4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #97

[jepop]

Date of issue was Nov 29th
Payment Due by Dec 29th

View attachment 548926

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article287365665.html

I did not say it was proof of deliberate deception. That is something the D will have to prove with supporting evidence.

I was not implying they had a name Nov 29th. The public does not know when the IGG was initiated/completed nor when the family tree was initiated/completed. The public does not know the details of what was done nor how long it took by either agency. It IS supposed to take weeks. IMO LE knew his name before he went on Christmas break.

I am saying that BP did NOT know about the WSU car discovery until December 20. I was responding to the idea that the D case falls apart because they got BKs name from the WSU query and not the IGG. And how the car change fits into that timeline.

And I am saying I believe the PCA was misleading.

JMO

Ok, understood you believe the PCA is misleading.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I’ve thought all along he did it because he thought he could somehow test the criminal justice system & thought he was smart/educated enough to get away with it by some technicality or loophole during trial.

The body cam footage where he was pulled over for entering an intersection before clear gives a glimpse into his thinking & shows how he has issues with accepting he was wrong & moving on. I found myself saying aloud, "it doesn’t matter what the traffic codes are in PA, you’re in WA, dummy" but BK just kept hammering on that point.

ETA punctuation, clarity

Right, I linked that video a couple of threads ago to show that BK is the smartest man in the room (cell now) in his mind and surely wasn't going to take a simple warning, no ticket, encounter with a female LE without debating and defending it to the 100th degree.

Shaddup BK, just say "Oops, sorry Officer" and move on like 99% of people would do. I wonder if he would of reacted the same way if stopped by a male LE Officer?

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

I'll take your word for it that receipt from private lab was 29 November. But that's not an issue or any sort of proof of deliberate deception in the PCA.IMO.

According to the PCA and State's Motion for Protective order, private lab developed an snp profile and "commenced" IGG. Then the FBI took over the IGG from private lab ( Othram I believe) and went on to do standard IGG investigative work using the SNP profile. This would have included the longer term task of developing a family tree. Imo that probably took weeks. Moo BK was not identified via IGG by 29th November if that is what you are implying. Or at the very least if lab receipted LE for their work on 29th Nov that in no way implies LE had BK's name on that date. Moo

See PCA plus p4 of link below

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-222805/061623+States+Motion+for+Protective+Order.pdf

Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest

I think LE would have turned over their DNA results to Othram for a RUSH GGI service after they did not find a match in CODIS. (We do see that Rush service being billed on the invoice)

This was a quadruple high profile homicide on a University campus. A mass murderer was on the loose and LE would have used any avenue available to them as soon as possible.

JMO

 

[INfisherman]

Right, I linked that video a couple of threads ago to show that BK is the smartest man in the room (cell now) in his mind and surely wasn't going to take a simple warning, no ticket, encounter with a female LE without debating and defending it to the 100th degree.

Shaddup BK, just say "Oops, sorry Officer" and move on like 99% of people would do. I wonder if he would of reacted the same way if stopped by a male LE Officer?

JMO

Thanks for reminding me - apologies for being lazy & not going back to find it to acknowledge your post/credit.

Regarding a male officer, maybe not to the extent he did with the female officer, but I’d almost guarantee he’d bring it up. His background has to involve debate/questioning things of some sort & just add that to his self-inflated ego concerning his intelligence. This all reeks of a smug "I’m going to get away with this while everyone knows full well I did it" sort of approach to me, as stated earlier. Apologies if I sound like a broken record. He’d have been better served thinning out the 2 hedgerows above his eyes.

JMO

 

[mrjitty]

I think LE would have turned over their DNA results to Othram for a RUSH GGI service after they did not find a match in CODIS. (We do see that Rush service being billed on the invoice)

This was a quadruple high profile homicide on a University campus. A mass murderer was on the loose and LE would have used any avenue available to them as soon as possible.

JMO

right. i am struggling to see why LE should be penalised for good police work unless and until the highest court rules this unconstitutional.

But even then i question whether you can throw out the PCA on that basis.

MOO.

 

[Nila Aella]

I find this analysis interesting.

Of course we are groping around in the dark a bit but I think what you suggest raises one interesting question. At some point, LE put 2+2 together that the cars are the same, as reflected in the PCA. This "lightbulb" was apparently correct.

Does it actually matter how the affiant was able to do that?

It's not exactly unusual that LE are working on an investigative theory from some other intelligence (e.g a source). So at some point they realise the cars are the same, and the FBI guy corrects his analysis.

All fine in my opinion. What would not make it fine, is if the source intel came from an unconstitutional search, which I am guess, is the real crux of the D argument?

MOO

Was the lightbulb correct?
Yes it matters.
Waiting for the direct testimony of the expert and dates for clarity. Although we are in the dark as to content of communications and dates, the P and D are not.
IMO The timeline is important to the D for the contitutional issue raised about the IGG and all that followed.

