4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #94

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Still stuck on the issue regarding a Payne/BK interview.
From the Defense's 2nd motion to compel:
"Request 23 [...] The State responded that they have provided A V000123 discovered on 3/30/23, however, the provided recording is an in person interview with FBI Agents rather than the phone interview done by Moscow Police."
So there are indeed two separate interviews.

Payne was not present at the Idaho press conference announcing BK's arrest. I would have assumed that as lead investigator he should be there, certainly seems more justified than Scott Greene's presence there. Would Payne have been in PA then? Payne wasn't present at the PA press conference either.
But even if Payne was in PA, would he have any authority to interrogate a suspect over there, even on the phone?
Labar stated on Newsnation that BK had been interrogated for "5 to15 minutes" before invoking his rights. My impression is that this would be too short for BK to speak with both FBI and Payne in that short time.
Just a few thoughts, lots of questions and no definitive answers unfortunately.
 
This article is from way back when in Oct 2023. Title is "The Missing Bryan Kohberger Evidence That Could Make or Break the Trial."

"Officer Payne ran a computer search and, from Kohberger's drivers license photo, could see that he was a slim white male with bushy eyebrows. He also pulled Kohberger's phone number from the police computer—Kohberger had been stopped for speeding in Moscow and his phone number was in their computer system. From there, the phone company was able to provide phone tower records, which can tell police where a person has traveled. To the police's dismay, the phone showed no record of being near the murder house that night. Payne believed Kohberger could have left the phone in Pullman, where it had earlier pinged local phone towers, or he may have switched it to airplane mode and brought it with him to Moscow. Either way, Payne believed, it pointed to someone who knew how to avoid detection."

So this was a known area of potential vulnerability for LE for quite some time, and my guess is that this is why the D has seized upon it so aggressively.

If he switched to airplane mode, LE could still get him, even if he disabled location services/GPS. There are ways to jam it. That could make it more difficult for LE. But all BK had to do was shut the phone off, and my guess is that's just what he did. D's not going to be able to do much with that. And a quote from Sy Ray here makes me think that's just what D's doing: (From article) Ray explains that "about 2-3%" of the location data from Kohberger's phone on the night of the murders is missing and that this could be very impactful to the case. At this time, Ray believes the phone data does benefit Kohberger's case.
“The wheels fell off here. There are records that will never be supported by the data. Does not represent what it claims to represent,” Ray explained in court. “Because of the inaccuracy and missing data these are helpful for Mr. Kohberger. There are things I would have said to help the MPD if I were involved, like if we don't get those documents, it’s going to be harmful for the state, but now it’s helpful for Mr. Kohberger.”

This doesn't sound like a bombshell to me. Until I hear otherwise, I'm assuming he had the phone off while he's now claiming to have been in an area with no cell coverage.
 
If he switched to airplane mode, LE could still get him, even if he disabled location services/GPS. There are ways to jam it. That could make it more difficult for LE. But all BK had to do was shut the phone off, and my guess is that's just what he did
The thing we still don't know, but which surely experts have already determined, is which of these scenarios is true. It's not known to us but it is known to the lawyers on both sides IMO.
If he disabled GPS, that action will be logged. If he switched the phone off, or to airplane mode, that will also be logged. Phones log all of these things. I practically never switch off my phone (android), and often get a notification "you haven't restarted your phone in x number of days."
I'm fairly certain that both the defense and the prosecution know by now whether BK manually made it so his phone wouldn't report to the network, or of it was just out of range.
I'm not sure why several posters here continue to repeat that the phone was switched off as if this were a confirmed fact, when it's just a hypothesis made in the PCA that has never been publicly confirmed.
To me this is really one of the most important questions we need answered. I had hoped it would be addressed during Sy Ray's testimony, but it looks like we're going to have to wait until the trial to find out.
 
Still stuck on the issue regarding a Payne/BK interview.
From the Defense's 2nd motion to compel:
"Request 23 [...] The State responded that they have provided A V000123 discovered on 3/30/23, however, the provided recording is an in person interview with FBI Agents rather than the phone interview done by Moscow Police."
So there are indeed two separate interviews.

