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

Status
Not open for further replies.
According to this DailyMail MSM post, Ethan's sister-in-law wants some answers from DM


Below is an except from the above post:

After hearing some more loud noises that night, Mortensen opened her door again and saw accused murdered Kohberger but believed him to be a partygoer.

The alleged claims answer questions from Chapin's sister-in-law that questioned why Mortensen, who was on the property along with Bethany Funke, didn't call the police after seeing the suspect leave the house.

His sister-in-law has since revealed that Mortensen called all of the roommates after she heard 'screaming and crying' coming from their rooms.

Posting in a thread on Reddit, the sister-in-law said: 'D supposedly called all the girls in the house after the crying and screaming stopped and no one answered – and she still didn't call the police.

'She needs to explain herself and her actions that night.'


When questioned about who called police, she added: '911 caller was the friend who went in because D called him to come over because she was scared from what she heard in the night.
 
Last edited:
I apologize if this is already posted, but I didn't see it.

DM is reporting on who actually found X and E's bodies and then called 911 (and that was Ethan's best friend). He used D's phone to make the call:


This article also reiterates the "screaming" at the house and has D shouting at others to be quiet at around 4 am.
 
I don't know why that phrase was used. But it's not that unusual that mistakes are made when text is written for public consumption. Look at how often politicians "walk back" written comments/speeches! And of course, the primary purpose of the PCA was not to serve as a statement for public consumption. So it may not have occurred to the writer(s) how that phrase would be interpreted. I don't know.

What I do think

1. The words "frozen shock phase" have quote marks around them. So it seems likely those could be DM's words, not words chosen by the PCA writer to describe DM's reaction.

2. The words may have been used by the writer in the PCA (whether they were initially DM's words or the writer's) in a mistaken effort to shield DM from criticism.

It's pretty obvious questions would be asked about what the survivors knew and when they knew it. There would be questions no matter what when 4 in a house are killed and 2 are not. But since the PCA reveals DM saw the alleged killer yet LE wasn't called until the next day, of course there are lots and lots of questions from the public and from the families. By using those words the reader may assume DM was in shock and could not act although I'm not sure that's what the words really mean. (Nor do I think the victims could have been saved at that point if she had acted.) But living in a college party house with multiple roommates one does see strangers wandering around at unexpected times. That's just the way it is. Seeing someone at an unexpected time can be quite startling but usually not shocking. But I don't know how DM felt. If those are her words though, I guess she may have been shocked into "a phase" of immobility.

3. I have no reason to think DM was led to use certain words-- except that an overly sympathetic relatively inexperienced officer might have done that. Officers are human and sometimes efforts to avoid appearing to blame a bystander do occur (& usually backfire.)
JMO

Interesting, though, that the defense's discovery request also asked for any documents/recordings, etc. that would indicate that the prosecution/LE undertook any "preferential treatment" related to any of the witnesses. So I think that your #2, above, might qualify if, indeed, LE was trying to shield DM from criticism.

----------
From the defense's discovery request:

12. Inducement. Provide to the defendant all documents pertaining to the existence and substance of any payments, promises of leniency, preferential treatment or other inducements or threats made to prospective witnesses, within the scope of United States v. Giglio, 405 U.S. 150 (1972) and Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959) and their progeny.

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.



edited formatting
 
Last edited:
I don't believe it is wrong to summarize a witness statement for a PCA but perhaps someone else can better clarify and I'm very sure there is a much more comprehensive statement made to LE that may flesh out the odd 'shock frozen phase'. It did occur to me that if recent news reports are credible and if she did shout out earlier for the household to quiet down, it may have been startling to see a stranger in front of her door mere moments after. Someone also posted a couple threads ago that the greatest risk for college aged women is sexual assault. Could she have feared that or maybe she was just startled by a stranger in her home in the wee hours of the morning.

I think we need to know how much lighting she had to determine how clearly she saw his eyebrows but oddly enough, when people are afraid, they do tend to focus on odd things.

The PCA also mentions phone records in relation to the roommates and I wonder if there was a running conversation, possibly venting about noise, parties, etc or even questioning who the stranger in the house may be.
Are you thinking that LE had a suspect in mind and tried to make the evidence fit the suspect?
I wouldn’t go that far because I think LE did a good job all in all. However, the way the pca is written doesn’t match the subsequent actions of the witness. Therefore, I think it sends the wrong message imo.
 
Good post.

People think inmates getting email, computer, iPad access etc...means they have internet access but they never do. Plus, inmates have to pay for games and music and things to keep them busy on an iPad - not everything is free to them.

