Does not even come close to meeting the definition of an alibis. I was looking at the stars!
4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #93
- Thread starter ChatteringBirds
- Start date
Cool Cats
I DEMAND COFFEE
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 11,808
- Reaction score
- 89,790
There were legal filings in this regard:
"The prosecution ended their response by requesting that court deny Kohberger and his attorneys "any further opportunity to add to any purported claim of alibi.""
Why Prosecutors Say Idaho Murders Suspect Bryan Kohberger’s Alibi Is Inadequate
Prosecutors say Bryan Kohberger's alibi lacks the "specificity required" by an Idaho law.people.com
If the prosecution has a strong case, they should not be bothered in the least by BK's alibi.
All JMO.
The defense is required - just like the prosecution - to reveal their evidence. It is the law in Idaho that a defendant must reveal his alibi defense if he is going to use it at trial. The defense passed the lawful deadline for this a year ago.
The prosecution is bending over backwards giving the defense time to produce their alibi defense.The prosecution has been waiting for the defense's alibi evidence for 1 1/2 years.
Later in the filing, the prosecution writes: "It has now been approximately 11 months since the State filed its 'Request for Discovery Disclosure; Alibi Demand' on May 23, 2023, and almost a year and a half since the homicides occurred. The defendant has been given more time than he is legally entitled in order to provide his alibi."
The prosecution ended their response by requesting that court deny Kohberger and his attorneys "any further opportunity to add to any purported claim of alibi."
The prosecution needs time to investigate Bryan's alibi and this includes interviewing and getting depositions of witnesses and viewing video and all related data.
The defense is not allowed to "spring" last minute alibi defenses on the prosecution, making it impossible for the prosecution to have time to investigate.
Why Prosecutors Say Idaho Murders Suspect Bryan Kohberger’s Alibi Is Inadequate
Prosecutors say Bryan Kohberger's alibi lacks the "specificity required" by an Idaho law.
Last edited:
He is a killer. He slaughtered the four. His alibi is weak and transparent. All he is doing is trying to cover <modsnip>. His defense team is his greatest supporter. I hope <modsnip> that he gets the worst punishable punishment allowed. <modsnip>
Last edited by a moderator:
The prosecution has not yet given the defense all of the discovery referenced in the PCA (stated by AT in today's hearing.) The prosecution has until September 2024 to turn over all discovery. Defense has longer than that. Prosecution is sending the defense chopped parts of video not synced with sound. Disorganized materials - they are trying to make things as hard as possible on the defense and are costing taxpayers a lot of extra money due to these tactics since the defense attorney is paid by the state and has to hire extra people to help bring order to this mess. IMO, neither the defense nor the prosecution can claim the high road here, but if the discovery was used for the PCA, by now it should be in defense hands. There is simply no excuse for it not being already provided. The alibi - it is a modern technological alibi. Why is the prosecution so scared of this alibi that they want it disallowed and want a closed hearing with the expert? This makes no tactical sense if the state has a strong case. What SY has testified to in the past is already available online for prosecution's perusal. BT they. were continuing to receive discovery - well hopefully he will receive discovery about BK's meta data and the cellular data needs to be rechecked by an independent expert. It is always possible that a mistake has been made somewhere and the defense is exploiting the mistake. It is better for the prosecution to identify this mistake and get their own solution for it than to continue along these lines that could lead to an overturned verdict.The defense is required - just like the prosecution - to reveal their evidence. It is the law in Idaho that a defendant must reveal his alibi defense if he is going to use it at trial. The defense passed the lawful deadline for this a year ago.
The prosecution is bending over backwards giving the defense time to produce their alibi defense.The prosecution has been waiting for the defense's alibi evidence for 1 1/2 years.
Later in the filing, the prosecution writes: "It has now been approximately 11 months since the State filed its 'Request for Discovery Disclosure; Alibi Demand' on May 23, 2023, and almost a year and a half since the homicides occurred. The defendant has been given more time than he is legally entitled in order to provide his alibi."
The prosecution ended their response by requesting that court deny Kohberger and his attorneys "any further opportunity to add to any purported claim of alibi."
The prosecution needs time to investigate Bryan's alibi and this includes interviewing and getting depositions of witnesses and viewing video and all related data.
The defense is not allowed to "spring" last minute alibi defenses on the prosecution, making it impossible for the prosecution to have time to investigate.
