ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 71

Status
Not open for further replies.
Totally agree that Bryan may have stalked the girls from their work to their home after their shifts.

This is a common stalker tactic, and I recommend that young people* (if possible) should not take jobs where they stay late, close up by themselves, or walk unescorted to their cars after dark.

*Edit to add: Young people, and women of any age (since about 50% of minimum wage workers are over 25)
To add if I may...also remove or cover work clothing that list the logo or name of the workplace. It astounds me how many people, male and female walk around in company gear even when not a working day!
 
My opinion is based mainly upon the countless reporters who commented that the house always seemed somewhat dark and secluded, sliders are quite quick and easy to breach, young people are frequently lax about home security, the wooded area would allow someone to watch the home.

Perhaps it's his choice of weapon that leads me to think he considered himself more of a hunter than a stalker but I could be wrong.
Just by definition a hunter IS a stalker.
 
From Ashleigh Banfield's program, info she says came from "a couple of sources familiar with the investigation" on "the order" in which the four of them were killed (also the "manner" but it is very graphic as she warns).

So: unnamed sources = take it with a grain of salt, or if you don't care for AB's show, as mods have reiterated, please just "roll and scroll".

Paraphrasing, AB's sources say:

Kaylee and Maddie were killed first in Maddie's bedroom on the 3rd floor.

Ethan was killed next in the area of Xana's bedroom door on the 2nd floor.

Xana was killed last in her bedroom and she had wounds that indicate she fought the attacker extensively.

Sources: Idaho victim Xana Kernodle was killed last and fought back | Banfield

Officer Payne reports in the PCA that he first saw Xana in her bedroom, then Ethan in the room. Wouldn't he have mentioned seeing Ethan first if he was near the bedroom door?
 
I'm not convinced that he stalked any individual(s) in a conventional sense and other than media narrative, nothing has been presented to convince me it's fact.

I'm leaning toward the fact that he was looking to kill and the house itself provided what he felt was the ideal location to carry out his plan.
Serious question. Would he not be stalking in order to know the house had ideal location for his plan?
 
IF he did those things, then he could present the evidence, but I don't recall reading that he claimed to have done any of those things. And the point is that he may not have done any of the things you listed, and apparently, he did not, but not doing those things does not mean he committed murder. jmo imo

And a person cannot always prove one's innocence. that's why the innocence project exists, for example, and many people have been wrongly accused. people also get framed imo jmo. Innocence Project - Help us put an end to wrongful convictions!

And yes, wherever we go, we leave traces, but what if the only place he went was the road and the car? or what if he claims his car and phone were taken? my point is that oftentimes the defense won't present evidence either because they can't and/or they don't have to. And failure to produce evidence of an alibi is not evidence of guilt. jmo imo


He can't claim that his car and phone were stolen because he would have reported them stolen, likely before the murders were even discovered because they weren't discovered until noon. And If this was the case I don't think he would be sitting in jail right now.
Plus he could claim his knife was in the car, he was framed.

Yes he could give his alibi as having just been in his car driving all night but his car would be captured on many cameras that people have with a street view. It's impossible to drive for hours and not be caught on camera. He gives them the route he drove and cameras verify it and he has his alibi.

After watching hundreds of true crime shows, I would want a lawyer with me before I said a word, even of course, assuming I was innocent. I have seen so many crime shows where the police get so focused on one potential defendant that they are like a dog with a bone. Many of those people they focused on did not have attorneys, answered all of their questions and even took a polygraph test. I would not take a polygraph either because they cannot be relied on which is why they are not allowed in a court of law. Sociopaths pass them every day of the week, and innocent people flunk just as often. I find myself livid watching some of these cases where the police so focused on only one person, to the exclusion of almost all others, it is horrible to watch. Of course the police have to focus on those closest to the murder victim, but so often it is a singular focus. There is a series on Oxygen called "Unexpected Killers"- I keep saying for the police there should not be unexpected killers because they should not limit their field of suspects to only those close to the victim.

Exactly what happened in the Ohio murder case where a family of 4 killed 8 members of another family over child custody.