Latah County Jail Remote Visitation Announcement - January 4, 2023​

Inmates at the Latah County Jail, now that the COVID pandemic is waning, once again allows inmates to get visits from friends and loved ones. Visits are either on-site (no contact) at the facility, and/or using the remote video services of the third party company outlined below.

Call 208-882-2216 for remote inmate visitation updates as schedules and policies can change without much advance notice.

Latah County Jail inmates are allowed to have no limit on the number of visits when using the remote video visitation service.

Since they have remote visiting at Latah County Jail, I assume that BK's family will be able to visit with him remotely from Pennsylvania.
 
I apologize if this is already posted, but I didn't see it.

DM is reporting on who actually found X and E's bodies and then called 911 (and that was Ethan's best friend). He used D's phone to make the call:


This article also reiterates the "screaming" at the house and has D shouting at others to be quiet at around 4 am.
Posting directed towards the article. If a neighbors security cam picked up a whimper, a thud, and a dog bark, why didn't it pick up screaming and crying and possibly DM "yelling" at her roommates? Jmo
 
I apologize if this is already posted, but I didn't see it.

DM is reporting on who actually found X and E's bodies and then called 911 (and that was Ethan's best friend). He used D's phone to make the call:


This article also reiterates the "screaming" at the house and has D shouting at others to be quiet at around 4 am.
It all sounds terrifying!

But I'm afraid the truth presented at trial will be even more horrifying :(
The details will be too much to bear - although I guess the poor families already know them.
How can they survive with so much pain?

JMO
 
Yes, we have that too. But frozen shock phase is not something that exactly trips off the tongue. ;)
I think DM might have said to LE when they asked her about her "state of mind" in the hours between seeing the masked man around 4 am and the call to LE after 11 am, that she was or must have been in a state of "frozen shock" and they "tagged on" the word "phase" because it implies she may have gone through several different phases or stages/states of mind throughout that morning.

For example:

An earlier phase could have been that she was groggy and upset at having been woken up by loud noises that she thought were from her housemates being rambunctious or "partying and horsing around" super late -- the "things are out of hand with my housemates phase".

Then after she had yelled out at them that she was trying to sleep and opened and closed the door 2 times, there was another phase after she was startled enough by seeing the masked man (unknown person who could have been a late night guest) in the house the 3rd time she opened the door to then close and lock her door, but was still assuming the noises had been from horsing around and he was just a guest "leaving" as he passed by going in the direction of the patio doors -- the "things finally quieted down but I wonder who that was" phase.

Then there was a phase where she thought more about the masked man and whether he made sense as a late night guest (wearing a mask due to Covid or other illness? wearing all black because some people do?) trying to process what seeing him "going towards the door" around the same time the house became quiet meant, then trying to reach out to her housemates on her phone to check in, and them not answering with her maybe thinking they broke up the party and sent guests home and finally are really trying to make sure everyone is super quiet and going to sleep" -- the "they must have finally kicked everyone out and now they've crashed out" phase.

Then there was a phase where she maybe considered other scenarios, especially if the masked man seemed "off'" for a typical late night guest and her housemates not answering made her increasingly uneasy (were they all 'locked down' staying silent in their rooms after sending a troublemaker on their way and promising not to call the cops on him?), such as someone showing up who had been to a party there before who was inebriated and wanted to crash there uninvited and ended up getting in a fight and making someone cry, or some random creep showing up and causing trouble or trying to sexually harass or assault one of them, and the noises she heard were them dealing with him and he was "sent on his way" and they all went back to bed after comforting whoever she thought she heard crying and locking their doors -- the "but what if that was a 'bad dude' in the house, one of them would have told me, right? phase".

Then there was the phase, perhaps intermixed with sleep and checking her phone for any delayed responses from housemates or friends or anything on SM from them, where she was dwelling on the more sinister possibilities but not being able to confirm anything, wondering if she misunderstood what was going on, sitting alone in the dark and getting more and more petrified of the "bad dude" who could still be in the house or lingering watching the house to make sure no one 'called the cops', thinking of other reasons why he could have been there, what he may have tried to do or done, or could still do to her, but being in disbelief or denial of anything really bad happening without her knowledge or one of the 5 other people in the house raising the alarm -- the "frozen shock phase".

JMO
 
Posting directed towards the article. If a neighbors security cam picked up a whimper, a thud, and a dog bark, why didn't it pick up screaming and crying and possibly DM "yelling" at her roommates? Jmo
But are we sure that the public was presented with all details recorded by security camera?

I really don't know what to think.

JMO
 
I apologize if this is already posted, but I didn't see it.

DM is reporting on who actually found X and E's bodies and then called 911 (and that was Ethan's best friend). He used D's phone to make the call:


This article also reiterates the "screaming" at the house and has D shouting at others to be quiet at around 4 am.
Though Ethan was a triplet, all single and students..no mention of other siblings. Where does this SIl fit in? Anybody know??
 
