4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 72

Status
Not open for further replies.
.

Do you remember which show this was? I'm not very familiar with her show and have only seen a couple of her reports on the ID murders.
On her show tonight. She's on News Nation. She had some serious reporting experience with CNN, etc. I remember her covering 911 and events in Afghanistan. Not sure what caused her career decline.
 
Totally random, and maybe someone has already posted about this before so I’m sorry in advance if this isn’t anything new but.. does anyone else find it interesting that the link to the pdf listing all DP certified attorneys on the Idaho Public Defense Commission’s website is no longer working? Thankfully one of the lists was captured on the way back machine on 1/28, so it’s still accessible that way but idk I just found it odd that they don’t want people seeing the list anymore. My guess is that concerned citizens were blowing up the emails of every other attorney in the state urging them to take AT’s place as BK’s defense attorney due to the “conflict of interest”.


I found this listing dated 2021. I got it from this link; PDC Capital Counsel Roster
 

Attachments

  • PDC-Capital-Counsel-Roster.cleaned.pdf
    242.9 KB · Views: 3
No a killer cannot just plead guilty and give no information at all IF they are taking a PLEA DEAL. The prosecution can require a complete proffer (testimony) of the crime in order for the defendant to get their plea deal.

Prosecutors normally want a FULL CONFESSION from the defendant that details how they carried out their crime.

For example, the prosecution not giving a plea deal unless the killer reveals where they buried the body, or where they disposed of the weapon, or how were they able to gain access to the victim's home? The prosecution can even interrogate the defendant as to their motive etc...The prosecution has the upper hand in any plea negotiation.

The confession and proffer can be used as leverage. "You give us a full confession of your participation and planning in this crime and help bring closure to the families, and we in exchange will give you the plea deal you want." Plea deals are an exchange, the defendant gives something and in exchange the prosecution gives something in return - the net result of this is almost always a lighter reduced sentence.

But if the defendant wants to plead guilty WITHOUT A PLEA DEAL, this is when you may get zero answers.

Without the plea deal the prosecution loses their leverage and can't demand a full confession and full proffer. They can ask, but a stubborn defendant who has no remorse and doesn't care about giving the family some closure won't give the answers.

In the Watts case, the DA didn’t require any details as part of the plea. When asked, the DA explained they decided not to require an explanation/details because anything that came out of Watt’s mouth couldn’t be believed.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't he be aware of the sheath missing when he gets to his car and goes to set the knife down?

A knife dripping blood all over his car.

I have to wonder if he left the sheath on purpose to look like a military person did it. It is a military style sheath.

Did he go back because it took 8 hours for news to break on it? I wonder. He probably was dying to hear the news on it and couldn't figure out why the radio silence?

Why not HUGE (early morning) breaking news stories on it? I bet he scoured the news.
Yep. And if he did they should be able to find evidence of online searches relating to the murders made before the 911 call had even been placed.
 
IMHO I have been searching to see if BK's family knew he was "released" from his WSU teaching position.
After all, in the "I got away with it world", what might have been his explanation and next steps to his family'? Getting as far away as possible makes sense. Maybe he simply did not care if he was released from his position because he accomplished what he set out to do.
I'm sure more info will trickle out. He had a lot of balls to juggle and it looks like he dropped a few.
My sense is he would have told his parents he was leaving the program voluntarily because the students and professors were idiots and threatened by his knowledge. And he wanted to find a program that was challenging and worthy/appreciative of his intellect.

JMO
 
Would the police do something so stupid? I’m not au fait with the complexities of the US justice system, particularly as States vary, but in the UK interviewing a witness must abide with stiff rules and leading a witness is an almighty no, no.

I can absolutely understand the witness seeing the bushy eye brows. The witness would have seen something coming towards her, her brain would have determined it is a human and then her brain would have tried to make sense of who/what this person is.

We all go straight to a face, which, in this situation was mostly covered by a mask. Her brain would be desperately trying to see something, anything that would make a person and when it saw the bushy eyebrows, would have completely focused on them, because this is a true human identifier.

In other crimes, people particularly remember a perp’s eyes, or their nose etc. In a confusing and frightening situation our brains might not remember every last detail of what clothing was worn etc, but it absolutely can very clearly remember certain characteristics, such as bushy eyebrows.
I agree but my point is in my opinion, she might not have come out and clearly said that at least not without a little help. We shall see.
 
I was struck while watching the recent Jeffrey Dahmer documentary and docudrama series that the only evidence as to Dahmer's legal sanity was his own testimony. And his account freely admitted he knew he was doing wrong, but he couldn't stop himself. He kept expecting LE to stop him and was surprised it took so long for them to do so.
I have been led to believe by discussions on another Idaho case, that of Lori Vallow, that this is the literal definition of “sane enough to stand trial” - that a person is smart enough to know right from wrong, which it sounds like Dahmer amply proved.

The bar for judging sanity is very low.
 
