4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #90

[Cool Cats]

SBMFF. If that was the case, then no one would ever be successfully framed for a crime, ever.

JMO

2 Cent Opinion

You miss the point. Everyone has an alibi if they are innocent, with one exception, the innocent person was at the crime scene in which case they become a witness.

If BK was framed he would have an alibi. Unless he was at the crime scene, he was somewhere else at 4:00am. Could he prove where he was? Maybe not but he could raise an alibi defense and try to prove his alibi.

Every wrongly framed/convicted individual has an alibi ---they were some place else -- but couldn't prove it with evidence.

https://www.sullivanlawnc.com/blog/2022/03/what-is-an-alibi-and-when-can-you-use-it-in-your-criminal-defense/

"Alibi" as a Defense to Criminal Accusations in California

An alibi defense is where you present evidence that you could not have committed a crime because you were somewhere else when the crime occurred.

www.shouselaw.com

What evidence do you need to raise an alibi?​

Proof of an alibi can vary depending on the nature of the alibi as well as what and who can be used to corroborate it. Here are the kinds of evidence that you can use to support your alibi claim:

• Time-stamped photographs and video footage of the accused person at a different location when the crime took place. These are great alibi because they are objective evidence.
• A documented evidence of the accused person at a different location. These can include admission records if the defendant was at the hospital when the crime occurred or receipts indicating that the accused person was out shopping at the time of the crime. GPS and telephone records or credit card swipe records may also be used as an alibi.
• Witness testimony in support of the alibi. This can be extremely helpful when the accused person has a credible witness who can vouch for their whereabouts at the time the said crime took place. It works even better if the witness does not have any relations with the accused person.

 

[arielilane]

Many have asked, when will #BryanKohberger go to trial?

We conducted a poll and 36% thought 2024 and 36% thought 2025. I believe 2026 or later.

They are still producing Discovery.

The Judge put a deadline on the FBI to produce their lab results by December 1, 2023.

BK waived his speedy trial, thus, this will drag on unless he pleads, which would be a small miracle.

But life including a vegan diet, church, eyebrow grooming, private t.v., and pressed suits is much more desirable than a Maximum Security Prison or Death Row, so BK is quite content, considering the possible alternatives.

He made 1 crucial error dropping that Sheath or the state may have never had a chance to capture him.

He is innocent until proven guilty and likely basking in the attention, love letters, and Proberger support, just like #BTK did.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1726962559478108328

https://twitter.com/CoffindafferFBI

Unfortunately, JC just maybe right on this one. moo

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

2 Cent Opinion

You miss the point. Everyone has an alibi if they are innocent, with one exception, the innocent person was at the crime scene in which case they become a witness.

I don't miss the point. I DISAGREE with the point. There's a monumental difference, IMO.

 

[Cool Cats]

I don't miss the point. I DISAGREE with the point. There's a monumental difference, IMO.

My point you disagree with is this:

"If BK was set up he would have an alibi for that night because he wasn't there, he didn't do it."

Just because you can't prove your alibi doesn't mean you don't have one. If a murder in your area is taking place right now your alibi is where you are right now but you may not be able to prove it.

An alibi is the place you were when you were not at the scene of a crime, this is why everyone has an alibi. You have an alibi right now if there is a murder happening right now because you are not at the crime scene.

If BK did not commit the murders then he was somewhere else. Wherever this place is, it now has become his alibi. Say he was home, then that is his alibi. Say he was driving on country roads from 4 to 5 AM, then this is his alibi.

If BK is being framed and can't prove where he was, can't prove his alibi, then an innocent man will likely end up on death row because of the DNA, witness description, car, phone, and lack of proving his alibi.

2 Cents - I posted 2 links above

 

[Jurisprudence]

ICYMI: Judge John Judge has ordered that all future State v. Bryan Kohberger proceedings will be livestreamed via a court camera. Attending media will no longer be able to bring in their own cameras or audio equipment. The defense previously lodged complaints that the pool camera was providing too many closeups of Kohberger and that the national attention this case was receiving could bias or sway public opinion for an upcoming trial.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1726659967619400165

View attachment 462471

So unhappy about this.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

I like it.

Maybe I'm too cynical. But I am not a fan. It's likely a fixed frame, audio could be close to nonexistent, and it can be taken off line at any time intermittently. And in his last paragraph, he also reserved the right to cut it off and end it at any time before the close of trial.

Will we see it all so that what we do see will be properly framed and in context? The pool camera is not a big deal. They are in courtrooms all over the country without incident in cases just as big or bigger than this. I am not loving this but we get what we get.

jmo

 

[katydid23]

Maybe I'm too cynical. But I am not a fan. It's likely a fixed frame, audio could be close to nonexistent, and it can be taken off line at any time intermittently. And in his last paragraph, he also reserved the right to cut it off and end it at any time before the close of trial.

Will we see it all so that what we do see will be properly framed and in context? The pool camera is not a big deal. They are in courtrooms all over the country without incident in cases just as big or bigger than this. I am not loving this but we get what we get.

jmo

I am happy about it, only because many trials I followed had ZERO cameras. Following a trial by tweet is horribly frustrating.

