4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #91

Status
Not open for further replies.

ChatteringBirds

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
9,469
Reaction score
46,397
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...”

Thread #1 Thread #2 Thread #3 Thread #4 Thread #5 Thread #6 Thread #7 Thread #8
Thread #9 Thread #10 Thread #11 Thread #12 Thread #13 Thread #14 Thread #15 Thread #16 Thread #17 Thread #18 Thread #19 Thread #20 Thread #21 Thread #22Thread #23 Thread #24 Thread #25 Thread #26 Thread #27 Thread #28 Thread #29 Thread #30 Thread #31 Thread #32 Thread #33 Thread #31 Thread #32 Thread #33 Thread #34 Thread #35Thread #36 Thread #37 Thread #38 Thread #39 Thread #40 Thread #41 Thread #42 Thread #43 Thread #44 Thread #45 Thread #46 Thread #47 Thread #48Thread #49 Thread #50 Thread #51 Thread #52 Thread #53 Thread #54 Thread #55 Thread #56 Thread #57 Thread #58 Thread #59 Thread #60 Thread #61 Thread#62 Thread #63Thread #64 Thread #65 Thread #66 Thread #67 Thread #68 Thread #69 Thread #70 Thread #71 Thread #72 Thread #73 Thread #74 Thread #75Thread #76 Thread #77 Thread #78 Thread #79 Thread #80 Thread #81 Thread #82 Thread #83 Thread #84 Thread #85 Thread #86 Thread #87 Thread #88 Thread #89 Thread #90


Media Thread/No Discussion
Media Thread/No Discussion #2

Probable Cause Affidavit


Press photo album (compilation courtesy of WS member cujenn81)

Moscow ID Police Department Facebook page

City of Moscow re King Road Homicide

Media Guide to the Idaho Courts

Detectives are looking to develop context for the events and people involved in the four murders at 1122 King Rd in Moscow, Idaho. Anyone who observed notable behavior, has video surveillance, or can provide relevant information about these murders:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT CHRIS MCDONOUGH AND THE INTERVIEW ROOM

Nothing that Chris M says is allowed on this forum unless it is backed up by law enforcement.

Chris has personally lied to me. He accused an innocent man of being Brian Laundry. He lied about being removed from the Crow lawsuit. He was removed but then put back in the lawsuit and lost. Chris told me he was removed from the lawsuit and was not sued. He never told me he was added back into the lawsuit and lost. Chris was sued for getting a false confession in the murder of Stephanie Crow.
I could go on but suffice it to say anything he says is not allowed. Even if it is in mainstream media.

Again only if what he said is backed up by an actual law enforcement source.

Here is the documentation on the Crow lawsuit
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Ruling from 2010 which overrules Dougie's decision from 2004.

Retired judge slams Crowe case


"A federal trial judge in San Diego dismissed the bulk of the civil rights suit in 2004. But six years later, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals revived the lawsuit, finding that Escondido police violated the civil rights of Crowe and his friends during “hours of grueling, psychologically abusive interrogations.”

The above links come from a great YouTube creator called Scientific Skeptic. If you go to this video there are more links describing the interrogation tools used by Chris and others in the Crow case,

Because Chris mistakenly named the wrong man on my YouTube channel and never told me to take down the false information I made this apology video when I discovered what happened,
Here is the apology video I had to make because of what Chris said on my Livestream.

The glove that Chris found was not there on the day of the Moscow Idaho murders

The MOB Crew has a great video showing the ground the day of the killing where the glove was found later in the month. On that day the glove was not there. Go to @2:35 of this video

I am not suggesting Chris did not legitimately find the glove. Just showing you it has nothing to do with the case. I will be shocked if Chris updates the story about the glove.

For those of you who know me this is an extremely unusual step for me to take. This is how strongly I feel. I was lied to but more importantly, because of Chris' actions, people's lives were threatened in the Summer Wells case.

Please do not discuss this post on this thread. If you have any questions please email me at websleuthsvideos@gmail.com

Tricia
 
I suspect BK will present a reasonable doubt defense. I suspect his lawyer's response concerning an alibi was a formality. It holds the door open in case there is evidence discovered which places him elsewhere.