Yep. And if he did they should be able to find evidence of online searches relating to the murders made before the 911 call had even been placed.
Colorado3,

BRILLIANT!!!! This is exactly what jurors will relate to. You are sooooo correct. Hoping there will be digital trails of 911 and the local news monitoring by BK.

CoolCats,

If he didn't use his computer or phone to search news, or smart tv that am, then him not hearing any news on radio or dumb tv most certainly would have drove him crazy (pun) to go back to scene.

I bet even after he drove back in am, didn't see any activity, went to grocery store, coffee, then drove back to apt, therr will be digital evidence of searches inidicative of his knowledge of events before released to public. I think this evidence is what will sink him with a jury.

Once the initial story broke, I bet he went search crazy on phone, computer.
 
Colorado3,

BRILLIANT!!!! This is exactly what jurors will relate to. You are sooooo correct. Hoping there will be digital trails of 911 and the local news monitoring by BK.

CoolCats,

If he didn't use his computer or phone to search news, or smart tv that am, then him not hearing any news on radio or dumb tv most certainly would have drove him crazy (pun) to go back to scene.

I bet even after he drove back in am, didn't see any activity, went to grocery store, coffee, then drove back to apt, therr will be digital evidence of searches inidicative of his knowledge of events before released to public. I think this evidence is what will sink him with a jury.

Once the initial story broke, I bet he went search crazy on phone, computer.
I don’t think they need to show that he searched for the murders online. But like you said, went crazy on the phone and computer. Probably kept refreshing all of the local news sites. And just compare that activity to previous (lack of) activity n a normal day.
 

Yep. And if he did they should be able to find evidence of online searches relating to the murders made before the 911 call had even been placed.

Fantastic!

What great evidence this would be if true.

BK's phone and/or computer showing he searched specifically for the 4 murders BEFORE they were discovered.
Only the killer would know before the discovery - before the 911 call.

They will do a forensic audit of his computer and phone searches.
 
Last edited:
I agree - I don't think he'd be in a cell right now were it not for that mistake.

DeSales had no coursework in genetic forensics that I can find (doesn't even have a department of anthropology, has no forensic genetics, no forensic anthropology, and actually doesn't even have a sociology department that I can find - and the Criminal Justice program focused on procedures more than on forensics, IMO. They do have a molecular biology major, but there's no evidence that BK was ever in that program nor are the courses listed as electives for the program he was in.

www.desales.edu

The biochemistry track is recommended for pre-meds:


Many people think of touch DNA as being like a fingerprint (you leave a few of them if you aren't wearing gloves). But DNA is persistent and microscopic (impossible to see except with special microscopes - and is in fact studied through a series of biochemical transactions inside of computerized equipment). BK probably did not know that it would be hard to remove DNA (if he tried) from the grooves around the snap, or that it would persist. Next to impossible to remove it completely from the leather, as well, if he touched the sheath with his fingers, ever. If he ever practiced with or examined the knife without gloves, he left DNA that would persist. He might have worn gloves that night, but since his DNA is on the snap, he didn't always wear gloves when handling it.

At any rate, a course in molecular genetics would not cover these aspects of forensic genetics. Nor was auditing available when DeSales went fully online. If he had actually majored in molecular biology (which he didn't), then he probably would have encountered the relevant information. He was apparently more interested in digital forensics, IMO.

IMO.

I agree with you; no person who is committing a heinous crime is purposely going to leave their DNA behind-- think about it-- just think about it-- it makes not one iota of sense: As 10ofRods stated, that DNA found on the sheath is what got him nailed!
 
My sense is he would have told his parents he was leaving the program voluntarily because the students and professors were idiots and threatened by his knowledge. And he wanted to find a program that was challenging and worthy/appreciative of his intellect.

JMO

Agree... or that he was homesick and one semester out in Idaho was enough and wanted to go to school back in the East.
 
I don't know why you are rooting against Banfield, but that is neither here nor there. I have few feelings about her one way or another.

More to the point, I am having trouble parsing your compound sentence in which "most people assume" [that] "the press believe" [that] the press now make up anonymous sources to justify what they really want to say."

There's no question that the pressures of 24/7 news channels have pushed against traditions of journalistic ethics. It seems well known that many major outlets will now go with one source (anonymous or not) where Woodward and Bernstein, say, had to have TWO sources for everything they published re Watergate.

But if "most people" assume journalists merely invent anonymous sources, then The Big Lie has done its work and we are far gone down the road to fascism. If Banfield were merely inventing anonymous sources, she could have reported everything she has said of late back in the first weeks following the murders.
I am not rooting either way on Banfield. There has been some discussion about whether some of these anonymous sources are real. It's certainly possible that she's just that good at developing anonymous sources. If so, congratulations to her. My point was - if what's she's reported from these "sources" turns out to be all wrong, then she is not as good at her job as she currently appears to be and I would stand by my statement that she would deserve to have a lot of egg on her face.

