4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 75

[BeginnerSleuther]

Many people scoff and brush off this description because a good percentage of the population have bushy eyebrows and tons of men fit the description of a tall athletic built male etc...

But let's be clear, this witness description is important and contributed to the probable cause in getting the judge to sign off on Warrants against BK.

The witness description is not meant to prove that this is in fact BK, it's to prove that the witness description cannot rule BK OUT.

Descriptions can help rule suspects in or out. This description rules BK IN.

If the suspect was described as fat, African American or another race, short, a female, thin eyebrows, 6' 5" or any number of other descriptions, then this rules BK OUT. Out as far as BK being that particular person she saw in her home that night.

The other LE consideration is that BK was not known as a suspect when the witness gave her statement. The witness did not know of BK. She gives a description of a suspect before knowing who the suspect is, then later when the suspect is arrested, he just happens to fit her description enough to not be ruled out.

This is one of my problems with forums in general. Something is posted, someone replies, and it (unintentionally) gets taken out of context. I understand that you're saying the description doesn't rule BK out. But the context is that your post that I replied to said they could have PC to arrest him with that, if I'm not mistaken. I do not believe inability to rule someone out is PC for an arrest. PC for questioning, certainly, but not for arrest. MOO, IANAL.

 

[Sundog]

"New theory on how 'stalker' Bryan Kohberger's 'meticulous' plan to murder just ONE of the Idaho students went awry."​

Theory on how Bryan Kohberger's 'failed plan' led to Idaho bloodbath

VIDEO: An analysis of the evidence against suspected quadruple murderer, Bryan Kohberger, suggests that he likely had just one victim in mind on the night of the gruesome slayings.

www.dailymail.co.uk

There were so many cars outside of the King Road house, and BK would have seen them, so I have my doubts about his targeting one person only.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

This was so cathartic to read. Thanks for laying this all out in a thorough and thoughtful way. I've long warned folks here to stop looking at individual pieces of evidence in a vacuum. It's the total sum of said evidence that is damning. With each piece corroborating and compounding the next.

LE's case is so strong that IMO that they could likely get a conviction without the DNA . As the evidence puts him outside of that house in the dead of night when he has no business being there.

The DNA seals the deal.

He has no business being on a public street? I've also told folks that when every single piece of evidence is weak (minus the DNA), the sum total has giant holes. The fact is that the suspect in a quadruple homicide not leaving any of his DNA in the house or, possibly, none of the victims' DNA on him/in his car is a problem. MOO. Many posters have now said this. If just one juror happens to agree, that's the ballgame. MOO.

 

[Kemug]

I'd like to know that too. A quick check of internet astronomy charts shows the moon was nearly full. Moon had risen around 1 am and would not set until about 9 am.

RSBM

So it is entirely possible that BK had done the research, and planned his attack accordingly.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

But I pointed out that if the defense wants to go this route then they need to give the jury an alternative suspect.

No they don't. It isn't up to the defense to provide an alternate suspect. It's up to the defense to defend the accused.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

"Coroner Report" Link?

@BeginnerSleuther
Altho I've seen vid clips of interview w Latah County Coroner and MSM articles quoting her, I do not recall having seen a document designated as a Coroner's Report in the case.
IDT there's been a release of any Autopsy Reports issued by the Pathologist in WA. who conducted the PM's.

@BeginnerSleuther Link pls to this Report, pls? TiA

I was talking about the coroner's report as in the coroner's account, which was posted last night. It wasn't the official report, just what the coroner reported to the MSM.

University of Idaho murder victims were in bed, stabbed multiple times: coroner

The four University of Idaho students found slaughtered an off-campus house Sunday were found stabbed to death in beds — and it’s “likely” they were asleep when they were attacked, the corone…

nypost.com

 

[Kemug]

I wonder if BK, had he not been caught, would have gone on killing? I think probably yes. I wonder if even his parents would have been safe. MOO

 

[NottaYutz]

Snipped by me. You must have read stuff I haven't. What I'm reading is exactly the opposite.

MOO.

I am of the opinion that Kohberger is intelligent but not smart. I've said before and will say again that I believe he went in to murder Madison, and got a surprise twofer when he found Kaylee in Madison's bed, and that surprise caused him to drop/leave the knife sheath. Then he went down the stairs to get the heck out and encountered Xana, took her down, then the boyfriend awakened and Kohberger took him down as well. On the way out, he was perhaps in a state of shock and awe, and that's why he didn't see the witness.