To present an effective alibi defense, there must be witnesses, and I suspect there are likely none (even if he was just driving around in the middle of the night). The other option would be for BK to waive his 5th Amendment rights and testify on his own behalf. That would likely be disastrous for the defense.
 
I suspect BK will present a reasonable doubt defense. I suspect his lawyer's response concerning an alibi was a formality. It holds the door open in case there is evidence discovered which places him elsewhere.

To present an effective alibi defense, there must be witnesses, and I suspect there are likely none (even if he was just driving around in the middle of the night). The other option would be for BK to waive his 5th Amendment rights and testify on his own behalf. That would likely be disastrous for the defense.
It’s been 10+ months since his arrest. They’ve had access to all of the evidence and tens of thousands of dollars for canvassing (witnesses and CCTV), testing, retesting, access to all of BKs digital records and more. and the best they got is “driving around” seemingly with no particular destination.

I try and stretch my imagination to think about what game changer might come in before trial. And I can’t think of anything that IMO logically fits within what we know so far.

Which is why their sole focus has been on weakening the prosecution's case via challenges to the strongest pieces of evidence.

MOO
 
Re: Defense focus

The D does not have all of the evidence yet.
10 supplemental discovery requests.
Motions to compel.
Hearings for the Judge to set deadlines.

IMO The Ds current focus is challenging the indictment and obtaining discovery.

Totally makes sense for them not having all of the evidence yet.

Prosecutors are continuing to build their case. The recently unsealed warrants and the FBI heading back out to the crime scene are examples of that. It’s the spoils from the waving of a speedy trial.

So there will always be a lag.

MOO

Edit: also, IMO, I still don’t see how killing the GJ indictment helps BK. Even if the defense were successful, prosecutors could just turn around and do it the old fashioned way. There’s plenty of evidence. I’m not saying that you are misunderstanding this…but I do see a lot of people incorrectly applying some sort of double jeopardy clause to how indictment works.
 
Last edited:
Re: Defense focus

The D does not have all of the evidence yet.
10 supplemental discovery requests.
Motions to compel.
Hearings for the Judge to set deadlines.

IMO The Ds current focus is challenging the indictment and obtaining discovery.


I'm not sure how I did it, completely lost track finally. Is there a hearing tomorrow? I know there's a deadline but is there a related hearing and I apologize for asking but I'm forgetting. TIA
 
I'm not sure how I did it, completely lost track finally. Is there a hearing tomorrow? I know there's a deadline but is there a related hearing and I apologize for asking but I'm forgetting. TIA

October 25th Order for in camera review

In balancing these interests, the Court will conduct an in camera review of all the IGG information in the possession, custody, or control of the State, including the FBI, to determine precisely what needs to be disclosed and what does not need to be disclosed, and issue any protective orders necessary.

Order setting deadline:

Based on the Order Addressing IGG DNA and Order for In Camera Review filed October 25,2023, and the status conference conducted on November 2, 2023. the Court orders the following:The State shall provide to the Court, no later than December l, 2023. all IGG material pertaining to this case that is in the possession of the FBI and the private laboratory the State contracted with, unless the State demonstrates good cause for an extension of time to turn over therequested material.


There is a deadline of tomorrow to hand over the IGG information unless the State demonstrates good cause for an extension, then the judge will review it in camera.

Wiki

In United States courts, in-camera review describes a process or procedure where a judge privately looks at confidential, sensitive, or private information to determine what, if any, information may be used by a party or made public.

 
October 25th Order for in camera review

In balancing these interests, the Court will conduct an in camera review of all the IGG information in the possession, custody, or control of the State, including the FBI, to determine precisely what needs to be disclosed and what does not need to be disclosed, and issue any protective orders necessary.

Order setting deadline:

Based on the Order Addressing IGG DNA and Order for In Camera Review filed October 25,2023, and the status conference conducted on November 2, 2023. the Court orders the following:The State shall provide to the Court, no later than December l, 2023. all IGG material pertaining to this case that is in the possession of the FBI and the private laboratory the State contracted with, unless the State demonstrates good cause for an extension of time to turn over therequested material.