The innocent brother and sister of the victims discovered the crime scenes and were harassed for months by LE asking " how much were you paid to kill your family?" They gave multiple lie detector tests to them and when the brother failed it they put a GPS tracker on his truck. He discovered it and not knowing who was tracking him, he broke it so they arrested him. Charges were dismissed not long after. Plus, the real killers were claiming these relatives killed them for insurance money, even trying to get people to call this fake "tip" into the police tip hot line.
 
thank you for sharing these. imo jmo Shannon has some personal reasons for wanting to speak out. I wonder what those could be? on a petty note, I really hate to see errors in legal pleadings. imo jmo

I wonder if something in the media is inaccurate and she wants to set the record straight? MOO.
 
Edited to say: I don't think it has anything to do with intelligence or education. IMO, an innocent person would answer all of LE's questions regardless of where they went to the best of their ability. Whether or not they had a lawyer or in what manner they were arrested, MOO

IMO, that is the worst thing anyone can do, whether they're innocent or not. If you're a suspect in a murder case, you absolutely should not talk to LE without an attorney.

MOO
 
I think BK is probably guilty, jmo imo, but I want to watch them try this case. I do hope they have more than in the PCA jmo imo.
Rsbm

I think BK himself (knows he's guilty and) wants to watch them try this case.

I think it's in his nature to be a watcher. In his car, in a cafeteria, in the back corner of a bar, in a courtroom.

Trial will be entertainment for him, marginally less dull than his coursework. And he'll approach it with creepy detachment.

I can imagine his defense making sure he gets a fair trial, objecting vigorously, challenging DNA and digital evidence as unscientific, hoping to bore and confuse the jury. I don't see them putting forth an alibi or a SODDI defense. I hope he'll be adequately defended, convicted BARD and sentenced into oblivion.

Sadly, I suspect instead he'll sit patiently in prison, waiting for someone from the next generation of criminal forensics to put forth a thesis and dial up the prison, for the interviews he knew would come.

Clarice indeed.

JMO
 
He can't claim that his car and phone were stolen because he would have reported them stolen, likely before the murders were even discovered because they weren't discovered until noon. And If this was the case I don't think he would be sitting in jail right now.
Plus he could claim his knife was in the car, he was framed.

jmo imo he could say he never knew. it's only once he was accused that he realizes this must be what happened, and off the hook for reporting them stolen. imo jmo. I don't believe that's whaat happened, but can I prove it? no. I'm hoping that if he's guilty, the prosecution can prove it bard. I hope they have physical evidence placing him in the house - blood, please or hair. something other than touch dna. jmo imo

he is not glued to his car, so they need to prove the he was in the car. jmo imo. what seems logical 'of course he was in it' can't jut be assumed at trial. esp with the theft issues with Elantras. Kia and Hyundai under Fire from Cities, Insurers over Too Easily Stolen Vehicles

I think it would be worse for him if he lied about an alibi and then couldn't prove it.imo jmo.
 
Last edited:
Hmm...
But how can a person leave evidence at a place he/she never visited?

Sure, sometimes ppl get "framed" by real perps.

But it only shows the poor effort of investigators b/c real perps leave much more evidence than a "framed" innocent person with "planted" one.
JMO
I'm sure they have tightened up over the years...but this false DNA case beats em all...

The Phantom of Heilbronn, often alternatively referred to as the "Woman Without a Face", was a hypothesized unknown female serial killer whose existence was inferred from DNA evidence found at numerous crime scenes in Austria, France and Germany from 1993 to 2009. The six murders among these included that of police officer Michèle Kiesewetter, in Heilbronn, Germany on 25 April 2007.

The only connection between the crimes was the presence of DNA from a single female, which had been recovered from 40 crime scenes, ranging from murders to burglaries. In late March 2009, investigators concluded that there was no "phantom criminal", and the DNA had already been present on the cotton swabs used for collecting DNA samples; it belonged to a woman who worked at the factory where they were made.

 
Last edited:
handing over 995 pages of documents and close to 2,000 photos as part of the discovery process,
Does anyone know how BK reviews discovery documents to "help with his case"? Are copies hard copies or digital uploaded or emailed from court/his lawyer to his tablet? The tablets provide legal research with up-to-date case information. Meaning his up-to-date case information?

What is the Idaho rule on BK's access to his discovery documents? All or only part of the docs?

Eerie feelings of BK revisiting the crime scene in discovery photos. MOO

Not really the answer, closest I could find below:
Bounds v. Smith, 430 US 817, 97 S.Ct. 1491 (1978), the supreme court held that in order to ensure prisoner's right of access to the courts, prison officials supply prisoners with paper, writing tools, notary services and postage.

