4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 76

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread has been interesting to say the least. For me, everyone‘s post offers a little something to think about. This case is challenging, educational and is definitely teaching me how to become a better sleuther. IMO, this case takes a toll now and then and at the end of the day, we all want the same thing. Justice for these kids, Maddie, Kaylee, Xana and Ethan.
I so agree, and it's such a horrible case of four vicious murders with no 'usual suspect' and no easily fathomable motive. It sure is challenging and complicated in numerous ways IMO. But every one has something to contribute to the discussion and I love being here at WS for that reason amongst others.I feel united with many other's who, as you say, want to see justice for these four beautiful souls, their families and loved ones. MOO
 
Quelle surprise. So it could all be basically much ado about nothing. How shocked I am. Not.

We've got a good long wait before trial. I'm sure there are going to be many more tiresome developments and even more tiresome alarmist media articles to look forward to. Joy.

...And my sarcasm being stuck on means it's time for bed. Night, all.
 
Quelle surprise. So it could all be basically much ado about nothing. How shocked I am. Not.

We've got a good long wait before trial. I'm sure there are going to be many more tiresome developments and even more tiresome alarmist media articles to look forward to. Joy.

...And my sarcasm being stuck on means it's time for bed. Night, all.

Good find @iamshadow21! Of course any observations we make about this are purely speculative and may not even come out during the trial if they are part of private personnel records IMO. It wold make perfect sense if the Brady/Giglio is related to the lawsuit filed against the Moscow PD by this Christian group (which I didn’t name specifically in case that is a rules violation) MOO. Once again, any speculation we make about this topic may never be substantiated IMO MOO.
 
IMO, you are assuming there is only a sheath that places Kohberger in the house. The facts are 4 students were knifed to death, a sheath was found next to one of them, and it certainly was out of place. It was the most convenient item to test for DNA because it did not fit. We have absolutely no idea what else, if anything, places him in the house. It's really not fair to try to paint the prosecution into a corner of "the only evidence they have is what is on the PCA". We all know that isn't true because they executed search warrants *after* he was arrested. We have absolutely no idea what, if anything, came back after the evidence was analyzed. All JMO
At this point it’s just circular arguments for doubt or guilt.

<modsnip>

I personally see the video, cellular, and dna evidence like I do finding studs in a wall. I’ll use one stud finder. And if I get a hit I don’t immediately start drilling or nailing. Anyone who has ever drilled after using just one stud finder likely has many unused holes. So I like to pull out another stud finder by a different brand. And if I get another hit in the same spot, my probability that there’s a stud there goes up. And often times I’ll pull out my old school magnetic stud nail finder and if I get a hit…by then I’m 99% sure.

Anyone of those stud finders on their own are sort of reliable. But when you add them up and use them together the chance that they are all wrong is astronomical.

<modsnip>



MOO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not overly familiar with US PCA's so I'm curious how they are usually presented. Would it be normal for one to include every shred of evidence available or is it more typical to provide just enough to justify an arrest?

<modsnip: opinion stated as fact>

I haven't figured out yet why LE seems to have needed a PCA to arrest him.

I am not even sure they had to have one. It is not a simple black and white issue.

We don't even know if there is enough evidence to take this to trial, case could be dismissed. This will be what the defense and prosecution will be arguing about at the June hearing.

This isn't even a death penalty case yet.

SM seems to have BK on death row already and he hasn't even plead guilty or innocent yet.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
At this point it’s just circular arguments for doubt or guilt.

<modsnip>

I personally see the video, cellular, and dna evidence like I do finding studs in a wall. I’ll use one stud finder. And if I get a hit I don’t immediately start drilling or nailing. Anyone who has ever drilled after using just one stud finder likely has many unused holes. So I like to pull out another stud finder by a different brand. And if I get another hit in the same spot, my probability that there’s a stud there goes up. And often times I’ll pull out my old school magnetic stud nail finder and if I get a hit…by then I’m 99% sure.

Anyone of those stud finders on their own are sort of reliable. But when you add them up and use them together the chance that they are all wrong is astronomical.
<modsnip>



MOO.
@schooling <modsnip> I love your analogy of poking holes aka finding mistakes. It's the defense's job to poke holes in the evidence against her client. From the Brady-Giglio request, Poke Holes files exist. Ideally evidence holes can be plugged.

While I'm in the corner that looks at the totality of the evidence, I've wondered if one piece of evidence is taken away or deemed un-reliable how sure could I be. It depends on which piece. Two pieces of evidence not reliable and I may have to acknowledge doubt even if, in my heart, I believe BK is guilty. What if the defendant testified he'd never been at the scene or was in the area for some other reason? His testimony would matter little to me bc his DNA was found at the crime scene and a witness testified she saw him there. If I could not consider DNA nor the witness, I'm left with the car and cell pings and maybe a shoe size. I doubt BK would testify. I trust there is more evidence I haven't heard yet. I trust the prosecution. What-ifs drive me until June.

