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

[Nova]

Thanks. I think we also see it in people who are not serial killers. There are a lot of people who participate in self-harm and high-risk behaviors who talk about how they were just feeling empty or numb. Most of those people do things that hurt themselves, but, sometimes, the blast radius is larger, wider and deeper

You and I totally agree on this.

But obviously there is an important distinction to be made between (i) somebody who feeds off the thrill of extreme sports, (ii) someone who self-harms, and (iii) somebody who stabs four people to death!

Maybe you and or one of our mental health professionals can explain the differences... I agree that all of the above examples are people needing to make themselves less numb to some extent.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Does anyone think that a family member may have suspected BK involvement early on and contacted the FBI with their concerns?

No.

 

[jepop]

I also think her description was specific. I'll even go so far as to say it was excellent, especially describing him as not muscular, but with an athletic build. That perfectly describes a runner's lean, athletic body and BCK is a runner.

Also, she almost nailed his height. She was off by a couple of inches, but maybe that's because she saw him from afar (he was walking towards her). I think she is a fairly tall woman herself. It was an educated guess.

And where would the investigation be without her eyewitness account. Would we all still be analyzing every single white Hyundai Elantra years 2011-2014 (not knowing the year was wrong)???

To my mind, no doubt that DM's eye witness account contributed to the narrowing down of BK as suspect by LE. MOO

On 29 November a (standard) search of WSU car rego records IDed BK and connected him with a white elantra with PA plates, the same day a WSU security officer IDed a white elantra with WSU plates in Steptoe Appartment that came back to BK. From here LE were able to pull details on BK's licence.The basic licence info/picture, tallied with DM's description of the stranger she saw on Nov 13th. (see PCA pp9-10) MOO.

DocumentCloud

www.documentcloud.org

 

[Nova]

I completely agree with you regarding supporting papers and articles in academia but I would like to offer a solution to the issue you raised.
JMO
He wouldn't have to look far for one or two peer-reviewed papers to cite a general concept, and there are always random one-off studies for all kinds of topics. Something loosely related.
Or, maybe he had no intention of using it for his paper, it was an activity he planned as his own private 'research'?
IMHO, more acknowledgment should be made of his lengthy education, AFAIK he has been in post-secondary education since he left high school, with maybe a few years working at some point, and at the most recent times, he has been studying criminals and their psyche, and criminal justice. He has lived and breathed these topics for years.
Just one of my opinions, JOMO, it was his own private research, encouraged by his paper, education, and possibly even something pathological.

That makes more sense to me. I understood the OP to be hypothesizing that BK was killing as primary dissertation research, and it was only that I questioned. (I didn't say so, but another factor is that BK was in his first term. My doctoral program required three years of classwork and teaching before one really started research on and the writing of the dissertation. If that were BK's motivation, he had years of reading to do before he was ready to experiment!)

If BK is guilty, I have little doubt that part of his motive was to satisfy his curiosity about how it feels to do the violence he had read about.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

DM is considered an eyewitness because she saw an actual person, a stranger, leaving the house right after 4 murders took place. Was that stranger the murderer? Was it BK? Doesn't matter, she still saw this person herself making her an eyewitness.

Any person who discovers a crime scene AFTER THE FACT is considered a witness but not an eyewitness.

Or before the fact, e.g., a hardware store clerk testifying that someone bought a tarp and a shovel that were later found with a body.

 

[Nova]

Within the craze there will be a motivation based on self interest one way or another.

In this case MOO boy wants girl, girl wants no part of boy, maybe unaware boy exists except as a pesty request on IG.
Boy tortured by his own inadequacies projects rejection into a “system” of girls who conspire to keep worthy men such as himself from becoming boyfriends.
The viewpoint that he is being intentionally hurt and his desire for the girl join up for a strong impulse to end the situation. Decides on a “victory” for himself by using his superior force.
Oops, lots of folks in the way, regrettable but not a big deal. Boy is crazy (fractured) feels he won by ending her.

Obviously we will have to wait for more evidence, but your hypothesis makes perfect sense to me (IMO only, obviously).

Even if it weren't his conscious motivation, it might have been an underlying impulse or a part of a complex motive.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

But do we really know she did not recognize the intruder? I haven't followed many cases like a lot of you so don't know how that works when it comes to PCAs. Do they leave it at the physical description, period, but leave out something like "witness thought he looked like so and so", and instead keep that info to themselves? Honest question because I really don't know how that works.

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.

 

[Nova]

IMO closure for the family, knowing that only the killer would know where the knife is and it will likely not be found otherwise. If BK thinks there’s no chance of appeal (based on how the trial goes), he might be willing to give a little to get a lot….his life. But I do think the family’s feelings on this will be strongly considered before any deal would ever be proposed. IMO but interested to hear others thoughts on this.

Obviously I don't know any of the individuals involved, but I tend to agree with Sundog that if BK wants to use the knife location as leverage, he'd be wise to do so BEFORE he is convicted by a death-qualified jury (IF he is, of course)!

A murder weapon is quite different from the corpse of a loved one. I can imagine family members deciding, "We can do without finding the knife, if means the killer gets the d.p."

 

[jepop]

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.

Yes. Per PCA p5, "DM did not state that she recognised the male". To my mind, standard official PCA/witness statement language. DM would have provided an unsolicited (IMO) witness statement to police. If she had recognised BK, she would have stated that. MOO

 

[RonSwanson33]

Meh, I really doubt the bushy eyebrows make the case. I bet I could walk down the street in Moscow and see about a dozen men with bushy brows. The devil IS in the details, but the details that make a difference in terms of looks wasn't in the PCA, IMO.