Yes!
IMO Unconstitutional searches is the crux.

I am particularly interested in learning more about the early federal GJ subpoenas and the duplicative MPD warrants that came months later.

JMO, IANAL

 

[girlhasnoname]

Thanks for reminding me - apologies for being lazy & not going back to find it to acknowledge your post/credit.

Regarding a male officer, maybe not to the extent he did with the female officer, but I’d almost guarantee he’d bring it up. His background has to involve debate/questioning things of some sort & just add that to his self-inflated ego concerning his intelligence. This all reeks of a smug "I’m going to get away with this while everyone knows full well I did it" sort of approach to me, as stated earlier. Apologies if I sound like a broken record. He’d have been better served thinning out the 2 hedgerows above his eyes.

JMO

No worries, BK did win the Regional Extemporaneous Speaking Contest in 2018 IIRC so he's had practice. Hah.

Yes, people discount those 'bushy' eyebrows, but if you look at BK's DL photo, they are clearly a defining feature. Roommate DM noticed them and her description is dead on. Funny how the Defense has kept them nice and trimmed since his arrest.

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

I found this info. it may have been brought up earlier on, but I wanted to repost it just because it seems to be more enlightening now with what we know about BK leaving no evidence at the scene other than the DNA on the sheath:

<snipped & BBM>

DeSales University boasts a robust criminal justice program, promoting “hands on training” and courses taught by renowned professors.

“[DeSales University has] an entire house, they call it the crime scene house, that is used for simulations, for crime scene investigation or collecting evidence or crime scene photography or responding to other emergencies,” Novak said.

Also noteworthy was this snippet from his neighbor M at the Pullman Apartments:

Kohberger kept tabs on the University of Idaho murders, continuing to bring them up in conversation before his arrest, according to M.

“He was like, ‘Oh, did you hear about these murders that happened?’ And it was like so short after they actually happened, there was barely any news articles out, so there wasn’t much that I could have read. So I was like, ‘Yeah, man, it’s crazy. Yeah, of course I’ve heard about them,” M said. “He was like, ‘Yeah, it seems like they don’t have any leads … And then he’s like, ‘Yeah, it seems like they think it was a crime of passion.”

JMO

Bryan Kohberger’s life under the radar: Walking in the footsteps of an alleged mass murderer

 

[girlhasnoname]

right. i am struggling to see why LE should be penalised for good police work unless and until the highest court rules this unconstitutional.

But even then i question whether you can throw out the PCA on that basis.

MOO.

I don't believe that has any chance of happening, just my humble opinion.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I’ve thought all along he did it because he thought he could somehow test the criminal justice system & thought he was smart/educated enough to get away with it by some technicality or loophole during trial.

The body cam footage where he was pulled over for entering an intersection before clear gives a glimpse into his thinking & shows how he has issues with accepting he was wrong & moving on. I found myself saying aloud, "it doesn’t matter what the traffic codes are in PA, you’re in WA, dummy" but BK just kept hammering on that point.

ETA punctuation, clarity

My perception of that road stop and all his questions was that he was attempting to

a) cover his paranoia about being fairly randomly stopped, maybe worried something else was really going on, trying to suss that out;

b) showboat his 'forensic' questioning skills, knowledge, and academic prowess by debating and discussing the situation at hand - attempted oneupmanship;

c) keeping the female officer talking in a way that could even be explained as trying gain her interest in him / flirt with her (ineptly);

JMO

 

[mrjitty]

I don't believe that has any chance of happening, just my humble opinion.

I don't see the question being resolved pre-trial in any event. If he is convicted, then it might wend it's way through the appeal courts

 

[mrjitty]

Was the lightbulb correct?
Yes it matters.
Waiting for the direct testimony of the expert and dates for clarity. Although we are in the dark as to content of communications and dates, the P and D are not.
IMO The timeline is important to the D for the contitutional issue raised about the IGG and all that followed.

Yes!
IMO Unconstitutional searches is the crux.

I am particularly interested in learning more about the early federal GJ subpoenas and the duplicative MPD warrants that came months later.

JMO, IANAL

It is certainly hard to discuss without the pleadings in full.

I guess what I am interested in, is assuming the D could show the expert changed his opinion basically because of the DNA search, does this matter?

I am not sure it is material why the affiant and the FBI expert reached the conclusion, so long as they did in fact decide that.

 

[wendy44]

The defense needs the model year correction to happen after the IGG is conducted. As they continue to imply that the IGG led to shortcuts in the investigation and LE tunnel vision. And in this specific case, AT implying (IMO) that after learning about Kohlberger via IGG... LE adjusted the model year because they were looking for a 2013 and Kohlberger's Elantra was a 2015. JMO.

