ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 67

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sincere question as I have no knowledge regarding search warrant receipts: If swabs of plumbing were, indeed, taken -- would those swabs have to be listed as items taken?

I would think so. But the better method is to have a plumber come in and remove the entire U shaped trap for the sink and the tub. It *can* involve taking out the tub. I got to thinking that such a major thing might have been reserved for a separate warrant, but I sure hope they do it. At any rate, they'd want the actual trap itself if at all possible, very difficult to know if one has an adequate swab.

If no one has used the tub and it's still a crime scene, that evidence is still there. It *should* be there if he used his shower after the murders.

Maybe they have evidence from elsewhere (regarding his shower). I doubt it, but it's an interesting thought.

I was surprised at the amount of people who said they do this all the time. I’ve never put my trash in a neighbor’s bin, and it initially struck me as suspicious that he did so.

It's illegal where I live and it's illegal many places. But BK probably didn't care about that at the time.

It’s also upsetting that something providential didn’t happen, such as a cop noticing the circling and pulling him over.

Hard to notice in a college town, with DoorDash and so on. At the quietest hour of the day. A policeman could have watched him, I suppose, then he would have seen a man dressed in black clothing, possibly wearing a mask, enter the back door of an unlocked student house. I would hope that would be enough to trigger concern.

I pray to God the human hair that was found was from the victims. Blood is very sticky. it's logical that during his "work" strands of hair would have clung to the blood. In the dark, he would not have noticed. Animal hair? If he wanted to work in silence, I think his first act/s would have had to have been to the throats of his victims. to disable airways, speech etc. I can see him grabbing each by their hair for leverage as he committed the murder. I think the prosecution's best hope will come from that apt.

But according to what the Coroner said - he did NOT do this. We've talked about it a lot. He would have had to grab the victims up from their sleep by the hair, I agree. But Coroner said that "most" were "sleeping" (lying down in their beds anyway) and the wounds were to the TORSO and upper body (not the throat).

Throat wounds spray copious amounts of blood onto the murderer as well. Bodies would have been found in postures consistent with that manner of death and would not appear to be sleeping.

That's not what he did, IMO.
 
So that Gray dude did a video about his journey after the murders, and there are about 16 minutes that are unaccounted for using GPS data. The missing 16 minutes occurred on the first leg of the trip so he assumes he ditched his clothes and weapon rather early in the 50 minute trip. IMO
Possibly. The area up there is very rural, so it's very possible cell service was spotty.

I do believe he got rid of the clothing and weapon shortly after the crime. If so, that might have been one of the only things he got right. However, LE doesn't really need those items since it appears they have other ample evidence against him.
 
And why are these two items listed as ONE (Item #2 on list) rather than each have a separate line item? Were they attached somehow? I find this odd. Does anyone else have an explanation?
Didn't another poster state that clothing or uniforms purchased for work/school use were tax deductible? Perhaps, BK stuck the Dickie's tag on back of the receipt as a reminder that this was a deduction for his taxes. Just a WAG. :)
 
But to what purpose? Just as a distraction? Would a judge allow that? MOO
Defense will or should want to argue he wasn't there. It wasn't him. It was some other guy. And even that guy might not have been there to kill people because the eyewitness didn't call police, etc.
 
or did they even ask her to try to identify the man she saw in the hallway...did he see her? make eye contact? if so she may have been in extreme fear or thought she was dreaming and tried to sleep.
Memory is such a funky thing, especially related to trauma. Studies show that every time we remember something we actually slightly alter the very memory we're remembering. With trauma, much of the time we relive a memory over and over until we get help processing it to calm it down. I'm definitely a big proponent of believing victims, but it isn't so simple as just asking someone to say what they remembered. Our brains protect us from trauma to keep our whole organism safe, which is why you see trauma victims do the weirdest things like laughing at inappropriate moments, appear like they don't have emotion, not report a crime, stay silent instead of screaming etc. They will have to see where the roommates are in their process before they bring them back in.