Payne was not present at the Idaho press conference announcing BK's arrest. I would have assumed that as lead investigator he should be there, certainly seems more justified than Scott Greene's presence there. Would Payne have been in PA then? Payne wasn't present at the PA press conference either.
But even if Payne was in PA, would he have any authority to interrogate a suspect over there, even on the phone?
Labar stated on Newsnation that BK had been interrogated for "5 to15 minutes" before invoking his rights. My impression is that this would be too short for BK to speak with both FBI and Payne in that short time.
Just a few thoughts, lots of questions and no definitive answers unfortunately.
5/12/23

3. The State has provided recordings of MPD Detective Payne’s interview with Mr.Kohberger to the Defense. The State will provide any related reports and/or notes as they are received and reviewed.

4. As with item above, the State has provided the Defense with reports,audio/video and other recordings, relating to the Defendant’s arrest andincarceration in Pennsylvania that have been received by the State.

page 3


7/11/23

In a States supplemental response to 2nd motion to compel:

Request 23.The State responded that they have provided AV000123 discovered on 3/30/23, however, the provided recording is an in person interview with FBI Agents rather than the phone interview done by Moscow Police.

The State has been informed this phone interview was completed by SA Shirley who confirmed this referenced phone interview was not recorded.

Page 3


The D was given a recording of an in person interview with FBI agentS. IMO PA
The phone interview by MPD?
First the State acknowledged it provided a phone interview recording with BP.
In the supplemental, they say there was a phone interview, it was done by Agent S, and not recorded.

IMO
Initially, both the P and D thought MPD/BP actually did a phone interview. Probably was referenced in some document. The D requested it. After trying to locate the interview, the P was informed this phone interview was done by Agent S and not MPD/BP.
IMO only two interviews - we know about. One by Agent S on the phone before arrest. One by Agents in PA after arrest.

JMO
edited to complete a sentence
edit to correct spelling
 
Last edited:
This article is from way back when in Oct 2023. Title is "The Missing Bryan Kohberger Evidence That Could Make or Break the Trial."

"Officer Payne ran a computer search and, from Kohberger's drivers license photo, could see that he was a slim white male with bushy eyebrows. He also pulled Kohberger's phone number from the police computer—Kohberger had been stopped for speeding in Moscow and his phone number was in their computer system. From there, the phone company was able to provide phone tower records, which can tell police where a person has traveled. To the police's dismay, the phone showed no record of being near the murder house that night. Payne believed Kohberger could have left the phone in Pullman, where it had earlier pinged local phone towers, or he may have switched it to airplane mode and brought it with him to Moscow. Either way, Payne believed, it pointed to someone who knew how to avoid detection."

So this was a known area of potential vulnerability for LE for quite some time, and my guess is that this is why the D has seized upon it so aggressively.

If he switched to airplane mode, LE could still get him, even if he disabled location services/GPS. There are ways to jam it. That could make it more difficult for LE. But all BK had to do was shut the phone off, and my guess is that's just what he did. D's not going to be able to do much with that. And a quote from Sy Ray here makes me think that's just what D's doing: (From article) Ray explains that "about 2-3%" of the location data from Kohberger's phone on the night of the murders is missing and that this could be very impactful to the case. At this time, Ray believes the phone data does benefit Kohberger's case.
“The wheels fell off here. There are records that will never be supported by the data. Does not represent what it claims to represent,” Ray explained in court. “Because of the inaccuracy and missing data these are helpful for Mr. Kohberger. There are things I would have said to help the MPD if I were involved, like if we don't get those documents, it’s going to be harmful for the state, but now it’s helpful for Mr. Kohberger.”

This doesn't sound like a bombshell to me. Until I hear otherwise, I'm assuming he had the phone off while he's now claiming to have been in an area with no cell coverage.
The 2-3% missing is Field Testing data along 270 and the Crime Scene. Not phone data.
LE did five days of drive testing (151:38)

The other missing data is 82 percent of the points LE did obtain were not plotted.

Why it is important according to SR
159:40
He is talking about 2-6AM the morning of the 13th
Adding the 82 % will tell a much more detailed story
Adding the drive testing will refine it even more.

 
Understood, this article linked above notes it's "'about 2-3%' of the location data from Kohberger's phone." I checked just to be certain, multiple articles are stating the same thing in the same way. Maybe the writers just figured the drive test/mapping information is so bound up with the process generally that they can state it in the manner in which they're stating it. Clearly it is closely related since he's a cell data expert and he's discussing it at such length.

The point was that the quote seems more about LE dotting the i's and crossing the t's (jmo), and that doesn't sound like any smoking gun. From that quote, I get that it's helpful to Mr. Kohberger because it's potentially harmful to the state. If D had a smoking gun, they wouldn't be burying it in technical discussion. JMO, there won't be any big revelations from this expert's testimony, but it's going to take a long time to see whether that's the case.
 