Snipped by me--this is exactly it. The defense needs for the model year correction to be after the name was produced from IGG for two reasons. One, to claim that law enforcement is fitting the evidence to the suspect. They only believed it to be the later model after they found out BK drove a later model.

Two, recall what the defense wrote in the Motion to Suppress regarding the white Elantra. "...the State must show it would have been discovered anyway...The State cannot make this showing..."

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2024/111424-Motion-Supress-Memorandum-Support-White-Hyundai.pdf

The defense needs to show that the other evidence would not have led to BK and the car is an essential part of that other evidence. The defense will likely argue that law enforcement thought it was an earlier model (before IGG) and therefore would never have run BK's plates and looked at his DL photo etc etc. The defense needs to convince the court that without the IGG, BK would never have been a suspect in order to get the IGG and every warrant that resulted from the IGG thrown out (which they will say is all the warrants). The argument about the model years is a vital component of proving "The State cannot make this showing."

JMO

 

[CKS]

It is certainly hard to discuss without the pleadings in full.

I guess what I am interested in, is assuming the D could show the expert changed his opinion basically because of the DNA search, does this matter?

I am not sure it is material why the affiant and the FBI expert reached the conclusion, so long as they did in fact decide that.

IMO b/c one is an 'expert' hence FBI expert and Payne had been a cop for what two years? The FBI expert did not change his opinion. Payne changed the years and mislead people to think the FBI expert changed it is what the defense is claiming imo. To be CAST expert you need 500 hours of training and Payne I doubt had nowhere near that.

Payne doesn’t have anything to back up his changing of the Elantra year range to include 2014-2016 Elantras and likely only did that in the PCA to justify arresting Kohberger. Or if there really is some FBI CAST expert why wouldn't the prosecution call them at the trial?


All moo

 

[Balthazar]

MOO but it's not the year of the car that was lied about. IMO it's that Payne was the one who switched the years but in court said the FBI was the one that switched it.

I agree with this.

 

[Boxer]

Snipped by me--this is exactly it. The defense needs for the model year correction to be after the name was produced from IGG for two reasons. One, to claim that law enforcement is fitting the evidence to the suspect. They only believed it to be the later model after they found out BK drove a later model.

Two, recall what the defense wrote in the Motion to Suppress regarding the white Elantra. "...the State must show it would have been discovered anyway...The State cannot make this showing..."

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2024/111424-Motion-Supress-Memorandum-Support-White-Hyundai.pdf

The defense needs to show that the other evidence would not have led to BK and the car is an essential part of that other evidence. The defense will likely argue that law enforcement thought it was an earlier model (before IGG) and therefore would never have run BK's plates and looked at his DL photo etc etc. The defense needs to convince the court that without the IGG, BK would never have been a suspect in order to get the IGG and every warrant that resulted from the IGG thrown out (which they will say is all the warrants). The argument about the model years is a vital component of proving "The State cannot make this showing."

JMO

They were looking high and low for an Elantra, any Elantra, ita owner and sriver was going to be investigated. MOO many were reported along the way, at least one of the others made the news.

 

[Boxer]

The idea that the model year, which barely discernable between years can be the basis for eliminating the DNA evidence ia unjust.
A car matching camera footage if a car circling King Road House before the murders and the speeding away belings to the man who left his DNA at the crine scene.

 

[INfisherman]

The idea that the model year, which barely discernable between years can be the basis for eliminating the DNA evidence ia unjust.
A car matching camera footage if a car circling King Road House before the murders and the speeding away belings to the man who left his DNA at the crine scene.

I agree. The 2011-2016 Elantra has the exact same sheet metal on the exterior for the entire generation. Only exterior plastic was changed for mid-cycle refreshes, with any interior changes being irrelevant. This is done by most, if not all automakers. Exterior sheet metal is only changed when new generations/chassis are introduced.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

I find this analysis interesting.

It's not exactly unusual that LE are working on an investigative theory from some other intelligence (e.g a source). So at some point they realise the cars are the same, and the FBI guy corrects his analysis.

All fine in my opinion. What would not make it fine, is if the source intel came from an unconstitutional search, which I am guess, is the real crux of the D argument?

MOO

SBM

That's not fine at all, IMO or in the opinion of the law. The evidence is supposed to lead you to the suspect. All of the evidence. If you have a suspect and some evidence doesn't lead you there, then you keep an open mind or you dismiss the evidence as irrelevant. You can't name a suspect, then alter evidence to make it match. That's how verdicts are thrown out.

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

SBM

That's not fine at all, IMO or in the opinion of the law. The evidence is supposed to lead you to the suspect. All of the evidence. If you have a suspect and some evidence doesn't lead you there, then you keep an open mind or you dismiss the evidence as irrelevant. You can't name a suspect, then alter evidence to make it match. That's how verdicts are thrown out.

MOO

No one altered any evidence though.

What was altered was the analysis of the evidence.