I'm hoping they have trauma based LE dealing with them, if they do have any further need of them.
 
I agree. I think D will have to testify so the prosecutor can lay out the timeline of everything and she's the only person who can tell the jury what it was like in that house during that short time. I'm also confident they will handle that as gently as possible, to also get ahead of anything the defense will try and do.

It's very possible that, once we hear the whole story, D's experience that night will make a lot more sense than it does right now. She could even have had a tv on, or been playing music while she slept, which could have covered some of the sounds. I used to do one or the other every night when I was that age. I also think that, if D is as traumatized as I certainly would be by what happened, the PD cannot be to aggressive with her. It will alienate the jury and that doesn't help her client.

MOOooo
IMO She is not on trial and does not have to justify why she didn't call the police at 4.30am. She went to bed so did not contaminate the crime scene that she didn't know existed. As to the next morning, I would think that the prosecution would want to establsih that the two surviving roommates and any friends who arrived did not inadvertantly contaminate either of the crime scenes so I would expect them to be called and cross examined over those points, but not to be grilled over the timing of the call to emergency services. MOO. Would a judge allow these potential witnesses to be questioned about why? Why - because we wanted to contaiminate the crime scene? MOO
 
So is it possible that LE already has the test results back on the items taken via the search warrant of BK’s apartment?

I would very much assume so.

My best guess is that they swabbed drains and sinks at the the time and tested on site and found nothing of value (six weeks post crime and all). That explains why swabs are not on the Service Return Doc. I don't think they woudn't have swabbed drains, they had to be sure, but the chances were low. MOO I welcome anyone with expert knowledge to comment!

If so that's counter to their own forensic handbook and to all standard practice in forensics. It would speak to a level of investigatorial incompetence that I frankly have never seen.

A NEGATIVE swab is STILL EVIDENCE (possibly exculpatory and therefore MUST be delivered to the defense). If that were to be true, any evidence found in Pullman would be suspect.

Let's say they also had the FBI's mobile unit to test such a swab. They could use a snake-like device to get stuff from two drains. It's now evidence! They can't just take it out to the mobile unit and then hide the fact that it came back negative for what they were seeking. Nor can they take it out of the place at all without calling it evidence. And there's no way they brought a DNA sequencer into the bathroom.

IMO.
 
There would have been no need for the murderer to pick up a knife or sheath at any store. They're all over garage sales, flea markets, and craigslist.

I know. The point is, this particular model can be bought through Walmart and he had a walmart receipt so that's why I said anything about it, plus it's a newer, 150th anniversary model so probably wouldn't be at a garage sale.
 
I'm standing by my theory that, as successful as he was academically, maybe he wasn't in a place personally that he wanted to be at this stage of his life. No wife, no girlfriend, no significant other on the horizon. No job prospects. Close to graduating with a degree that might actually be useless unless he wanted to go into university level teaching (which I don't think he did).

We know from his past that he had LE (and Army Rangers) aspirations, but it appears the closest he ever got to that was a short stint as a security officer at a school. What was his next step in life? Did he really want a career? Who would hire him with nothing but book knowledge and next to no job experience in his preferred field?

I honestly think he did have an "eff it" moment like you said. He committed this crime, likely hoping to get away with it, but maybe not really caring if he did get caught. He could spend his time in prison writing his memoirs, maybe even get his former professor to coauthor a book with him. Perhaps he was in love with the idea of hundreds of thousands of people being fascinated with this crime, and, subsequently intrigued by what kind of person could commit such a horrible act.

That sounds completely plausible. Well done!

But I do think he really didn't want to get caught...nor thought that he would get caught. Hw wanted to become the leading authority on the unsolved "Moscow Knife Sheath Murders" case.

Teach it in his class...because he was lucky enough to have it happen so close to him and right under his eyes. Write a book about it. Become a leading authority on the subject.
 