Last edited:
@Nila Aella
Thank you so much for this information!
So... There were two BK interviews, but it seems neither of them were with Payne/MPD after all.
Based on the dates of the documents you quoted, it took the prosecution two months to realize that actually their guy didn't interview BK! Amazing.
When would Payne have officially spoken with BK? He was arrested in PA and was appointed legal representation there. Upon his return to ID he invoked his right to remain silent as I understand it. Maybe I'm wrong here? Thanks

MOO
 
@girlhasnoname
Recordings of the Payne/BK interview were requested in one of the Defense's motions to compel early on.
The Prosecution replied saying they had given it.
"3. The State has provided recordings of MPD Detective Payne’s interview with Mr. Kohberger to the Defense. The State will provide any related reports and/or notes as they are received and reviewed."
When the Defense then told them that no, they didn't receive that one, the State then said what @Nila Aella noted above, which is that actually there was no Payne interview.
 
With all due respect that is exactly their job isn't it? To prove BK committed the crime which he'd of had to have been there at the scene of the crime. Afterall we're talking about the death penalty.

I also find it very interesting that Sy Ray is doing all of this pro bono.

Just my opinion. Thanks
I believe Sy Ray is doing it for the notoriety and attention. This is a case of a lifetime. He's typically been a Prosecution Witness, although I'm not sure if he's been declared an expert witness or not?

MOO
 
Understood, this article linked above notes it's "'about 2-3%' of the location data from Kohberger's phone." I checked just to be certain, multiple articles are stating the same thing in the same way. Maybe the writers just figured the drive test/mapping information is so bound up with the process generally that they can state it in the manner in which they're stating it. Clearly it is closely related since he's a cell data expert and he's discussing it at such length.

The point was that the quote seems more about LE dotting the i's and crossing the t's (jmo), and that doesn't sound like any smoking gun. From that quote, I get that it's helpful to Mr. Kohberger because it's potentially harmful to the state. If D had a smoking gun, they wouldn't be burying it in technical discussion. JMO, there won't be any big revelations from this expert's testimony, but it's going to take a long time to see whether that's the case.
IMO the defense is not burying anything in technical discussion.
SR simply explained why it is important for the D to obtain this information, clearly and under Oath.
While the press might not understand what SR testified to, the experts evaluating the data do.
IMO this data should be handed over to the D so that their expert can evaluate it.
Both sides should be able to do a complete evaluation of all the data available.
The Final CAST report and SR's analysis might reveal the same thing.
JMO
 
I've wondered if he asked if anyone else had been arrested because he was worried his father might have been because they drove back together and were pulled over twice. Maybe he worried about that?
I'm not sure he worries about anyone else. It just doesn't seem to be in his emotional makeup. Over time, I've come to feel that he wanted to know whether he was the only suspect on their radar, so he would know whether this was IT, or if he still had some chance of walking away.
 
I'm not sure he worries about anyone else. It just doesn't seem to be in his emotional makeup. Over time, I've come to feel that he wanted to know whether he was the only suspect on their radar, so he would know whether this was IT, or if he still had some chance of walking away.

My thought was (although this is a stretch that he would have such empathy), is IF his father was also arrested but for aiding and abetting.
 
I believe Sy Ray is doing it for the notoriety and attention. This is a case of a lifetime. He's typically been a Prosecution Witness, although I'm not sure if he's been declared an expert witness or not?

MOO

Yep. This is a marketing tool for him. He has not yet been declared an expert witness. He has been used as a witness for the defense in a pre-trial motion. I can't wait to see if the Defense can get him in as an expert witness - it seems to me it's probable that he will be allowed, given that he's testified in other courts.

OTOH, it appears he owns a for-profit, publicly traded company (as opposed to being a scientist who makes a living directly from scientific or engineering expertise).