  • Like
Reactions: IDK
He liked to let people know how smart he was, according to a post on here.

People who are know-it-alls do not like criticism or challenges to their points of view. His professor gave him constructive criticism and informed him of things and I believe tired to have normal discourse with him but he got defensive and difficult to talk to or reason with - I imagine.

I remember reading somewhere where the faculty gave him chances to improve but he refused to change.

Know-it-alls create enemies. Most professors won't tolerate it.
 
Though Ethan was a triplet, all single and students..no mention of other siblings. Where does this SIl fit in? Anybody know??
 
I'm not going to argue about it. I have expressed my viewpoint. It is what should have been said by the writer to better limit or prevent emotional harm to a victim that I have a problem with.

Others may not see it that way or agree with me. I'm cool with that.

Just my 2 cents minus inflation :)
Oh, I'm sorry if it seemed I was arguing. Not trying to. Just saying that the police write that for an audience of the Judge. Not for the public. They are selective in what they put in to support the application for a warrant. Due to the "gag order" nothing really can be done/said about it now. Really, I think DM is best to just continue as she has done; stay quiet.
 
<snipped for focus>
...in disbelief or denial of anything really bad happening without her knowledge or one of the 5 other people in the house raising the alarm -- the "frozen shock phase".

JMO
Replying to my own (rather lengthy ; }) post to focus in on this ^^^ regarding the underlying reason why DM didn't call 911, and instead called a friend to check on her housemates 7ish hours later:

She knew there were 5 other people in the house (Bethany, Xana, Ethan, Kaylee, and Maddie) who she was close to and interacted with all the time, and there was no scenario under which 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or all 5 would not communicate with each other if there was a crime in progress in their house.

So just as it was inconceivable that 4 people could be stabbed to death in less than half an hour without any of them being able to call 911 or communicate with the other people in the house about the attacks, it was equally unconceivable to DM.
MOO
 
I revisited this part about the sheath. When I first read this, I read it as the knife had been deliberately placed by M's body. I think I read that in the wrong voice/tone now.
1676484962889.png

Again, a brand new USMC Marine Corps KA-BAR Leather Sheath


1676487605748.png

They can be purchased at Walmart too.
On the left, a WWII era K-Bar USMC KABar Sheath (These don't have the Eagle/Globe Insignia). The leather is more pliable on these older sheaths too. This rules out the sheath possibly being a vintage item, in my mind, too. A used version of the sheath BK appears to have left behind is on the right.

1676494061721.png1676488794257.png

A different knife from a different era could have been in the sheath though, but I think he bought the set, before leaving for WSU. I do not think he was very familiar with these knives. That sheath/scabbard should have been attached to his belt, and for added stability, you can put a piece of leather through the hole and secure it to your leg. There's also leg sheaths that he could have used. Until those leather sheaths have been around for awhile, they can be stiff. So in the real world part of his mental game, his character may be struggling a bit with a large, sharp, knife, in the dark. Things aren't going quite as easily as he'd planned. The sheath gets dropped, or falls off of his person, onto the side of the bed. He doesn't even notice. The DNA is absently left behind when he's trying to unsnap the button. In looking at the home layout and the LEO stating that he later notices the sheath, on M's right side, as seen from the doorway, also reads to me differently, when I factor in the scene that the LEO was taking in at the time. I do not think he realized he didn't have the sheath, until after he'd left the home (at least that's my theory of the day). BK was in a whole different zone while in that home. I don't think leaving it behind has bothered BK a lot though. He's probably gone over it with himself, in his head, regarding the development, but what else can he do but roll with it now?


This is something that seems like he wanted to make sure, was up close and personal. He could have chosen a point in time in Penn, before he left for WSU, to commit these murders, then just disappear to WSU, and blend in (become a lumberjack). He waited. I wonder if he had been browsing social media sites, of other students in the area, before he got out to WSU.


The Huxx link to the floorplan.
 
Why would BK/his PD oppose the gag order being lifted/appeal being granted? Too much potential for "bad press' and "tainting the jury pool"?

Why could the families of the victims be asked to testify as witnesses? Witnesses to "what"?

"Idaho murders suspect Bryan Kohberger has stated his opposition to an appeal of a judge's gag order in the case through his attorney, while the families of the victims have been informed they could be asked to testify as witnesses."


Idaho murders suspect Bryan Kohberger fights to keep gag order
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
4,340
Total visitors
4,543

Forum statistics

Threads
593,007
Messages
17,979,649
Members
228,984
Latest member
fbifedora
Back
Top