I don't see any of that on here. I more often see derogatory comments towards BK calling him names. He is well educated, and has obtained degrees the VAST majority of Americans never do. If he is guilty of these crimes, he certainly made mistakes while committing them. Beyond that, there is no need to insult his intelligence, IMO.
As I've said here before (and MOO), there was likely a big gap between imagining using a knife to slaughter 4 people as if it were a scene on Criminal Minds or in a slasher movie and actually doing it, when someone fights back or cries, and when the blood is spurting and the killer is stepping in it, and when the noise and smells in a confined space, and likely In the dark are disorienting. Here's a sort of silly example of what I mean: when I imagine myself doing yoga, I imagine my form is awesome and I look slender and fit doing it. Then reality intrudes when I see myself in the mirror and I realize yoga is harder than I imagine.
 
Possibly. The area up there is very rural, so it's very possible cell service was spotty.

I do believe he got rid of the clothing and weapon shortly after the crime. If so, that might have been one of the only things he got right. However, LE doesn't really need those items since it appears they have other ample evidence against him.
He was just saying that the trip should only take 35 minutes, but it took BK 50, and the extra time is in the beginning of the trip because the amount of time for the 2nd leg was as expected.
 
I'm saying I'm not convinced he did it based on the fact there are many theories being spun out of the few actual facts that have been revealed.
I haven't gotten enough facts to determine if the man is guilty of 4 murders.
I find the vehicle and phone data in the probable cause affadavit to be convincing. And that almost certainly is not all of what LE has. MOO.
 
Didn't another poster state that clothing or uniforms purchased for work/school use were tax deductible? Perhaps, BK stuck the Dickie's tag on back of the receipt as a reminder that this was a deduction for his taxes. Just a WAG. :)
Well, he has done more moronic things, so this wouldn't be completely out of the question. But it would appear to me that they were somehow attached to one another to be listed as one item, IMO
 
He took the loooong way home, which was about 35 miles (check out Moscow to Gennesee, ID then to Uniontown and Johnson, WA, and finally home to Pullman). He had plenty of opportunities to get rid of the weapon and I think that's why he took that strange route home.

It will likely be someone walking their dog years in the future who eventually discovers the weapon, if he did toss it out his car window. It's always like that!
I'm still on the fence with all the evidence (as soon as the I hear it was more than touch DNA or those belongings in his house have their blood or hair I'll be all in), so I am struggling to understand how everyone who thinks he's guilty is trying to explain his meandering before and after the crime. There are so many things that people are saying "well, that was just dumb" about that it begs the question... does it give you any doubt? He drove around such that his car was seen, he did a three point turn, he kept receipts, he registered his car (btw, the registration was going to expire 11/20), he went to the doctor and his hairdresser... all these things that no one in their right mind would do after a crime.

I'm not saying he didn't do it, just that it doesn't truly seem open and shut here and I'll eat my words very gladly if more evidence comes proving him completely guilty, so bookmark this.
 
I know. The point is, this particular model can be bought through Walmart and he had a walmart receipt so that's why I said anything about it, plus it's a newer, 150th anniversary model so probably wouldn't be at a garage sale.
SMART! Of course, thanks!
 
The trash story has never actually been verified either, correct? Just a "sources say" type of article? JMO

I dunno. I thought it was actually observed by LE and they went immediately and took the trash.

ABC news said Federal Investigators saw him put the trash in the neighbor's bin. MSN says the same.

Newsweek says so too and adds the detail that the trash was then collected and is in evidence.


If we're going to start second guessing MSM sources with no evidence of our own, it will get fractious.
 
If CNN is touting it as original reporting then their threshold to air it or publish it is 2 distinct, corroborating sources, if anonymous.
[regarding the trash can story]-- CNN said multiple law enforcement sources. There are 3 agencies--PA State Police, FBI, and Moscow PD so all they would need is one from say PA and Moscow. People like to talk.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
117
Guests online
920
Total visitors
1,037

Forum statistics

Threads
589,930
Messages
17,927,798
Members
228,004
Latest member
CarpSleuth
Back
Top