My speculation only.
JMO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thinking about fingerprint evidence. If they had his fingerprint at the house, what are the chances that they would have been able to match it to him by the time the PCA was written? There had been discussion about whether or not he would have been fingerprinted in PA for the school security guard job, but even if he had been, would that fingerprint have been put in a system that was easily accessible to ID police or would it have just been used in a background check, but then not entered into a national database for keeps (I know my local school district runs background checks with fingerprints, but those fingerprints don't then become part of a statewide or nationwide system).

They wouldn't have been able to take prints from his grad office or apartment before the PCA. Either they weren't following him around in Pullman trying to get lucky and see him throw out a cup in a public trash can or they were and he didn't pitch anything, because then wouldn't they have been able to use that for DNA matching instead of waiting to get the PA trash evidence? They might have looked in the PA trash, hoping to get a print, but chances of getting a good clear print there wouldn't have been too great, even more so if he was being extra cautious with what he threw out and how he threw it out).
Just my opinion, but I think it may turn out to be a bit of serendipity that they ultimately matched the DNA from the knife sheath to that of Kohberger’s father and not to him personally. IMO, it heads off completely any rational defense argument that the DNA on the sheath was planted and/or contaminated.
 
At this point it’s just circular arguments for doubt or guilt.

<modsnip>

I personally see the video, cellular, and dna evidence like I do finding studs in a wall. I’ll use one stud finder. And if I get a hit I don’t immediately start drilling or nailing. Anyone who has ever drilled after using just one stud finder likely has many unused holes. So I like to pull out another stud finder by a different brand. And if I get another hit in the same spot, my probability that there’s a stud there goes up. And often times I’ll pull out my old school magnetic stud nail finder and if I get a hit…by then I’m 99% sure.

Anyone of those stud finders on their own are sort of reliable. But when you add them up and use them together the chance that they are all wrong is astronomical.

<modsnip>



MOO.
Posters have done well to remind us that the information available is limited to that which was required to arrest BK - that is, probable cause - and that although we can see clearly that LE had factual grounds to believe BK committed this crime, we should not make a judgment about his guilt or innocence until we know what the jury will know. In particular, we haven't heard BK's perspective on the prosecution's evidence, whether it must in fairness be excluded, and any exculpatory or mitigating evidence he may intend to offer.

Also, we should remind ourselves of the Sheriff's statement after BK's arrest, to the effect that the investigation of BK was "just beginning". We must not make judgments about the eventual strength of the case against BK based upon assumptions and speculations about the PCA or - heaven help us - MSM reporters and "experts".

<modsnip>

There are elements of logic, pragmatism, intuition, and emotion in most of the analyses in this forum, although different posters strike different balances. What I see as the most striking difference is the focus: some of us seem to focus on the details, and some on the overall picture presented by the available evidence. Both approaches have their merits and limitations. Details matter, but so does the big picture. If we focus on details we risk not seeing the forest for the trees. If we focus on the forest, we may miss the disease that will kill it.

I welcome all perspectives and I have learned much from this discussion, even from those with whom I differ.

Thanks much for your contribution @schooling! I hope to read more of it after the next step in the proceedings. I hope the Idaho Supreme Court will decide the media case soon, and that interest in this case will be renewed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Where is the document that is suppose to show BK bought the type of knife that could have been used that night?

If true, very damning circumstantial evidence unless he can produce the knife showing it was used for benign purposes.
 
Where is the document that is suppose to show BK bought the type of knife that could have been used that night?

If true, very damning circumstantial evidence unless he can produce the knife showing it was used for benign purposes.
Below is a link to the previous thread. Post #430 mentions a list of knives. I assume that LE will look for any/all purchase histories for any weapons and that anything discovered could potentially be submitted as evidence at trial?

 
@schooling See you in June. I'll miss your posts but understand waiting until hearing. I love your analogy of poking holes aka finding mistakes. It's the defense's job to poke holes in the evidence against her client. From the Brady-Giglio request, Poke Holes files exist. Ideally evidence holes can be plugged.

While I'm in the corner that looks at the totality of the evidence, I've wondered if one piece of evidence is taken away or deemed un-reliable how sure could I be. It depends on which piece. Two pieces of evidence not reliable and I may have to acknowledge doubt even if, in my heart, I believe BK is guilty. What if the defendant testified he'd never been at the scene or was in the area for some other reason? His testimony would matter little to me bc his DNA was found at the crime scene and a witness testified she saw him there. If I could not consider DNA nor the witness, I'm left with the car and cell pings and maybe a shoe size. I doubt BK would testify. I trust there is more evidence I haven't heard yet. I trust the prosecution. What-ifs drive me until June.

