4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, 2022 #77

[10ofRods]

I can't speak for OP and why their 'pages and pages' of posts on aspects of BK losing his job seem relevant to this case to them.

IMO, it's relevant as follows:

"His reputation came to precede him" last Fall at WSU rather quickly, through him behaving unprofessionally on campus, and for being condescending towards his students and allegedly misogynistic towards his female students he was assistant teaching, and for getting into "altercations" with the professor he was assisting.

As far as has been reported in MSM by people who knew him, BK only struggled in this way on campus and in his role as a TA.

That is why it's interesting and a point of discussion that his behavior was so "out of control" when he was a TA, IMO, that he got fired for it, and especially the part which included for lack of a better term a "negative or demeaning attitude" towards the young women who were students he assistant-taught.

And because this was perhaps an "escalation" of his poor treatment of young women who were students -- AFAIK, he didn't act like this at his 2 previous colleges where he earned degrees -- once he was in a "position of authority" as a TA, and not just a coed amongst coeds.

And that it all occurred concurrently with his alleged stalking of 1-3 of the young women who were students on a nearby campus that he then allegedly murdered that same semester.

That is relevant, IMO, to last Fall and his alleged poor treatment of young women who were "under him" whom he apparently lashed out at verbally and graded harshly just because they were women.

And it seems like it could also be relevant that he was losing his ability to control his misogynistic behavior in the outside world and comport himself in a way that fit within societal, cultural, and/or academic norms within his new-to-him environment last Fall.

It's indicative of hatred he had towards young college-aged women, IMO.

At the same time he was allegedly stalking or spying on and planning to assault and/or stab 3 young college-aged women to death (and one of their boyfriends who was there the night he acted on his urge), all while in a rage, IMO.

He even allegedly said the murders looked to be "a crime of passion" to his neighbor, and, uh, I guess he would know what he was talkin' about:

Bryan Kohberger's neighbor says the murder suspect once told him the Idaho killings seemed like a 'crime of passion'

MOO

And, even if none of this matters materially at trial, we as the public still have public interest. This case will be talked about for years. This isn't the only online forum devoted to it. For some of us, the information surrounding the case and the context of the crime are as interesting as the current legal processes.

Once the trial is over, we will probably see quite a few people who are involved in this case speaking out and even, perhaps, writing books.

IMO.

 

[U.N. Known]

LE cannot exclude information that casts doubt on anyone's guilt according to the Supreme Court.

Because prosecutors have an affirmative duty to seek out exculpatory evidence, law enforcement has a duty to collect it and turn it over to the prosecutor.

The Brady doctrine is a pretrial discovery rule that was established by the United States Supreme Court in Brady v. Maryland (1963). The rule requires that the prosecution must turn over all exculpatory evidence to the defendant in a criminal case. Exculpatory evidence is evidence that might exonerate the defendant.

The media is asking if cops really understand their Brady obligations

If legislatures, courts and prosecutors can’t agree on what Brady requires, is it any wonder officers and police departments are uncertain?

www.police1.com

More States Forcing Prosecutors to Hand Over Evidence -- Even When It Hurts Their Case

The Supreme Court required prosecutors to do this decades ago, but they don't always follow the rules. New York is the latest state to strengthen them.

www.governing.com

An amendment to the 1st bold line above: "LE is not supposed to exclude information that casts doubt on anyone's guilt..."
The existence of a law does not = compliance with that law.

So yes, if the information that BF knows was shared with prosecutors who did not share it with the defense, they are in violation. However, there is nothing in the documents we've seen suggesting that LE or the prosecution failed to disclose something. BF may not have told LE (who therefore could not share) whatever it is the PI feels is exculpatory. If the information is indeed exculpatory, the offense may a failure to ask the right questions.

 

[r3d-ros3]

Why wouldn't it be insignificant though? There hasn't been any evidence at all that it's related. There's no connection (that we know of) between the victims and his trouble at work. The only way anyone could make any kind of connection is to suggest the trial should be a larger biosketch of his entire life and IMO, without a much more clear line between his work troubles and the murders, I'm not even sure it would be allowed in court.

If he became violent at work, if he made threats at work, if that rumor in MSM about him possibly breaking into a colleague's house is true, then I could see it. But students not liking him and him having a non-physical altercation with his boss (depending on the topic) are irrelevant to these murders, IMO.



I'm not sure what you mean here. It may have been initially unrelated to his position, but as far as we know, it was never related (not just initially). If he was stalking the girls, there was no connection to his job, as far as I know. He also hadn't yet been terminated at the time of the murders. In fact, he'd go on to work as a TA for over a month longer, so that doesn't play a role in the murders, IMO.

