4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #92

[Megnut]

I don't think the affidavit ever mentions Kohlberger returning to the actual scene of the crime. Just that he was back within the range of the towers that cover the King Rd home. So I wouldnt' expect him to be caught on the same set of cameras.

Also, IMO, I don't think it matters if they have video of who's driving inside of the car. I've seen dozens of cases where grainy black and white footage of a vehicle was used to put a suspect in the area of a crime.

And I think the prosecution already gave us a preview of how they plan on answering the question of "how do we know it was Kohlberger driving the Elantra on that night". And the answer is in the PCA and the the grocery store video.

Early on the night of the murder, right before he turns off his cell phone the prosecution describes a video of a white Elantra at an intersection. And they cite that they have cellular evidence tied to Kohlberger that kind of confirms (in their minds) that it is him driving the car.

So now the precedent is kind of set that where we see the white elantra on video our cellular location data evidence should line up with it. And they reinforce this again....

After the murders...they again go out of their way in the PCA to tie the same set of cellular location data (he turned his phone back on) to a white Elantra to a CCTV video. With the presumption that it is Kohlberger driving the car.

Great. So they've been able to track this car by corroborating where BKs cell phone data says the white Elantra should be and the actual video of the exterior of the Elantra. But they still dont know whos driving it.

Then we have the grocery store.

It's a video of a white Elantra. Presumably also missing a front plate. Pulling into the grocery store parking lot. And again, like the night before we have cellular evidence lining up with this location and video of the car to prove it....

But only THIS TIME IMO, we can probably see Kohlberger in broad daylight, clearly exiting the vehicle. And I expect that they will be able to use this car + cell evidence + video thing on the days prior to the murders and the days after the murders. Forcing the jury to have to imagine an alternative universe where all of the evidence lines up except for a 4 hour gap on the night of the murders. Nothing about that sounds 'reasonable'.

That is PRETTY STRONG evidence IMO. Especially when we consider it along with the DNA pulled from the crime scene.

MOO

And the defendant's defense -- that he was driving around in the white Elantra, registered to him.

Add another alternate universe.

JMO

 

[MissyRie]

According to all available information and reporting the state lab pulled a local sample of the DNA first. That local sample did not hit on CODIS. So another sample was pulled for IGG indepdentendly from the local sample. Two completely different and distinct chains of custody.

Yes, the IGG was used to locate Kohlberger. But how do you fix that if the local sample matches Kohlberger and is completely unrelated to the IGG.

No matter what the defense does it's not going to change the fact that the sheath DNA is Kohlberger's DNA. Which is why the local sample continues to go unchallenged by them and they seem completely fine with pretending that it doesn't exist. MOO.


MOO.

Which is why the local sample continues to go unchallenged by them and they seem completely fine with pretending that it doesn't exist. MOO.

I am new here and probably doing/replying to this wrong (asking for grace, please)
But is it anyone's opinion that the state might actually have evidence of blood/DNA in his car and the defense is also pretending this doesn't exist?
I know they/she wouldn't outright lie, but if they/she "doesn't have the report back yet/discovery" then she could be pretending that it didn't exist?

 

[snooptroop88]

I am new here and probably doing/replying to this wrong (asking for grace, please)
But is it anyone's opinion that the state might actually have evidence of blood/DNA in his car and the defense is also pretending this doesn't exist?
I know they/she wouldn't outright lie, but if they/she "doesn't have the report back yet/discovery" then she could be pretending that it didn't exist?

Hi, I'm fairly new as well, and still kind of getting used to things. At this stage, I do believe there's no DNA evidence from the vehicle. BK's attorney has actually stated this, and I doubt such a sharp, definitive type of statement would be made if it weren't true. Even with the gag order, I would think (?) at this stage, the public would be aware of such evidence, although I cannot be certain. I find it astounding as well there's no DNA evidence from the vehicle, but I do remember the discussion of the extreme cleaning/purging measures BK took in terms of trash and the cleaning of the vehicle. I looked up the bleaching process at that time and at least one source noted that if someone "bleaches" a car, this process leaves a type of footprint of its own. So waiting on this as well in terms of the trial.

It's my belief that if this case does actually go to trial and BK is convicted, he will probably not escape the death penalty. His criminologist background will work against him so potently here (JMO) that it could tip the balance away from any sort of mercy, if things reach that point. If he's convicted, people may well picture a very, very unsympathetic defendant who truly enjoyed "going through the process" with those in the legal system and the public.