 

[Bogbacal2]

In reference to the items seized from BK apartment, I wonder if the hair strands or possible dog hair turned out to be anything? IMO, the digital trail that BK left behind, combined with the victims’ digital trails, will play a huge part in his demise. IMO, when June/July rolls around, I believe we will be pleasantly surprised to learn that the case against BK is solid and the defense, well, IMO, they aren’t going to have much of a defense!

 

[Cool Cats]

I am with you the whole way - right down to your option 2) which is how I think it will be resolved. There will be a motion to throw out the DNA; Judge will deny; Defense will ask for its own expert to examine the sheath. Judge will say yes, expert will be hired and perhaps asked to do the examination with another expert present as well as someone representing the State (who has chain of custody).

They will do the snap first. If the analysis shows that the DNA is identical to BK's (now in evidence with a warrant) the Judge will allow it in, IMO. In the end is computed by a computer after a series of minor chemical procedures.

The only way the sequence of nucleotides present on the sheath can give an identical match BK's DNAs unless it is BK's DNA on the sheath. The defense will then have the unenviable position of trying to explain that away.

Defense could also make it more complicated by insisting on testing other parts of the sheath (but they risk being disappointed).

IMO.

We are definitely on the same page here.

Good point, defense could actually find more of BK's DNA from testing other parts of the sheath.

You said:

"They will do the snap first. If the analysis shows that the DNA is identical to BK's (now in evidence with a warrant) the Judge will allow it in..."

The judge has to allow the DNA evidence in even if it doesn't match BK's DNA.

If the DNA doesn't match BK's DNA then by law the judge has to let it in because this would be exculpatory evidence - evidence tending to exonerate a defendant or helps establish their innocence.

To not have a DNA match to BK would be a windfall for the defense, this is what they would want.

For the jury to get to the place of "beyond a reasonable doubt" for his guilt, they need to get to "beyond a reasonable doubt" regarding the evidence against him.

If the prosecution presents experts to diagram and explain how the DNA evidence is a match to BK, but the defense counters with their own expert witnesses to refute this, then the jury must decide who is more credible.

The defense expert could raise reasonable doubt with some jurors. Reasonable doubt that BK did it, that it is not beyond a reasonable doubt that a different killer left DNA on the sheath and committed the murders.

 

[10ofRods]

RSBM

So it is entirely possible that BK had done the research, and planned his attack accordingly.

Speculation ahead - yours much appreciated.

Well, you and I are on the same page. I think he did exactly that. There are other killers in the history of crime who have done so (and it's folklore/literature in many societies as well - some crimes are best done in the dead of night/dark of the moon; others require some moonlight).

Someone upthread proposed that it's possible one of the things BK did more than once is put on his coveralls and other "kill suit" or "crime suit," perhaps in his own mind thinking a variety of competing things. Drives around. It's possible he even got out of his car and went in the house before (since people are posting a lot of speculation about things we cannot possibly know - such as what the actual evidence is, I figure I'll speculate too). It also goes along with what Prof B said about his two theories (from his master's thesis: Rational Choice Theory and Script Theory). Indeed, his unsuccessful reddit q'naire focused on whether the crime-doer felt what he had expected to feel).

A rational criminal, according to this theory

(which was not designed for criminology, but now used there - looks like it rose to prominence in the 90's). Here's a quote from an early (and much assigned) article on the topic. They research studied non-convicted college students in regards to crimes they had committed (they had not been caught, IIRC):

[we studied student]...decisions to commit three offenses (drunk driving, theft, and sexual assault). Even after considering differences in self- control, there was evidence to suggest that the attractiveness of the crime target, the ease of committing the crime with minimum risk, and perceptions of the costs and benefits of committing the crime were all significantly related to offending decisions

Emphasis mine. Crime target attractive? Check! Easy? Check! (esp if framed as simply entering the house to have a look, see what happened next) and weigh costs/benefits. What is the benefit? I haven't even a clue. But the cost is arrest and public approbrium, possible prison time (in BK's case - life in prison or death penalty). What were the benefits? We will likely never get a clear picture of that, but the theory posits that there are some in the mind of the criminal actor. In the end, in this influential study, the authors conclude that there is a large unexplained element (individual differences). Article for those interested.

This other article traces the history of Rational Choice Theory back to Beccaria and Bentham in the 18-19th centuries. However, the article points out that the theory was exceptionally limited (applying early on to evaluations of whether criminal penalties mattered to criminals - did a severe penalty change their behavior?) This second article is ultimately quite critical of Rational Choice Theory (and I agree with their criticisms - it's not a theory; it's a research methodology that makes assumptions the researcher uses to be neutral about human data - by itself, it's not explanatory of anything).