PCA is just probable cause for arrest...also there is way more evidence in the PCA than just the eyebrows, and 3000 pages of discovery we have not seen yet.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

It’d have the opposite effect on me. I’d think she was a liar. (Based on what’s in the PCA.)

However, I’d respect someone who just said what she saw, height, build, eyebrows, and didn’t try to invent an identification.

MOO

I agree. It was potentially dark inside (though I will not assume, and there could have been varying degrees of ambient light) 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 a potentially dark house - not sure how close, not sure how dark, 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 to the described conditions in the house, however dark or light it was, in the courtroom and hold up photos of bk and many similar looking men with masks on and ask her to pick from however many feet and from a crack in the door at angle or whatever position she was in, it might be tough. or not .

​

 

[RonSwanson33]

If you got home at 4 am the dog would likely be awake and probably need to be let out. Did anyone let the dog out ? If I was up and awake and my dog was also up and awake and we were chatting and talking after a night out I definitely would be playing with my dog at that hour. That hour seems odd to you but young people keep odd hours and may not be unusual to them.

They got home at like 1:45-2:15 am. So yeah they probably took out the dog IMO.

 

[Nova]

I also think her description was specific. I'll even go so far as to say it was excellent, especially describing him as not muscular, but with an athletic build. That perfectly describes a runner's lean, athletic body and BCK is a runner.

Also, she almost nailed his height. She was off by a couple of inches, but maybe that's because she saw him from afar (he was walking towards her). I think she is a fairly tall woman herself. It was an educated guess.

And where would the investigation be without her eyewitness account. Would we all still be analyzing every single white Hyundai Elantra years 2011-2014 (not knowing the year was wrong)???

All of what follows is IMHO:

The same specificity that you and others find INculpatory will be used by BK's attorney to argue DM's eyewitness account is more prejudicial than probative. (This is assuming that, as per early reports or assumptions based on the PCA that DM was unable to formally ID the intruder, even while she mentioned a couple of said intruder's characteristics.)

Men with athletic builds cannot be uncommon on a college campus. Universities of any size today have fancy gyms, racketball courts and public running tracks for a reason! Further, I expect a significant number of men in any area will have "bushy eyebrows". The danger that jurors will give these facts more importance than they warrant is real--again IMHO--and will be something the judge will have to consider before allowing DM to testify to what she saw (as opposed to what she heard, etc.)

As always, IANAL.

 

[Nova]

And we might not be getting all the details. She has now had time to see photos of BK. I think a stronger account will come out from her when she takes the stand as an eyewitness - a witness who actually saw a person in the house at the time of the murders.

Again, IANAL and all that follows is IMHO.

If DM has seen multiple photos of BK, that isn't necessarily a good thing for the Prosecution. The defense will argue that seeing photographs imprinted BK's image in DM's mind and have added to her memory of the intruder.

Such details as this might keep DM from being allowed to testify at all re what she saw. (And rightfully so, frankly. We can't get correct verdicts if witnesses are given unrelated visual cues to bolster their eyewitness accounts.)

 

[Kemug]

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?

 

[jepop]

All of what follows is IMHO:

The same specificity that you and others find INculpatory will be used by BK's attorney to argue DM's eyewitness account is more prejudicial than probative. (This is assuming that, as per early reports or assumptions based on the PCA that DM was unable to formally ID the intruder, even while she mentioned a couple of said intruder's characteristics.)

Men with athletic builds cannot be uncommon on a college campus. Universities of any size today have fancy gyms, racketball courts and public running tracks for a reason! Further, I expect a significant number of men in any area will have "bushy eyebrows". The danger that jurors will give these facts more importance than they warrant is real--again IMHO--and will be something the judge will have to consider before allowing DM to testify to what she saw (as opposed to what she heard, etc.)

As always, IANAL.

Thanks for raising. I'm still confused over how the prosecution and defense might approach DM's evidence (as summarised in PCA and if that summary is the gist of her formal witness statement to LE). Could any with legal expertise in this area speak specifically to what @Nova has raised here?

 

[Nova]

she could be asked point blank if the person she saw was BK and if she says "yes" and "yes he is in the court room here today; the defendant" that would be damning IMO.

Not if she wasn't able to give a police sketch artist a decent account of the intruder when the events of the night were fresh in her mind and BK hadn't yet been identified as the killer to her.

This is in no way a criticism of DM or your post, but if DM's memory suddenly got better after BK was arrested and revealed to the media, that isn't going to help the prosecution much, IMHO.

 

[jepop]

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?

yes, IMO, he would have been found

ETA: see PCA pp 1- 18
ETA: "he would have been found"

DocumentCloud

www.documentcloud.org

 

[Nila Aella]

My timeline may be off then. I thought the gag order was expanded after People did the story on Mad Greek? But I've lost track now.

People story on Insta Dm's was before the expanded gag order

People story Jan 17
Expanded gag order Jan 18

Accused Idaho Killer Bryan Kohberger Repeatedly Messaged One of the Victims on Instagram: Source

"He was persistent," an investigative source on the case tells PEOPLE

people.com

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/011823%20Amended%20Nondissemination%20Order.pdf

edit: added People story on Dm's

 

[Cool Cats]

Again, IANAL and all that follows is IMHO.

If DM has seen multiple photos of BK, that isn't necessarily a good thing for the Prosecution. The defense will argue that seeing photographs imprinted BK's image in DM's mind and have added to her memory of the intruder.

Such details as this might keep DM from being allowed to testify at all re what she saw. (And rightfully so, frankly. We can't get correct verdicts if witnesses are given unrelated visual cues to bolster their eyewitness accounts.)

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