We can agree to disagree, but I think it's a worthwhile discussion to be having (and I think others in the thread agree!). If it ends up being a coincidence that he was struggling in such a significant way in the immediate weeks and months leading up to the murder, then I guess it's just a coincidence. We're just not sure yet.

I could have been clearer in my second point: stalking prior to the start of his issues at WSU seems to support what you call the irrelevance of his struggles as a PhD student. So, I was conceding that there is also evidence -- at least so far -- that you might be right.

 

[Cool Cats]

An amendment to the 1st bold line above: "LE is not supposed to exclude information that casts doubt on anyone's guilt..."
The existence of a law does not = compliance with that law.

So yes, if the information that BF knows was shared with prosecutors who then did not share it with the defense, they are in violation. However, there is nothing in the documents we've seen that suggest that LE or the prosecution failed to disclose something. BF may not have told LE (who therefore could not share) whatever it is the PI feels is exculpatory.
If the information is indeed exculpatory, the offense may a failure to ask the right questions.

I was just pointing out something in the law responding to a post. I don't think there is anything for LE to hold back about this material witness because

I do NOT think BF did anything illegal and is "wanted" by the law in Idaho. Seems almost like victim bashing to infer this. You are not inferring this, I just mean I am not comfortable with discussions as if she is guilty of something.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Another court filing

https://twitter.com/x/status/1650974241993441282

Is this fairly standard?

I think it's great news that the County's Prosecutor is requesting the assistance of the State's DA for their "resources and expertise", IMO.

Just like Moscow PD enlisted the State (and Federal) LE agencies to assist in the investigations of the murders, which was a very smart move and worked out very well, IMO.

Just a smidge curious if the 2 people (Deputy DAs) being added to the prosecution's team have some special kind of expertise.

 

[Helechawagirl]

I think most that showed up didn't go in the house and everything they heard and repeated would have been hearsay.

I also suspect LE told them right up front to keep their mouths shut that loose lips might end up causing the murdered to get off in court...or show up looking for them!

But there was a mom who said her daughter told her things or am I confused?

 

[Helechawagirl]

The 4 murdered were sleeping or in bed with another person and the two surviving roommates were in bed alone. Something to consider?

Or nah?

Coincidence I think. JMO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

We can agree to disagree, but I think it's a worthwhile discussion to be having (and I think others in the thread agree!). If it ends up being a coincidence that he was struggling in such a significant way in the immediate weeks and months leading up to the murder, then I guess it's just a coincidence. We're just not sure yet.

I could have been clearer in my second point: stalking prior to the start of his issues at WSU seems to support what you call the irrelevance of his struggles as a PhD student. So, I was conceding that there is also evidence -- at least so far -- that you might be right.

Sure, my saying it's irrelevant doesn't mean anyone should stop talking about it. We've spent 77 threads talking about it. I don't expect anyone to stop now. I'm just saying that IMO, it's irrelevant, unless someone can draw a direct line between his troubles at WSU and these coeds (for example, if one of them was in one of his classes at WSU and she complained about him or something). But otherwise, given he wasn't even terminated yet, I find it a stretch to suggest his trouble at work somehow caused him to murder 4 (as far as we know) strangers in cold blood. JMO.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

I was just pointing out something in the law responding to a post. I don't think there is anything for LE to hold back about this material witness because

I do NOT think BF did anything illegal and is "wanted" by the law in Idaho. Seems almost like victim bashing to infer this. You are not inferring this, I just mean I am not comfortable with discussions as if she is guilty of something.

Personally, I don't think BF did anything wrong. But I do think the possibility exists that LE may have, given the Brady disclosure, which is coincidentally dated the same as the subpoena for BF's testimony at the preliminary hearing. JMO.

 

[I'm Nobody]

Sure, my saying it's irrelevant doesn't mean anyone should stop talking about it. We've spent 77 threads talking about it. I don't expect anyone to stop now. I'm just saying that IMO, it's irrelevant, unless someone can draw a direct line between his troubles at WSU and these coeds (for example, if one of them was in one of his classes at WSU and she complained about him or something). But otherwise, given he wasn't even terminated yet, I find it a stretch to suggest his trouble at work somehow caused him to murder 4 (as far as we know) strangers in cold blood. JMO.

It's possible motive and the knife will never be found.

Still I enjoy theories about where they might be hidden.

JMO

 

[Boxer]

It's possible motive and the knife will never be found.