 

[jepop]

I am happy about it, only because many trials I followed had ZERO cameras. Following a trial by tweet is horribly frustrating.

I'm very pleased about it. Seems like a reasonable compromise. If triple J takes a leaf out of Judge Werner's book ( who Imo did a fantastic job overseeing respectful use of court controlled camera during Leticia Stauch trial) this should allow for public transparency whilst simultaneously protecting the rights and sensitivities of all concerned (witnesses, defendant, victims). As I think someone else pointed out, it takes the competitive media element out of the picture and brings ethical and judicial process to the forefront. Moo

 

[Cool Cats]

So unhappy about this.

jmo

We get to see the trial! This is what matters

 

[girlhasnoname]

So unhappy about this.

jmo

Meh, Judge Judge could have said no to any cameras, as is his right. I think it's a good compromise and far more favorable than the 'Trial by Tweet' which has caused more confusion and chaos IMO.

 

[Shadowtrix]

I am happy about it, only because many trials I followed had ZERO cameras. Following a trial by tweet is horribly frustrating.

Agreed. Still a better alternative to that. Anything but trial by Tweet and bad court sketches. I’ll take it.

 

[Boxer]

IMO in 1975 the primary suspect either not having an alibi or not having a provable alibi makes a lot more sense than it does in 2023.

The innovations in technology in the last 50 years makes it a lot harder to believe that nowadays.

If BK was out and about and not in the area of the homes

• security cameras on streets, homes, businesses
• cellular evidence (his phone was off)
• a receipt of some sort
• identifying a location that maybe an eye witness could corroborate

If he was at home

• computers that keep system level activity logs by time and date (Event Viewers in Windows, Console Log in Mac OS X)
• DNS records from your ISP
• Browser History
• Roku / Firestick / Apple TV / Gaming Console Logs
• Social Media or other Sites and Services logins
• Phone / Text Logs
• Smart Home Devices Activity

The lack of an alibi is evidence in of itself. But the weight it carries is only amplified when put into the same context of the DNA evidence on the sheath. Which is why the defense attorneys are desperately trying everything they can to chalelnge it.

I go for drives sans technology a lot (though my Tesla logs my miles, frequent locations, and Spotify usage will in the car) BUT my DNAhas never been found at the scene of a quadruple murder on the holster of the suspected style of murder weapon used.......

MOO

The last few qtime BK had an alibi is stopping in the WSU rec center and his phone goes off.

Maybe I'm too cynical. But I am not a fan. It's likely a fixed frame, audio could be close to nonexistent, and it can be taken off line at any time intermittently. And in his last paragraph, he also reserved the right to cut it off and end it at any time before the close of trial.

Will we see it all so that what we do see will be properly framed and in context? The pool camera is not a big deal. They are in courtrooms all over the country without incident in cases just as big or bigger than this. I am not loving this but we get what we get.

jmo

the medias bread an butter are cases, or celebrities that have constant audience drawing power. Those viewer numbers translate to money. A Competetive pool naturally leads to ever more audience grabbing edgy content.

MOO every case in every court have have fixed video feed of the courtroom proceedings with maybe a couple angles to alternate to.

 

[arielilane]

NEW: Judge in #BryanKohberger case will livestream all future proceedings on his YouTube page. He will not allow a separate media camera inside the courtroom. This is a compromise to having no livestream vs. judge being able to control.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1726654316759724266

View attachment 462470

https://twitter.com/cathyrusson

Not a fan, and there is no guarantee going forward. The defense can always file another complaint. moo

From court docket:

"The Court reserves the right to amend or prohibit audi/visual coverage in the future ifit is determined that videoing the proceedings is interfering in any way with the proper administration of justice."

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

My point you disagree with is this:

"If BK was set up he would have an alibi for that night because he wasn't there, he didn't do it."

Just because you can't prove your alibi doesn't mean you don't have one. If a murder in your area is taking place right now your alibi is where you are right now but you may not be able to prove it.

SBMFF. Except he DID say where he was -- he was driving somewhere in ID. If your contention is that every innocent person will know the exact coordinates of where they are during a crime, then yes, I disagree strongly with that. If your contention is that every innocent person will know what generic thing they were doing during the time frame in which a crime takes place, then I agree and would add that BK's team did say what he was doing.

JMO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Maybe I'm too cynical. But I am not a fan. It's likely a fixed frame, audio could be close to nonexistent, and it can be taken off line at any time intermittently. And in his last paragraph, he also reserved the right to cut it off and end it at any time before the close of trial.

Will we see it all so that what we do see will be properly framed and in context? The pool camera is not a big deal. They are in courtrooms all over the country without incident in cases just as big or bigger than this. I am not loving this but we get what we get.

jmo

I'm not crazy about this development either because of the reasons you cited, but I will add the media has only itself to blame. Had they been more responsible in shooting/reporting/editorializing this case, perhaps such control by the court wouldnt be necessary.