Why Prosecutors Say Idaho Murders Suspect Bryan Kohberger’s Alibi Is Inadequate
Prosecutors say Bryan Kohberger's alibi lacks the "specificity required" by an Idaho law.
All JMO.
arielilane
Justice for Liz Barraza
MOSCOW, Idaho — The judge overseeing the case of the man accused of killing four University of Idaho students sided with the prosecution in deciding to close a motion hearing on May 14, overriding adamant objections from the defense.
...
The judge ultimately ruled in favor of the prosecution, saying that he just couldn't grapple with these hearings being held open to the public because of the different nuances and that it's just going to be a little bit easier to keep things in closed doors. That way it wouldn't unintentionally create an unfair hearing if something accidentally slips out.
www.khq.com
...
The judge ultimately ruled in favor of the prosecution, saying that he just couldn't grapple with these hearings being held open to the public because of the different nuances and that it's just going to be a little bit easier to keep things in closed doors. That way it wouldn't unintentionally create an unfair hearing if something accidentally slips out.
Judge agrees to close hearing despite objections from Bryan Kohberger's defense
MOSCOW, Idaho — The judge overseeing the case of the man accused of killing four University of Idaho students sided with the prosecution in deciding to close a motion hearing
- May 2, 2024 Updated 2 hrs ago
Cool Cats
I DEMAND COFFEE
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 11,808
- Reaction score
- 89,790
FBI information needs to be turned over and judge Judge said this is notoriously difficult.
The prosecution wants a closed hearing to protect BK 's rights and not prejudice the jury pool against him.
The prosecution is bending over backwards to give BK a fair trial. A DP trial has a higher standard to meet and the prosecution doesn't want Anne Taylor crying in her soup that her innocent client didn't get his exculpatory evidence or regular evidence or a fair jury so now he has grounds for appeal.
I have never seen so many multiple hearings for trial issues that should take only one hearing.
BK is the most pampered indigent defendant I have ever seen, including money spent. I'm surprised the defense isn't taking turns rocking him to sleep at night.
2 Cents
Cool Cats
I DEMAND COFFEE
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 11,808
- Reaction score
- 89,790
Anne Taylor's filing says there is proof that on other occasions BK has been star gazing.
Note.... "Other occasions."
Star gazing won't hold up in front of a jury....Why?
Because he would need the proof on his phone for November 13, 2022 at 4:00 to 4:30 AM. There has been no filings from AT that says BK's phone took videos or photos at 4 to 4:30 am that night.
You know how photos always spring up on your phone and other digital devices? Mine just came up to show me what I recorded on my phone a year ago, a house fire a few houses down.
What did BK record on his phone that night? Nothing. He turned it off to commit 4 murders and burglary.
2 Cents
Megnut
A piece of peace is peace enough.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 10,734
- Reaction score
- 191,269
Unless he set it up on a tripod somewhere, programmed to take photos at intervals.
Do his phone records sync with that? I seriously doubt it.
AT wants open hearings IMO precisely for What Might Slip Out. She all but admitted she wants to present BK's side to the public. Which is decidedly not where cases are to be tried.
No doubt she will soon suggest BK was stargazing twelve times. Under a different sky than the one Moscow has.
JMO
He's presumed innocent in the eyes of the law? But AT and co. don't say that.
I think D making statements in public hearings that Kohberger is innocent is strategic. There is no need or reason or relevance in telling the Judge what members of the D personally believe. Such comments are meant for public/jury pool consumption.All moo.
The D's repeated assertions of innocence or belief in innocence in court circumnavigate non dissemination order. But they are nevertheless being made by attorneys who are perceived as learned and therefore influential authorities in the public eye. The non D order seeks to keep attorneys from making such bold statements for dissemination to the public but only outside the court setting. What would happen if a member of the P said to the judge during a public hearing out loud and emphatically, 'we believe BK is guilty' I wonder? Not that they would ofcourse. All moo
Megnut
A piece of peace is peace enough.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 10,734
- Reaction score
- 191,269
By virtue of arrest, the State does think he's guilty (that they can prove it BARD), but I think you are right about the Defense. She can't make public statements so she's using open hearings to saturate the media. Pure strategy.
As well, she's "getting it out there" that the State is refusing to turn over discovery. But I find this disingenuous too. In some cases it's discovery she already has, reports that don't exist, etc. The State can't give her what they don't have.
Today she got about 150,000 words in just under an hour out to the general public. Goal met.