 

[Boxer]

Thanks. The defense did say they are still waiting on more discovery to be handed to them. Is the important video AT mentioned the LL video from say 6am that morning till 11:58? If so, why does AT not have that footage in discovery? The PCA presents BK coming to the scene the next morning through phone records. If a white sedan is on the LL video that morning, from say sometime between 6am and 11:58, then it will also be on the King rd video, and it may be possible to see the driver. Is that the footage AT wants to see?

MOO AT is fishing for delays. That is all.

 

[wendy44]

According to all available information and reporting the state lab pulled a local sample of the DNA first. That local sample did not hit on CODIS. So another sample was pulled for IGG indepdentendly from the local sample. Two completely different and distinct chains of custody.

Yes, the IGG was used to locate Kohlberger. But how do you fix that if the local sample matches Kohlberger and is completely unrelated to the IGG.

No matter what the defense does it's not going to change the fact that the sheath DNA is Kohlberger's DNA. Which is why the local sample continues to go unchallenged by them and they seem completely fine with pretending that it doesn't exist. MOO.


MOO.

I'm guessing if the IGG produced the lead before the other evidence the defense will want to fix it by throwing out the DNA evidence on the sheath if they can find some way to challenge the IGG. I'm not arguing the merits or likelihood of that, just offering it as explanation when people are asking why the defense is so intent on procuring the IGG timeline and details.

And I fully agree--they know the DNA on that sheath is his and I don't think they can produce a reasonable scenario to explain to a jury that it's his, but he didn't do this and this is how a sheath with his DNA ended up at the scene.

JMO

 

[snooptroop88]

One of the most bizarre aspects of this whole thing to me is "the alibi." Defense: Mr. Kohberger was out driving that night.

Prosecution: "We know..."

In terms of IGG, I think they're going for the IGG to try and show some kind of potential pre-existing bias towards him. At this point, that's all I think they want. Meaning LE wasn't really trying to "find" a lead, they were more confirming something they already had in mind, and perhaps ignoring other potential leads to "zero in" on him.

 

[Cool Cats]

One of the most bizarre aspects of this whole thing to me is "the alibi." Defense: Mr. Kohberger was out driving that night.

Prosecution: "We know..."

In terms of IGG, I think they're going for the IGG to try and show some kind of potential pre-existing bias towards him. At this point, that's all I think they want. Meaning LE wasn't really trying to "find" a lead, they were more confirming something they already had in mind, and perhaps ignoring other potential leads to "zero in" on him.

They had a DNA sample that is why they were able to run any genealogy at all. Can't do it without DNA.

Can't be biased against unknown DNA.

And they suspected BK more than a month before his arrest so they had every right to pursue their lead. It is what they are suppose to do with suspects.

2 Cents

 

[maskedwoman]

They had a DNA sample that is why they were able to run any genealogy at all. Can't do it without DNA.

Can't be biased against unknown DNA.

And they suspected BK more than a month before his arrest so they had every right to pursue their lead. It is what they are suppose to do with suspects.

2 Cents

I agree. I realize there are times that the police charge the wrong person. I hate that it happens, as I'm sure it's devastating to that person and their family. Even worse, the guilty party is still running around free. However, I am quite weary of this reflexive "defense strategy A" where the attorneys claim that "LE focused on my client to the exclusion of other possible suspects." Well, that's what evidence is for, for pity's sake. To narrow the suspect pool, and clear innocent people. I'm tired of defense attorneys suggesting that LE should keep looking for suspects after they already have plenty to make their case. It's ridiculous and, IMHO, it's as bad for criminal law as the CSI effect is.

 

[Justice101]

They had a DNA sample that is why they were able to run any genealogy at all. Can't do it without DNA.

Can't be biased against unknown DNA.

And they suspected BK more than a month before his arrest so they had every right to pursue their lead. It is what they are suppose to do with suspects.

2 Cents

Well said!

 

[Justice101]

I agree. I realize there are times that the police charge the wrong person. I hate that it happens, as I'm sure it's devastating to that person and their family. Even worse, the guilty party is still running around free. However, I am quite weary of this reflexive "defense strategy A" where the attorneys claim that "LE focused on my client to the exclusion of other possible suspects." Well, that's what evidence is for, for pity's sake. To narrow the suspect pool, and clear innocent people. I'm tired of defense attorneys suggesting that LE should keep looking for suspects after they already have plenty to make their case. It's ridiculous and, IMHO, it's as bad for criminal law as the CSI effect is.

What I almost always go back to is the police arrested the right person 95% of the time.