There is a deadline of tomorrow to hand over the IGG information unless the State demonstrates good cause for an extension, then the judge will review it in camera.

Wiki

In United States courts, in-camera review describes a process or procedure where a judge privately looks at confidential, sensitive, or private information to determine what, if any, information may be used by a party or made public.

And it appears the IGG material was submitted to the court under seal yesterday:
https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/
IMG_2298.jpeg
https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/
 
Totally makes sense for them not having all of the evidence yet.

Prosecutors are continuing to build their case. The recently unsealed warrants and the FBI heading back out to the crime scene are examples of that. It’s the spoils from the waving of a speedy trial.

So there will always be a lag.

MOO

Edit: also, IMO, I still don’t see how killing the GJ indictment helps BK. Even if the defense were successful, prosecutors could just turn around and do it the old fashioned way. There’s plenty of evidence. I’m not saying that you are misunderstanding this…but I do see a lot of people incorrectly applying some sort of double jeopardy clause to how indictment works.
I am not one of those people.

It will depend on what the Judge decides. IF he dismisses the indictment the P might have the option to call another grand jury and present again without the prior flaws or the Judge may order a PH as a remedy. The PH is what the D is pushing for IMO. If the D is successful it will be a much different road for the P.

I am sure the P can continue investigating and complying with discovery at the same time.

Those warrants were from March, July, and August 1st. They weren't posted for the public until September.
Waiver was 8/23.


JMO MOO IMO
 
Not sure but this might be something different.
Not sure they would describe the Judges review as a forensic evaluation?
ICBW.

Wherefore, the State respectfully prays that the Court seal from public disclosure the STIPULATION AND ORDER TO TRANSFER EVIDENCE FOR FORENSIC EVALUATION
I thought the same; It’s so difficult to tell with everything sealed, so only time will tell.

The defense agreed with this & I don’t see the State blowing off a deadline, but who knows?
 
I am not one of those people.

It will depend on what the Judge decides. IF he dismisses the indictment the P might have the option to call another grand jury and present again without the prior flaws or the Judge may order a PH as a remedy. The PH is what the D is pushing for IMO. If the D is successful it will be a much different road for the P.

I am sure the P can continue investigating and complying with discovery at the same time.

Those warrants were from March, July, and August 1st. They weren't posted for the public until September.
Waiver was 8/23.


JMO MOO IMO
I know you're not one of those people.

Also, I've seen cases go to trial with a lot less evidence. Look at Aaron Hernandez's second case (the murder of the two Cape Verdean guys, Hernandez beat the case) where they had A LOT less evidence than they do against BK and a lot of time had passed.

IMO, with each ruling the judge is signaling that things would go exactly the same way in a theoretical PH. Otherwise it would be a much different road for BK right now.

So why do you think BK's PH would be any different?

MOO

Edit: I removed the reference to the Pennsylvania judge and LE because I could not find the article.
 
Last edited:
Imo the latest motion, stipulation and order may or may not be related to the in-camera review of IGG material. I'm not really sure how the transfer of the FBI's constructed family tree (for e.g. puposes only) would be filed for an in-camera review and how that might be reflected on COI page and summary.

As far I can see, after the DEC 1 deadline for FBI held IGG info is met by the P, JJJ still then has to set a date for the actual in-camera review. Sure hoping it will be before Xmas, but realistically, depending on the Court's timetable and also time JJJ will need to digest and comprehend the material (he might need to sort out some expert opinion/assistance?) I'll take a punt that it will happen in the new year. Moo

Forensic evaluation of evidence
, as described in the motion and order, is possibly not the same as something being forensic evidence. IDK, but I don't think motion and order are necessarily referring in any way to the up and coming In-camera hearing (no date as of yet), but they could be related to the transfer of FBI held IGG info (or not!). Moo
 
Not sure but this might be something different.
Not sure they would describe the Judges review as a forensic evaluation?
ICBW.

Wherefore, the State respectfully prays that the Court seal from public disclosure the STIPULATION AND ORDER TO TRANSFER EVIDENCE FOR FORENSIC EVALUATION
I'm glad it's filed under seal. It should be, why would we want future criminals to know the procedure the FBI uses in its research? I'm of the camp it was just a desperate attempt by AT & Co. to influence the public's perception of IGG. The State wasn't even going to use it during trial because they already had BK's buccal swab from his arrest with an STR match in the 5+ octillions from the DNA recovered on the button of the knife sheath left on a victims bed.