My speculation only.
JMO
BBM

I'm not sure there is a witness to testify she saw BK at the scene. We don't know precisely what DM will say when/if she testifies. But from what the PCA says, if she actually does testify it sounds like she'll be saying the person she saw could have been BK. That's a bit different from having a witness place him at the scene. Eyewitness identification of strangers is notoriously inaccurate but I'm not at all sure we even have an identification.

I think I'm more in the camp of initially looking at each piece of evidence and mentally tossing pieces if necessary, rather than looking at everything all together. The "all together" approach could lead to thinking the sheath DNA was his and DM saw someone that looked like him-- therefore it must have been him that she saw since his DNA was there. I don't really think the sheath was planted but it could have been. DNA on a small easily moved object isn't quite the same as finding DNA on the house structure. So the sheath doesn't prove he was there IMO. Given that it doesn't, it certainly shouldn't be used to "shore up" DM's testimony that she may have seen him there.

JMO
 
I dont think we've seen one. JMO
<modsnip - quoted post was snipped>

Showing BK making a "murder kit" purchase would be incredible circumstantial evidence. I have seen this type of evidence used in other murder trials. They call it "murder kit" purchases.

If they have evidence of BK buying a mask or gloves or dark clothing, etc... These types of purchases might be considered part of his "murder kit" for that night.

2 Cents


Although the phrase “murder kit” seems generic, the type of bag chosen and the items placed into it reveal a great deal about a killer’s approach to murder, sense of identity, imagination, and decision that a “kit” is even necessary. Some are careful to include items they can "explain" if caught. Predatory serial offenders who troll or stalk will often carry one. What they place inside can be merely utilitarian or it can be part of a fantasy ritual. Thus, preparing the kit can add to the titillation of anticipation.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
<modsnip - quoted post was snipped>

Showing BK making a "murder kit" purchase would be incredible circumstantial evidence. I have seen this type of evidence used in other murder trials. They call it "murder kit" purchases.

If they have evidence of BK buying a mask or gloves or dark clothing, etc... These types of purchases might be considered part of his "murder kit" for that night.

2 Cents
Speculation.

A receipt I remember is a Dickies purchase that all we know is something Dickies brand. Nothing concrete there either.

JMO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Very early on (like Nov 14/15) it was stated in a post here, "'Photos at the scene show people bundled up a bit, so maybe it was cold and they went to the scene as soon as they heard, not thinking to dress warm so they were given emergency blankets.'" This would have been before crime scene tape was up.

There was also mention of a Lewiston Tribune article that the neighbors "...were cleaning their apartment...and looked out the window and saw police cars, along with a group of women crying while draped in emergency blankets."
Does anyone know where these photos were posted or have a copy of them/it? I'm very interested in seeing them. Any help in finding them would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
 
Speculation.

A receipt I remember is a Dickies purchase that all we know is something Dickies brand. Nothing concrete there either.

JMO
Either there is a receipt that BK bought a Ka-Bar type knife or there isn't.

I don't know at this point.

If he did buy this type of knife in June 2022, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Prosecution raise this at the Preliminary Hearing in June.
 
Posters have done well to remind us that the information available is limited to that which was required to arrest BK - that is, probable cause - and that although we can see clearly that LE had factual grounds to believe BK committed this crime, we should not make a judgment about his guilt or innocence until we know what the jury will know. In particular, we haven't heard BK's perspective on the prosecution's evidence, whether it must in fairness be excluded, and any exculpatory or mitigating evidence he may intend to offer.

Also, we should remind ourselves of the Sheriff's statement after BK's arrest, to the effect that the investigation of BK was "just beginning". We must not make judgments about the eventual strength of the case against BK based upon assumptions and speculations about the PCA or - heaven help us - MSM reporters and "experts".

If I may respectfully offer an alternative to your juxtaposition of logic v pragmatism in our approaches to this case, it would be this:

There are elements of logic, pragmatism, intuition, and emotion in most of the analyses in this forum, although different posters strike different balances. What I see as the most striking difference is the focus: some of us seem to focus on the details, and some on the overall picture presented by the available evidence. Both approaches have their merits and limitations. Details matter, but so does the big picture. If we focus on details we risk not seeing the forest for the trees. If we focus on the forest, we may miss the disease that will kill it.

I welcome all perspectives and I have learned much from this discussion, even from those with whom I differ.

Thanks much for your contribution @schooling! I hope to read more of it after the next step in the proceedings. I hope the Idaho Supreme Court will decide the media case soon, and that interest in this case will be renewed.
While my brain tends to give more weight to the forest scene (how many coincidences can possibly coexist without a causative factor?) my head still wants to know if there is possibly any way all those seeds could have coalesced independent of one another.
We need the people who can see those seeds independently in this case, just as the defense will struggle (IMHO) to present them.
The battle, at this point, would be for the jury to give equal respect for both perspectives.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
1,463
Total visitors
1,575

Forum statistics

Threads
589,162
Messages
17,915,034
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top