And yet again, a Colorado Court ruled his software-driven analysis to be inadmissible. His bio says he mostly "consults with" law enforcement and attorneys (as opposed to "testifies at trials"). It's a really common form of consulting (like jury consulting - the goal is to provide education and info to the attorneys). He has received some criticism from other experts (for examples, type his company's name into scholar.google.com - there are just a few, dense things to read that spin around the algorithms used by ZetX (the publicly traded company of which Ray is, I believe, the founder). Up until 2019, there were small news articles showing him as the "owner" of ZetX but more recently, he is said to be working at 10-2 Technologies. I can't find his name on their website, though. Here's the link that says he's associated with those two businesses:


A broader search on Mr. Ray has provided me with perplexing results and no clear idea of how many trials he's actually testified in. There's apparently one in Montana. Here's a bit of marketing for ZetX:


It states that they use data known as TRAX and apparently, other experts believe this is not a sufficient database (and that LE/FBI have access to better data). I have to say I don't understand much of this, but here's a brief on the Montana case (and I know that other experts have criticized the method used by ZetX - but mostly not in academic publications or MSM):

^
University of Montana; scholarly article.
Long; it mentions Ray on p. 4, I believe - I really can't make heads or tails of this whole TRAX issue but I do know that Mr Ray frequently works as a consultant and I am finding little other evidence (other than this link) that he has testified. If anyone knows the names of other cases where he's taken the stand, I'd be much obliged.

IMO
 
My thought was (although this is a stretch that he would have such empathy), is IF his father was also arrested but for aiding and abetting.

It's a strange ask.

Does it imply a confession? Awareness of guilt?

Isn't it really -- I did it, but did you get the other guy?

Was it an excited utterance and even he doesn't know why he said it?

Was it carefully crafted, for just that moment, important to BK for reasons known only to him? Deflection of some sort? I find it weirdly self-incriminating.

Was he thinking of an actual one person when he said it? Did BK pull somebody into his crime, before, during or after? Whom? And in what capacity?

Just exactly how stable/not stable is he? How integrated is he? If he sees himself as some kind of actor in his own movie, was it a genuine inquiry -- I know you got me but did you get my stunt double (who is also me)? Is anyone that detached?

I'm actually surprised he said anything.

JMO
 
Yep. This is a marketing tool for him. He has not yet been declared an expert witness. He has been used as a witness for the defense in a pre-trial motion. I can't wait to see if the Defense can get him in as an expert witness - it seems to me it's probable that he will be allowed, given that he's testified in other courts.

OTOH, it appears he owns a for-profit, publicly traded company (as opposed to being a scientist who makes a living directly from scientific or engineering expertise).

And yet again, a Colorado Court ruled his software-driven analysis to be inadmissible. His bio says he mostly "consults with" law enforcement and attorneys (as opposed to "testifies at trials"). It's a really common form of consulting (like jury consulting - the goal is to provide education and info to the attorneys). He has received some criticism from other experts (for examples, type his company's name into scholar.google.com - there are just a few, dense things to read that spin around the algorithms used by ZetX (the publicly traded company of which Ray is, I believe, the founder). Up until 2019, there were small news articles showing him as the "owner" of ZetX but more recently, he is said to be working at 10-2 Technologies. I can't find his name on their website, though. Here's the link that says he's associated with those two businesses:


A broader search on Mr. Ray has provided me with perplexing results and no clear idea of how many trials he's actually testified in. There's apparently one in Montana. Here's a bit of marketing for ZetX:


It states that they use data known as TRAX and apparently, other experts believe this is not a sufficient database (and that LE/FBI have access to better data). I have to say I don't understand much of this, but here's a brief on the Montana case (and I know that other experts have criticized the method used by ZetX - but mostly not in academic publications or MSM):

^
University of Montana; scholarly article.
Long; it mentions Ray on p. 4, I believe - I really can't make heads or tails of this whole TRAX issue but I do know that Mr Ray frequently works as a consultant and I am finding little other evidence (other than this link) that he has testified. If anyone knows the names of other cases where he's taken the stand, I'd be much obliged.

IMO
He testified to his credentials in the last hearing.
Somewhere near 100 cases as an expert witness in both State and Federal cases.
His career started in 1995 and lead him to his current work of consulting.
The aftermath of the CO case was interesting especially what CO LE said about that case and the steps/instructions they gave to their agencies which continued using the program afterwards. JMO

47:44 SR goes through his extensive history all the way up to the point he sold his company and beyond.
58:03 At some point all of the federal agencies have used his product in their training
58:52 Thousands and thousands of hours looking at phone records (consulting)
59:22 Testifying as an expert: roughly 100 times in both State and Federal


I was able to find his cases, just go to his current company
I haven't done it, but you can get the names and then probably look them up in court records in whatever State they happened in.

JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
167
Guests online
1,572
Total visitors
1,739

Forum statistics

Threads
599,486
Messages
18,095,882
Members
230,862
Latest member
jusslikeme
Back
Top