JMO
Gemmie
Clam dip nose
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2014
- Messages
- 5,456
- Reaction score
- 36,779
"Stargazing" reminds me of "watching fish".
There were legal filings in this regard:
"The prosecution ended their response by requesting that court deny Kohberger and his attorneys "any further opportunity to add to any purported claim of alibi.""
Why Prosecutors Say Idaho Murders Suspect Bryan Kohberger’s Alibi Is Inadequate
Prosecutors say Bryan Kohberger's alibi lacks the "specificity required" by an Idaho law.
If the prosecution has a strong case, they should not be bothered in the least by BK's alibi.
All JMO.
I don't think it's about the alibi specifically. I believe it's about trying to get him to comply with the rules. Sort of like you need to provide X and maybe the Defense has had a hard time getting him to agree to terms. I also think it's partly about the clarification of the alibi not being significant and also the delay tactics of both sides. They seem to be arguing for the sake of argument even though some of the points are valid, like they're waiting for something probably beyond the CAST report but definitely that. There's a back story that we're not seeing. We're focusing on what's in view and it appears to me that they're waiting for some other elements to fall into place. JMOO
Good points! More thoughts: even though ofcourse the assumption is P obviously believe in his guilt, there is a diff influence wise between what is widely understood and what is said out loud/declared publicly. That being why the non D order prevents all attorneys from making public statements re their beliefs in his guilt or innocence; because of attorneys' and LE's potentially large capacity to manipulate/influence public opinion either deliberately or inadvertently.moo
I agree. It is theater. JMOO
I will go a step further. Both sides are demonstrating efforts to prove BK is getting a "fair trial". Translation, the State of Idaho is trying to avoid appeal issues (I do realize we could argue this all day). I think the beginning of this case and the end of this case will be interesting. But the middle is just going to be frustrating. JMOO
Cool Cats
I DEMAND COFFEE
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 11,808
- Reaction score
- 89,790
Well I'm going in for jury duty now and could care less what was said in hearings leading up to trial.
Jurors can do.... "Just the facts mam"
I have never heard a jury foreperson say they voted guilty due to defense or prosecution grandstanding in pre-trial hearings.
snooptroop88
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2024
- Messages
- 356
- Reaction score
- 2,572
Totally, totally agreed on this. What else is she going to say? "My client's guilty as sin. I wish I didn't have to try this case with this sanctimonious academic, who's also a pathological liar, as a defendant." A lawyer disciplinary board would probably bring disciplinary action against her for anything along those lines. And I'm glad she's not saying it, he needs counsel and deserves a fair trial. But that so-called "alibi" is a joke, it's more of the same that we've already seen with this defendant, AT is herself an academic, she's had years of schooling, she has to know herself it's not looking good for BK.
MOO, the "alibi" assertion is the same type of manuever as attacking the DNA because there was the use of geneaology used to narrow the sample.
The "alibi" will challenge the cell data in general.
Both cell data and DNA evidence are under a coordinated attack by defense attorneys throughout the US.
Many threads ago, posters here were discussing hypothericals and someone said they went on holiday near a lake in the middle of nowhere and if they had been accused of a murder in the area there would be no witnesses to corroborate their alibi of relaxing by the lake.
Posters were quick to point out that although there may be no witnesses, their phone data would definitely be able to show exactly where they were, so they wouldn't need to worry.
Well, as it turns out, the defense here is unable to get that phone data which might corroborate the alibi. This is exactly the same thing. It turns out the defense still doesn't have the full CAST report, or the phone data they could potentially use to back up their alibi in more detail.
(Sorry if I got some details wrong, it was ages ago but the gist of it stuck with me)
Posters were quick to point out that although there may be no witnesses, their phone data would definitely be able to show exactly where they were, so they wouldn't need to worry.
Well, as it turns out, the defense here is unable to get that phone data which might corroborate the alibi. This is exactly the same thing. It turns out the defense still doesn't have the full CAST report, or the phone data they could potentially use to back up their alibi in more detail.
(Sorry if I got some details wrong, it was ages ago but the gist of it stuck with me)
Last edited:
I think the point they're trying to make is this:
I often hear mainstream media commenters saying : "if he was innocent he'd be screaming it from the rooftops!".
He obviously can't scream it from the rooftops, or make any public statements at all. So he's probably asked his lawyers to scream it for him, at every hearing, and that's what they've been doing.
That doesn't mean he IS, but IMO it shows his team doing the closest thing possible to what media commenters are saying he should be doing.