I don't listen to the defense before the trial (or sometimes even the prosecution), because it is spin trying to save the defendant's reputation and influence/skew the jury pool ahead of time.

 

[DFWNF]

Death Row | Idaho Department of Correction

www.idoc.idaho.gov

Only three executions have occurred since Idaho enacted a new death penalty statute in 1977.
There are 8 people on death row.

Here is how long they have been there....

2017
2004
2004
1996
1993 - only female
1992
1986
1983

Yes I think the prosecution will take the DP off the table if BK offers to plead guilty to all 4 charges and gives some answers for the families.

I think the families would agree to this under the condition they got some answers from him. I don't think pleading guilty is enough, I think the families will want to know how he came to target their children and why he did it.

And would he speak the truth? I doubt it.

 

[Cool Cats]

And would he speak the truth? I doubt it.

I've seen this happen. The story the killer tells has to coincide with all the evidence and time-lines that have been painstakingly collected.

And yes there are inconsistencies but these prosecutors are good at narrowing down the inconsistencies. Prosecutors are trained to root out BS. They will confront and point out discrepancies.

So there is usually enough truth to start getting at least some answers.

It isn't super easy to sit for 10 hours being filmed and keeping all your lies straight under intense scrutiny.

But BK is arrogant, a know it all. I don't see him admitting guilt. To admit guilt means he has to stand up in court with all the families in the room and the camera on him and plead guilty 4 times.

Then there is a separate sentencing hearing where he has to sit and listen to all the victim impact statements.

If he is found guilty he will be forced to go through this.

2 Cents

 

[schooling]

One of the most bizarre aspects of this whole thing to me is "the alibi." Defense: Mr. Kohberger was out driving that night.

Prosecution: "We know..."

In terms of IGG, I think they're going for the IGG to try and show some kind of potential pre-existing bias towards him. At this point, that's all I think they want. Meaning LE wasn't really trying to "find" a lead, they were more confirming something they already had in mind, and perhaps ignoring other potential leads to "zero in" on him.

Yep. Hence the earlier court filings pointing out another car that LE initially focused on and reporting by ABC or NBC about a Nissan Sentra. All smoke and mirrors. IMO.

But at the end of the day the DNA is the DNA.

“You caught him but you didn’t do it fairly” is my interpretation of what is going on.

MOO

 

[DFWNF]

Hi, I'm fairly new as well, and still kind of getting used to things. At this stage, I do believe there's no DNA evidence from the vehicle. BK's attorney has actually stated this, and I doubt such a sharp, definitive type of statement would be made if it weren't true. Even with the gag order, I would think (?) at this stage, the public would be aware of such evidence, although I cannot be certain. I find it astounding as well there's no DNA evidence from the vehicle, but I do remember the discussion of the extreme cleaning/purging measures BK took in terms of trash and the cleaning of the vehicle. I looked up the bleaching process at that time and at least one source noted that if someone "bleaches" a car, this process leaves a type of footprint of its own. So waiting on this as well in terms of the trial.

It's my belief that if this case does actually go to trial and BK is convicted, he will probably not escape the death penalty. His criminologist background will work against him so potently here (JMO) that it could tip the balance away from any sort of mercy, if things reach that point. If he's convicted, people may well picture a very, very unsympathetic defendant who truly enjoyed "going through the process" with those in the legal system and the public.

"His criminologist background will work against him so potently here (JMO) that it could tip the balance away from any sort of mercy, if things reach that point. If he's convicted, people may well picture a very, very unsympathetic defendant who truly enjoyed "going through the process" with those in the legal system and the public."
---------
How so?

 

[schooling]

I am new here and probably doing/replying to this wrong (asking for grace, please)
But is it anyone's opinion that the state might actually have evidence of blood/DNA in his car and the defense is also pretending this doesn't exist?
I know they/she wouldn't outright lie, but if they/she "doesn't have the report back yet/discovery" then she could be pretending that it didn't exist?

I've always wondered this! I think the defense might have implied that no blood evidence was found...but I might be conflating that with some very loose interpretations (from others) of "no connections to the victims"

 

[Boxer]

I've seen this happen. The story the killer tells has to coincide with all the evidence and time-lines that have been painstakingly collected.

And yes there are inconsistencies but these prosecutors are good at narrowing down the inconsistencies. Prosecutors are trained to root out BS. They will confront and point out discrepancies.

So there is usually enough truth to start getting at least some answers.

It isn't super easy to sit for 10 hours being filmed and keeping all your lies straight under intense scrutiny.

