are discovered.
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.
Bringing this forward (on Page 1 of every thread)Hey everyone,
WS requires links to information stated as fact. What you "heard somewhere" or "read somewhere" "think I heard" etc is NOT an approved source. If you can't link it, you can't post it.
No link, no post !!
Just to add to your comment. I would suggest that she's been interviewed several times, starting with immediately after LE knew she resided in the house. It sounds like LE has done their job and scrutinized the surviving roommates phones as well so I'm sure no stone has been left unturned.
I don't think people realize that her partial description is simply presented in the PCA as a starting point for the investigation. She saw one male of a general build which suggests that LE didn't need to spend much time looking for a slender built female and her initial description does suggest that she only saw one person in the house at roughly about the time her roommates were killed.
<modsnip>
More likely a balaclavaIMO DM's description of the person she saw is widely vague BUT at the same time a decent piece of circumstantial evidence at the very least. She didn't say it was a 5'2" female, or a 6'8" elderly Asian man, or a set of conjoined triplets attached at the hips. She saw a single man with the very basics of Kohberger's build.
I'm also a little bit curious about the mask she witnessed the suspect wearing. It's quoted in the PCA as "a mask that covered the person's mouth and nose". That certainly doesn't exclude very many types of masks, but that may not be the only description of the mask she provided to LE. For all we know, which is nothing, she could have told LE that the mask is a fabric Covid mask that is blue with black polka dots and has yellow bands that attach the mask over the wearer's ears and she recognized the mask immediately because she's seen it for sale at Target. That's a complete hypothetical but what I'm getting at is there's a possibility, especially if the mask was a Covid-type, that a description of the mask has at least a possibility to further tie Kohberger to the crime. Covid masks were required in many public places over the last few years. Kohberger's classmates would likely be able to describe at least a "type" of mask he may have frequently worn, and perhaps he even always wore the same one (disposable or washable). Again, if DM described that same mask that Kohberger's classmates could describe, that's more circumstantial evidence with ascending or descending importance based on "uniqueness" of the description.
Just MO but it seems likely that the mask would be a Covid-type because that's the least likely of all masks to draw attention anywhere, even while driving in the car. But of course it could be a Donald Trump or a Baby Yoda Halloween mask for all we know. But again, a distinct Halloween mask would offer yet another chance to tie Kohberger via description if he ever wore it anywhere previously on Halloween...
yes, this is part of what procedural TV shows are doing when they ask permission to treat a witness as "hostile."Impeaching Own Witness?
snipped for focus @Orange Tabby
Briefly, nope. Why? ID Rule of Evidence 607* is same as Fed rule 607:**
"Any party, including the party that called the witness, may attack the witness’s credibility."
Not so briefly. Why? This explanation re fed rule:
"Notes of Advisory Committee on Proposed Rules
"The traditional rule against impeaching one's own witness is abandoned as based on false premises. A party does not hold out his witnesses as worthy of belief, since he rarely has a free choice in selecting them. Denial of the right leaves the party at the mercy of the witness and the adversary. If the impeachment is by a prior statement, it is free from hearsay dangers and is excluded from the category of hearsay under Rule 801(d)(1)...."
" The substantial inroads into the old rule made over the years by decisions, rules, and statutes are evidence of doubts as to its basic soundness and workability...."
Rule 607. Who May Impeach a Witness
www.law.cornell.edu
Hope this helps.
ETA: @wary
______________________________
*" Idaho Rules of Evidence Rule 607. Who May Impeach a Witness.
"Any party, including the party that called the witness, may attack the witness’s credibility."
I.R.E. 607. Who May Impeach. | Supreme Court
isc.idaho.gov
** "Rule 607. Who May Impeach a Witness
"Any party, including the party that called the witness, may attack the witness’s credibility."
Rule 607. Who May Impeach a Witness
www.law.cornell.edu
© 2015-2022 The National Court Rules CommitteeFederal Rules of Evidence | 2024 Official Edition
The Federal Rules of Evidence are a set of rules that govern the introduction of evidence at civil and criminal trials in US Federal Courts.www.rulesofevidence.org