Not to mention, the Defense has filed plenty of motions and responses under seal as well.

MOO
 
Re: Defense focus

The D does not have all of the evidence yet.
10 supplemental discovery requests.
Motions to compel.
Hearings for the Judge to set deadlines.

IMO The Ds current focus is challenging the indictment and obtaining discovery.

I don't believe the D will be successful in overturning the GJ findings. In the extreme case it were to, the State could turn right around and hold another GJ review. BK would still be in jail and the D would still not be privy to the State's case in chief, which I think is even stronger now than back in April/May when they last held it.

MOO
 
I know you're not one of those people.

Also, I've seen cases go to trial with a lot less evidence. Look at Aaron Hernandez's second case (the murder of the two Cape Verdean guys, Hernandez beat the case) where they had A LOT less evidence than they do against BK and a lot of time had passed.

IMO, with each ruling the judge is signaling that things would go exactly the same way in a theoretical PH. Otherwise it would be a much different road for BK right now.

So why do you think BK's PH would be any different?

MOO

Edit: I removed the reference to the Pennsylvania judge and LE because I could not find the article.
Agree that some cases go to trial with a lot less evidence.
What is available to the public is only a fraction of what the D, P and JJJ are aware of.
MOO

PH and GJ are very different. The D wants a PH for those differences IMO.

Unlike a preliminary hearing held in court with the defense side present, the grand jury doesn't make its decision in the context of an adversary proceeding. Rather, it's a one-sided affair. Grand jurors see and hear only what prosecutors put before them.

Great comparison/history of GJ and PH. Pros and Cons. Viewpoints of P vs D on each. etc. 1974 review

The preliminary hearing is criticized by prosecutors on at least two grounds:first, that it provides the defense with too much information about the state's case without corresponding discovery by the state, and second, that the hearing rushes the state's investigation and preparation of its case against the defendant. The first argument involves the question of the merit of broad pretrial discovery and is therefore outside the scope of this commentary. The fallacy of the second point is obvious. If the prosecutor does not have in hand adequate evidence to establish probable cause within a reasonable time after arrest then the accused should not be detained. Nevertheless, the prosecutor does have at his disposal an alternative procedure that allows the defendant no discovery at all and requires less careful preparation than the adversary preliminary hearing. The prosecutor may simply obtain an indictment from the grand jury


Re: JJJ signaling. IMO the first signals will be the next two rulings (IGG and Motion to Dismiss the Indictment)

JMO: IMO: MOO
 
I'm glad it's filed under seal. It should be, why would we want future criminals to know the procedure the FBI uses in its research? I'm of the camp it was just a desperate attempt by AT & Co. to influence the public's perception of IGG. The State wasn't even going to use it during trial because they already had BK's buccal swab from his arrest with an STR match in the 5+ octillions from the DNA recovered on the button of the knife sheath left on a victims bed.

Not to mention, the Defense has filed plenty of motions and responses under seal as well.

MOO
?? No mention of sealing or opinion about the sealing in my post??

I am of the camp that the investigative process is what the D is interested in.
The D has not challenged the STR, yet.
IMO it is important to know more about the STR sample, the process, and how the match number was arrived at.

JMO
 
?? No mention of sealing or opinion about the sealing in my post??

I am of the camp that the investigative process is what the D is interested in.
The D has not challenged the STR, yet.
IMO it is important to know more about the STR sample, the process, and how the match number was arrived at.

JMO
I was just stating my own thoughts about filings under seal, no worries.

AT is very good at her job, I expect the D to double-challenge every single thing. Since BK doesn't appear to have a credible alibi, IMO, going the way of discrediting the State on technicalities was expected by me.

Her job is to provide BK a competent and vigorous defense, as is his right, and I think she is doing just that.

Even if I don't like it - hah

JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
200
Guests online
1,337
Total visitors
1,537

Forum statistics

Threads
591,767
Messages
17,958,587
Members
228,603
Latest member
megalow
Back
Top