To a student of true crime, that second article (even just its first 3-4 pages is such an interesting look back at the history of criminal justice. The researchers were in the broader field of sociology which also devotes whole journals and methods to the study of crime.

IME, IMO.

NYTIMES article explaining BK's liking for RCT.

 

[Boxer]

I am guessing the police and Prosecution have an idea of how the attack played out. The house would have been full of evidence/clues to tell the story. We will hear it eventually. I think most of us assume the girls upstairs were attacked first, but who knows. I wouldn't doubt that there could still be some bomb-shells to drop.

MOO simply lost track of it in the dark in the bedding. Couldn't take the time to look very long, counted on having cleaned it.

 

[al66pine]

I was talking about the coroner's report as in the coroner's account, which was posted last night. It wasn't the official report, just what the coroner reported to the MSM.

University of Idaho murder victims were in bed, stabbed multiple times: coroner

The four University of Idaho students found slaughtered an off-campus house Sunday were found stabbed to death in beds — and it’s “likely” they were asleep when they were attacked, the corone…

nypost.com

.

@BeginnerSleuther Thanks for your response.
Wanted to make sure I had not missed anything new from the coroner.

BTW, for anyone who did not notice, the article referenced as being "posted last night" was dated Nov. 18.

University of Idaho murder victims were in bed, stabbed multiple times: coroner

The four University of Idaho students found slaughtered an off-campus house Sunday were found stabbed to death in beds — and it’s “likely” they were asleep when they were attacked, the corone…

nypost.com

Thx again.

 

[Bogbacal2]

Speculation ahead - yours much appreciated.

Well, you and I are on the same page. I think he did exactly that. There are other killers in the history of crime who have done so (and it's folklore/literature in many societies as well - some crimes are best done in the dead of night/dark of the moon; others require some moonlight).

Someone upthread proposed that it's possible one of the things BK did more than once is put on his coveralls and other "kill suit" or "crime suit," perhaps in his own mind thinking a variety of competing things. Drives around. It's possible he even got out of his car and went in the house before (since people are posting a lot of speculation about things we cannot possibly know - such as what the actual evidence is, I figure I'll speculate too). It also goes along with what Prof B said about his two theories (from his master's thesis: Rational Choice Theory and Script Theory). Indeed, his unsuccessful reddit q'naire focused on whether the crime-doer felt what he had expected to feel).

A rational criminal, according to this theory

(which was not designed for criminology, but now used there - looks like it rose to prominence in the 90's). Here's a quote from an early (and much assigned) article on the topic. They research studied non-convicted college students in regards to crimes they had committed (they had not been caught, IIRC):



Emphasis mine. Crime target attractive? Check! Easy? Check! (esp if framed as simply entering the house to have a look, see what happened next) and weigh costs/benefits. What is the benefit? I haven't even a clue. But the cost is arrest and public approbrium, possible prison time (in BK's case - life in prison or death penalty). What were the benefits? We will likely never get a clear picture of that, but the theory posits that there are some in the mind of the criminal actor. In the end, in this influential study, the authors conclude that there is a large unexplained element (individual differences). Article for those interested.

This other article traces the history of Rational Choice Theory back to Beccaria and Bentham in the 18-19th centuries. However, the article points out that the theory was exceptionally limited (applying early on to evaluations of whether criminal penalties mattered to criminals - did a severe penalty change their behavior?) This second article is ultimately quite critical of Rational Choice Theory (and I agree with their criticisms - it's not a theory; it's a research methodology that makes assumptions the researcher uses to be neutral about human data - by itself, it's not explanatory of anything).

To a student of true crime, that second article (even just its first 3-4 pages is such an interesting look back at the history of criminal justice. The researchers were in the broader field of sociology which also devotes whole journals and methods to the study of crime.

IME, IMO.

NYTIMES article explaining BK's liking for RCT.

Great reads. Thank You. One thing in particular stood out to me in the article that traces the history of Rational Choice Theory is:
“defined crime in legal terms and regarded the offender as morally guilty because he had freely chosen to commit a criminal act”

 

[Boxer]

No they don't. It isn't up to the defense to provide an alternate suspect. It's up to the defense to defend the accused.

True. They need not say a word.
Yet there are formulas for defenses: "It wasn't me (SODDI), it was justified, I was impaired."