But BK is arrogant, a know it all. I don't see him admitting guilt. To admit guilt means he has to stand up in court with all the families in the room and the camera on him and plead guilty 4 times.

Then there is a separate sentencing hearing where he has to sit and listen to all the victim impact statements.

If he is found guilty he will be forced to go through this.

2 Cents

He stood silent.
One benefit of standing silent is keeping the option open of later pleading guilty to take DP off table.
AT thinking capital conviction from the beginning, her entire case will be to try to find a procedural reason to suppress evidence...
MOO because he is guilty.

 

[Love Never Fails]

Death Row | Idaho Department of Correction

www.idoc.idaho.gov

Only three executions have occurred since Idaho enacted a new death penalty statute in 1977.
There are 8 people on death row.

Here is how long they have been there....

2017
2004
2004
1996
1993 - only female
1992
1986
1983

Yes I think the prosecution will take the DP off the table if BK offers to plead guilty to all 4 charges and gives some answers for the families.

I think the families would agree to this under the condition they got some answers from him. I don't think pleading guilty is enough, I think the families will want to know how he came to target their children and why he did it.

Knowing the “why” is what every family member of a murdered victim wants. The truth is you will never get the why. A psychopath loves playing with peoples minds. They have no empathy. Any stories they do tell might be far worse. I would let him go on to his punishment and pray he isn’t with the general prison population where he can keep killing. He needs to sit in a cell alone for however long that is. IMO.

 

[snooptroop88]

"His criminologist background will work against him so potently here (JMO) that it could tip the balance away from any sort of mercy, if things reach that point. If he's convicted, people may well picture a very, very unsympathetic defendant who truly enjoyed "going through the process" with those in the legal system and the public."
---------
How so?

Because it's like a "gaming the system" type of deal. Criminologists know "the system" and know the inner workings of crimes like murder. They get that access to that type of information to understand crime and work within the parameters of that system. If he's convicted, that means he had this increased access, and that his privileges (information he had obtained over the course of his studies) were directed towards committing the crimes, not benefiting society in the capacity of a criminologist. For example, JMO, it would be equivalent of a "dirty cop" using his/her position to help a relative go unhindered in the commission of a serious crime-- or even firsthand engaging in crime. The PO is supposed to be serving and protecting society, not violating the very laws s/he is supposed to be enforcing. Another example might be an attorney learning the statute of limitations on certain crimes so he can commit them and figure out how long to run the clock, basically. It adds a whole new level of wrongdoing to the commission of a crime, MOO. Meaning BK if guilty went out and murdered four people, and he drew on his academic life and actual career path in its commission. It's unavoidable that he didn't, he was in class taking notes and participating in studies.

 

[Boxer]

Knowing the “why” is what every family member of a murdered victim wants. The truth is you will never get the why. A psychopath loves playing with peoples minds. They have no empathy. Any stories they do tell might be far worse. I would let him go on to his punishment and pray he isn’t with the general prison population where he can keep killing. He needs to sit in a cell alone for however long that is. IMO.

Agree. There is no why as related to victims.
Murder is a dirty act committed by a person going down a path that no decent person lets themselves go down.


And even people with severe mental illness, who find themselves in the grip of unrelenting homicidal ideation, in an act of decency and mercy often kill themselves instead to save others.

 

[DFWNF]

Because it's like a "gaming the system" type of deal. Criminologists know "the system" and know the inner workings of crimes like murder. They get that access to that type of information to understand crime and work within the parameters of that system. If he's convicted, that means he had this increased access, and that his privileges (information he had obtained over the course of his studies) were directed towards committing the crimes, not benefiting society in the capacity of a criminologist. For example, JMO, it would be equivalent of a "dirty cop" using his/her position to help a relative go unhindered in the commission of a serious crime-- or even firsthand engaging in crime. The PO is supposed to be serving and protecting society, not violating the very laws s/he is supposed to be enforcing. Another example might be an attorney learning the statute of limitations on certain crimes so he can commit them and figure out how long to run the clock, basically. It adds a whole new level of wrongdoing to the commission of a crime, MOO. Meaning BK if guilty went out and murdered four people, and he drew on his academic life and actual career path in its commission. It's unavoidable that he didn't, he was in class taking notes and participating in studies.

Interesting, I will ask my sister, she has the same degree. Do we know what year he was in, etc? Did he meet up with and interview any so called criminally insane/not criminally responsible? That made me think of when he had his survey he was seeking responses to. If he physically met any folks rather than just responses. Jmo