One of the reasons reporters used to require more than one anonymous source, or at least some sort of verification, was to protect themselves and their employer from lawsuits by defaming someone, from reporting something fed to them by someone with an axe to grind, and from looking like chumps, all generally because they didn't do their due diligence. Apparently, the 24 hour news cycle approach to that problem is to report anything they are told and "fix" it later. Only they almost never really fix it later.

I don't see how she could have reported all of these items in the first weeks following the murders, since there was no suspect at that time. And, purely for ratings' sake, it does not help any tv reporter to tell everything they claim to know all at once. You want the audience tuning in every night if you can manage it. So you let things out in a trickle, and follow up with teasers for the next night. MOOooo
 
I agree but my point is in my opinion, she might not have come out and clearly said that at least not without a little help. We shall see.

Are you thinking that LE had a suspect in mind and tried to make the evidence fit the suspect?
 
I agree with you about the dangers in assuming wording in the PCA was "specially and thoughtfully chosen." The PCA really has one purpose-- to demonstrate probable cause to believe X did a particular crime (s). The document needs to be persuasive so words are likely not chosen carelessly and there is likely some group input. But at the same time, the wording needs to be straightforward. It would seem that wording that over-promises & goes far beyond the actual evidence described would backfire. So a certain word in the PCA probably means pretty much what it appears to mean. A word doesn't typically mean "We've used this word to convince you we know A when we don't" or " the word B was chosen instead of C to give the appearance of certainty when any real sense of certainty is false" or "we used word C instead of word D to signal XYZ."
JMO
RBBM
If what you say is true & I lean in that direction myself, why does this particular PCA characterize the feelings of DM & leave open for wide interpretation & speculation what she was thinking about & reacting to?

I find the "shock phase" statement problematic because it is a loaded expression that has been used against a victim in this case. The writer(s) wrapped a ribbon around her without tying the bow. The PCA should not leave an innocent bystander in this predicament since it has the potential for creating further victimization, WHICH IS OCCURRING.

Redaction would have been one way to deal with this weakness in the PCA.

Language matters greatly when a victim's behavior is publicly subjected to unnecessary speculation & criticism.

It was easy to prevent misunderstanding here - clarify in simple wording what the two surviving victims were doing between commission of the crimes & the time of the 911 call.

"Shock phase" will live on in the annals of poor affidavit writing IMO. And it should.

JMHO
 
BRILLIANT!!!! This is exactly what jurors will relate to. You are sooooo correct. Hoping there will be digital trails of 911 and the local news monitoring by BK.
^^ Agreed (Very good point Colorado and Monkey)
I don’t think they need to show that he searched for the murders online. But like you said, went crazy on the phone and computer. Probably kept refreshing all of the local news sites. And just compare that activity to previous (lack of) activity n a normal day.
^^ I think IF BCK specifically searched for a murder or anything that could be tied to 1122 King before anything came across MSM that would be crucial evidence for the prosecution, how would he or anyone know to preform any kind of search on a early Sunday morn like that? MOO

MOO Him even searching frantically and refreshing after means nothing...and thats because he was a PhD criminology student and anyone in his position would be continually searching for that once the news broke especially living 10 mins away. Heck its been three months and we are doing it now, I think the morning of the arrest and awaiting a name I refreshed my computer at least 1000 times, LOL

Edit: added the cow
 
RBBM
If what you say is true & I lean in that direction myself, why does this particular PCA characterize the feelings of DM & leave open for wide interpretation & speculation what she was thinking about & reacting to?

I find the "shock phase" statement problematic because it is a loaded expression that has been used against a victim in this case. The writer(s) wrapped a ribbon around her without tying the bow. The PCA should not leave an innocent bystander in this predicament since it has the potential for creating further victimization, WHICH IS OCCURRING.

Redaction would have been one way to deal with this weakness in the PCA.

Language matters greatly when a victim's behavior is publicly subjected to unnecessary speculation & criticism.

It was easy to prevent misunderstanding here - clarify in simple wording what the two surviving victims were doing between commission of the crimes & the time of the 911 call.

"Shock phase" will live on in the annals of poor affidavit writing IMO. And it should.

JMHO
MOO Shock phase means momentarily shocked. She could be shocked her roommates had some weird dude over.
MOO Anyway she didn’t suspect a quadruple murder, so she proceeded as it was a situation of noisy roommates that had a weird dude over. She probably thought she had to talk with them the next day.
 
Last edited:
MOo Shock phase means momentarily shocked. She could be shocked her roommates had some weird dude over.
MOO Anyway she didn’t suspect a quadruple murder, so she proceeded as it was a situation of noisy roommates that had a weird dude over. She probably thought she had to talk with them the next day.
IMO she was texting them that night. And receiving no response from specific roommates (I'd bet that BF was also in the thread but likely responded) well into the next morning is what likely spooked her/them into calling friends over (as reported) the next day...which led to the police being called.

My wife is still active in a college roommate group message (all her best friends now) that's 12 years old.

MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
743
Total visitors
847

Forum statistics

Threads
596,479
Messages
18,048,407
Members
230,011
Latest member
Ms.Priss74
Back
Top