Here is a defense that basically stayed silent.

Chandler Halderson
Jurors deliberated for just over two hours before finding 23-year-old Chandler Halderson guilty on all counts related to the July 1 killing of 50-year-old Bart Halderson and 53-year-old Krista Halderson at their home in Windsor, about 80 miles (130 kilometers) west of Milwaukee.

Chandler was convicted on two counts each of first-degree intentional homicide, mutilating a corpse, hiding a corpse and falsifying information about a missing person. A first-degree intentional homicide conviction carries a mandatory life sentence.

Defense attorneys for Halderson rested their case Thursday without calling witnesses or testimony from the defendant.

 

[schooling]

He has no business being on a public street? I've also told folks that when every single piece of evidence is weak (minus the DNA), the sum total has giant holes. The fact is that the suspect in a quadruple homicide not leaving any of his DNA in the house or, possibly, none of the victims' DNA on him/in his car is a problem. MOO. Many posters have now said this. If just one juror happens to agree, that's the ballgame. MOO.

I know you understand hyperbole and turns of phrase but I'll bite....if his defense for heading that way at 3am with his DNA in the house is "it's a public street" then he's going to have a really really really hard time in court.

And it's always 1 juror away. In every single case in every single court room. And simlarly, I have a 'punchers chance' against Mike Tyson. But I still wouldn't want to be in that ring.

But I would take a match with Tyson over being in BK's position with the evidence stacked against me (IMO) and facing a potential firing squad.

MOO, of course.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

DM is an eyewitness to a shadowy figure in her home. The figure doesn't exclude BK. She's not an eyewitness to the crime. MOO, based on what's been discussed already.

iirc, DM said he was a 5'10" or taller, with bushy eyebrows. He's 6'0 so that's someone from 5'10-6'2" (she was 2 inches under, so 2 inches over is the range I'd use). We also don't know how dark it was; how close he was to her door; how wide the crack and the angle from which she was looking; if she wears glasses and, if so, had them on; if she was under the influence of any drugs or alcohol that might have affected her senses; if she mistook him for someone else, etc. That's a short list of questions that will be relevant to any eyewitness account jmo imo

 

[schooling]

Snipped:
Since I believe that I am the last person who posted the note in bold, I'll add:

Regardless of how the defense has to spin it, the reality is--
"Just because BK's DNA is on the knife sheath doesn't mean he was there." Period. It matters. LE, as posted upthread, he DNA was not used to procure probable cause, so even they left room for it to be excluded.

We're talking about this in a vacuum, but within that vacuum, it only takes one member of the jury to feel the same to derail the case for the prosecution. So yes, that distinction --is important. If the prosecution presented only what we know of now, and the defense had a reasonable explanation, I'd hesitate to put someone in jail for the rest of his life.

Jail? He's facing the possibility of being executed. So the stakes are much much higher.

Also, if it comes down to a mistrial by one lone holdout he's not going anywhere. BK will likely spend the next 5 years in jail awaiting a retrial. Accused quadruple murderers (with a mistrial and a retrial he's still the accused) do not get to walk on personal recognizance or home confinement. They'll retry him until they get a conviction or an acquittal. There have been as many as 8 or 9 retrials. Look no further than Curtis Flowers for #5 (or 6, can't recall).

This is barring any crazy rock solid exculpatory piece of evidence (like a confession) coming out of nowhere, of course. Though IMO they'll get it done the first time.

 

[WingsOverTX]

iirc, DM said he was a 5'10" or taller, with bushy eyebrows. He's 6'0 so that's someone from 5'10-6'2" (she was 2 inches under, so 2 inches over is the range I'd use). We also don't know how dark it was; how close he was to her door; how wide the crack and the angle from which she was looking; if she wears glasses and, if so, had them on; if she was under the influence of any drugs or alcohol that might have affected her senses; if she mistook him for someone else, etc. That's a short list of questions that will be relevant to any eyewitness account jmo imo

And DM is tall. She might even be 5'10". Her impression would be based on comparison to her height most likely.
JMO

 

[schooling]

just curious - what you’re basing this off of when you say ‘and it is his car’ ? not arguing it is or isn’t, only that this is all I saw about the car:

Prosecutors are going to show the jurors a picture of a 2013 and a 2015 and they'll immediately understand the mistake.

This is not the gotcha that a lot of people think it is. IMO. Otherwise the police would still be looking for the white box truck in the Beltway sniper case.

MOO