MOO

 

[Cool Cats]

SBMFF. Except he DID say where he was -- he was driving somewhere in ID. If your contention is that every innocent person will know the exact coordinates of where they are during a crime, then yes, I disagree strongly with that. If your contention is that every innocent person will know what generic thing they were doing during the time frame in which a crime takes place, then I agree and would add that BK's team did say what he was doing.

JMO

I don't care about general assumptions just that if BK was set up he would have an alibi because he was somewhere else regardless of whether he remembers, regardless of where he was.

All innocent people not at crime scenes have alibis WHETHER OR NOT THEY REMEMBER WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN PROVE IT. I have explained this and posted LINKS.

If BK was innocent I believe things would be different with his phone, that he would have been home.

We know from his neighbor that they would regularly hear him up late at night running the garbage disposal and what- not.

I believe if he had not been at the crime scene and someone else did it that there would be at least some leads, some evidence in that direction.

This is a defense that fights like a starving dog on a bone and they would have had their investigators uncover at least something exculpatory and there would definitely be Motions we would see filed.

They would be all over screaming he is being framed and they would want everything filmed to show the world this poor unlucky guy is being abused by the legal system.

3 Cents - Stated as Opinion

 

[Boxer]

SBMFF. Except he DID say where he was -- he was driving somewhere in ID. If your contention is that every innocent person will know the exact coordinates of where they are during a crime, then yes, I disagree strongly with that. If your contention is that every innocent person will know what generic thing they were doing during the time frame in which a crime takes place, then I agree and would add that BK's team did say what he was doing.

JMO

"Idaho Code § 19-519​

Current through the 2023 Regular Legislative Session
Section 19-519 - NOTICE OF DEFENSE OF ALIBI(1) At any time after arraignment before a magistrate upon a complaint and upon written demand of the prosecuting attorney, the defendant shall serve, within ten (10) days or at such different time as the court may direct, upon the prosecuting attorney, a written notice of his intention to offer a defense of alibi. Such notice by the defendant shall state the specific place or places at which the defendant claims to have been at the time of the alleged offense and the names and addresses of the witnesses upon whom he intends to rely to establish such alibi."


MOO BK did not supply any detail with his claim of having been "driving around" as an alibi because if he claimed a drive anywhere else besides where he was, circling 1122, cameras along the way would verify.
Would the defense miss that opportunity to possibly exhonerate him? No.

MOO AT intends to agree BK was driving around the 1122 but explain his presence there as trying to buy drugs nearby from a no show dealer and challenge the timeline.

However, that someone planted a trace sample of BKs DNA into a hidden part of the murder weapon sheath is not believable. So this defense strategy is a what if. As in "what if we got the DNA suppressed."

His defense is challenge to procedure.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

"Idaho Code § 19-519​

Current through the 2023 Regular Legislative Session
Section 19-519 - NOTICE OF DEFENSE OF ALIBI(1) At any time after arraignment before a magistrate upon a complaint and upon written demand of the prosecuting attorney, the defendant shall serve, within ten (10) days or at such different time as the court may direct, upon the prosecuting attorney, a written notice of his intention to offer a defense of alibi. Such notice by the defendant shall state the specific place or places at which the defendant claims to have been at the time of the alleged offense and the names and addresses of the witnesses upon whom he intends to rely to establish such alibi."


MOO BK did not supply any detail with his claim of having been "driving around" as an alibi because if he claimed a drive anywhere else besides where he was, circling 1122, cameras along the way would verify.
Would the defense miss that opportunity to possibly exhonerate him? No.

Or they legitimately don't know where he was at the time of the murders because he was "driving around."

My response was to a poster who stated that EVERYONE who isn't guilty of a crime has an alibi. I was on the road yesterday into this morning for the holiday. If someone asked where I was at 2:35 am, I'd have no earthly idea other than maybe the state. I guarantee some crime happened in that state. Does the fact that I can't tell you exactly where I was mean that I must not be innocent of the crime? This is teh logic that poster was arguing.

IMO, it's a ridiculous generalization.

None of this speaks to BK's guilt or innocence on my part. I'm speaking about the generalization.

MOO.

 

[Boxer]

Still, "driving around" is not an alibi.

 

[Jurisprudence]

I am happy about it, only because many trials I followed had ZERO cameras. Following a trial by tweet is horribly frustrating.

A bunch of us just followed a sentencing hearing and the audio made it almost impossible to follow. @arielilane can vouch for this. It was later reposted on L&C where it was clear so that was good. But who would fix this if this happens here since this is only a one-man band? I also don't like that it can be "edited" by cutting off the feed. No checks and balances on the coverage so to speak. jmo

We don't have a choice though so I will hope for the best. I am very interested in hearing the evidence at this trial, particularly the DNA and cell phone and camera evidence which I expect AT to fight as hard as she can but unless I see something really wrong I personally think they have the right guy. He wasn't at a library or driving around aimlessly turning his phone off and on. Uh uh.But that's jmo.