Still I enjoy theories where they might be hidden.

JMO

If BK kept an ID from a victim MOO there is a good chance the knife is buried or hidden and not thrown in a river.
MOO there might be a chance it will eventually be found.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

It's possible motive and the knife will never be found.

Still I enjoy theories where they might be hidden.

JMO

But it's not motive. By definition, a motive is an incentive. There was no benefit to his TAing by killing 4 people who weren't even related to his job, workplace, or his students (that we know of). At most, we could say that it gives us understanding of what he was going through emotionally. Nothing wrong with that. But to connect that then to committing murder against 4 uninvolved individuals to meet a legal standard of proof, is a stretch.

MOO.

 

[MassGuy]

But it's not motive. By definition, a motive is an incentive. There was no benefit to his TAing by killing 4 people who weren't even related to his job, workplace, or his students (that we know of). At most, we could say that it gives us understanding of what he was going through emotionally. Nothing wrong with that. But to connect that then to committing murder against 4 uninvolved individuals to meet a legal standard of proof, is a stretch.

MOO.

This was a clear sexually motivated homicide as I see it. He hated women, as he couldn’t handle rejection. He wanted to prove he was smarter than everyone else. No rape occurred, at least as far as we know, but sexual nonetheless.

He got off on this.

 

[Boxer]

This was a clear sexually motivated homicide as I see it. He hated women, as he couldn’t handle rejection. He wanted to prove he was smarter than everyone else. No rape occurred, at least as far as we know, but sexual nonetheless.

He got off on this.

Agree.
<modsnip>

 

[whiterhino]

Or maybe he only planned to kill 2 people but killed 4 because another person was in bed with them.

I do not think he expected to even see Ethan there and he had no idea the girls would fall asleep together.

Mystery

Except BK drove past the house multiple times that night, in front of where Ethan parked his vehicle.

BK had to have seen how many vehicles were parked there. If he'd done any surveillance or stalking, he'd have known whos car was whos. Hard to believe that Ethan being there was a surprise for BK or something he hadn't prepared for.

 

[10ofRods]

Agree.
<modsnip>

I think current psychiatric diagnosis provides no clear way to discuss it either. And as @MassGuy says, this one is an outlier, even within the context of other mass murders. It is very unusual. They took Sexual Sadism out of DSM for reasons related to forensics, not to medical science/psychiatry (IMO).

But Sadism is still a thing and it's quite obvious to some of us that this was a heinous, sadistic crime perpetrated upon completely innocent victims.

Nothing these four students could have done can possibly be perceived as a reason for their criminal deaths. I'm pretty sure that everyone here knows this was a heinous crime - but we have to tread carefully. BK could still plead insanity. He can continue to insist he's innocent, as well. But someone in the region committed this crime and to think it was someone other than the person in the white Elantra who circled the neighborhood 3X that night and then went into the house...is not common sensical, to me.

I am virtually certain that WS will light up big time when we get to the disclosure of the autopsy results. It will be horrific. There are specifics that I think people will have a very hard time with. IMO. No MSM, so IMO.

But even then, people will be arguing in the somewhat the same fashion as we are today. Different paradigms for different people, I guess. As someone who studies comparative criminality, I am more interested in those meta distinctions than I am in the legal intricacies (which also interest me a great deal).

IMO. Someday the parents and families of these four murdered young people will be free to speak out about what they know. That won't be until after a trial (which seems really unfriendly to the families, but it is what it is and it's how we do it in the US). When all the truth is out there, I will be satisfied, myself. In the meantime, I agree with @MassGuy that this is a particular type of crime, based on all the other crime data with which I am familiar.

IMO.

 

[Jessthinkin]

The crimes may be unique, but the motives rarely are. I’m honestly not a huge fan of her, but this is why a man his age does this. He was on the older end of the spectrum, and committed a first murder event (I don’t think he’s killed before), that was way outside the norm. But these guys almost always kill for the same reason.

If true, the statements of the manager at the Pennsylvania bar he used to frequent, the one who said that he had to speak with BK about the inappropriate/creepy things BK would say to the female employees (such as: Do you have a boyfriend? and: Where do you live?) and do (call them a "(edited deragatory slur)" if they wouldn't answer his questions) speak to a sexual/rejection /anger component. Bryan Kohberger harassed women at Pennsylvania brewery: report

 

[JerseyGirl]

New thread:

4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, 2022 #78

This tragedy seems to be breaking news: Police said they responded to King Road for a report of an unconscious person. When officers arrived, they “discovered four individuals who were deceased...”...

www.websleuths.com