TX: A lawyer "can share the discovery with your client by letting them read it, but you cannot give copies to the client unless you have permission from judge or the prosecutor. Many bad things happen when discovery is found in a client’s jail cell"

edit for: MOO and Twisting post snipped by me for amount of discovery documents.
 
Last edited:
imo jmo, but that's exactly what an intelligent person would do, regardless of guilt or innocence. jmo imo If LE started out with how's your day going?, I'd answer. As soon as they flipped to asking about murder, I'd ask for an attorney. And with his education, it looks like the is the one thing that sunk in. I wonder when they mirandized him?

They normally read Miranda Rights when slapping the cuffs on you and telling you that you are under arrest. They have to give the Miranda Rights as soon as they place you under arrest.
This is important because anything a suspect says in a police car on their way to jail can be used against them, but nothing they say in the car can be used against them if they were not read their Miranda Rights. The suspect could confess in the car and they couldn't use it without those Miranda Rights.

He can't say he was at home, as his car was recorded leaving Pullman that night.
There is a cctv camera at his accommodation there.

If he was caught driving out of his apartment complex that night then they would have video of him returning and this would help prove he was driving the white Hyundai Elantra and wasn't home during the murders or at home at 9:00am when the white Hyundai Elantra was seen again at the crime scene.

Is there a link to show he was caught on camera leaving his apartment building?
 
They normally read Miranda Rights when slapping the cuffs on you and telling you that you are under arrest. They have to give the Miranda Rights as soon as they place you under arrest.
This is important because anything a suspect says in a police car on their way to jail can be used against them, but nothing they say in the car can be used against them if they were not read their Miranda Rights. The suspect could confess in the car and they couldn't use it without those Miranda Rights.
Miranda has nothing to due with handcuffs or arrest. You may be handcuffed while being only detained. Miranda falls into when the police ask you questions about a crime. They can talk about the weather or baseball or whatever. Before questioning about a crime is when Miranda must be read.
 
jmo imo he could say he never knew. it's only once he was accused that he realizes this must be what happened, and off the hook for reporting them stolen. imo jmo. I don't believe that's whaat happened, but can I prove it? no. I'm hoping that if he's guilty, the prosecution can prove it bard. I hope they have physical evidence placing him in the house - blood, please or hair. something other than touch dna. jmo imo

he is not glued to his car, so they need to prove the he was in the car. jmo imo. what seems logical 'of course he was in it' can't jut be assumed at trial. esp with the theft issues with Elantras. Kia and Hyundai under Fire from Cities, Insurers over Too Easily Stolen Vehicles

I think it would be worse for him if he lied about an alibi and then couldn't prove it.imo jmo.
With a stolen car scenario, BK’s defense would have to have a jury believe that someone stole both his car and his phone, drove to Moscow with a knife sheath that just happened to be in BK’s “stolen” car, left the sheath at the murder scene, then drove it back to HIS apartment.

If he says he lent both his car and phone to someone, he would have to name the person, who likely could provide his own alibi for being elsewhere.

He may try to argue he sold the knife but, whoever he sold it to must have also “borrowed“ his car and cell phone.
 
jmo imo he could say he never knew. it's only once he was accused that he realizes this must be what happened, and off the hook for reporting them stolen. imo jmo. I don't believe that's whaat happened, but can I prove it? no. I'm hoping that if he's guilty, the prosecution can prove it bard. I hope they have physical evidence placing him in the house - blood, please or hair. something other than touch dna. jmo imo

he is not glued to his car, so they need to prove the he was in the car. jmo imo. what seems logical 'of course he was in it' can't jut be assumed at trial. esp with the theft issues with Elantras. Kia and Hyundai under Fire from Cities, Insurers over Too Easily Stolen Vehicles

I think it would be worse for him if he lied about an alibi and then couldn't prove it.imo jmo.

I agree, they will want to prove it was him in that car on King Rd that night.

The only alibi I can think of, if he did this, is for him to say he was home the whole time and that it is not his car on camera.

He can't say this if his car is on camera at his apartment complex showing him leaving before 4:00am and returning after 9:00am. At least he can't say he was home, he can still say it was a different car that coincidentally matched his.

This is why I would like to know where his car - or car matching his - was first spotted on camera that night. At his apartment? Somewhere in Pullman? Between Pullman and Moscow? Or just on camera at King Rd?
 
With a stolen car scenario, BK’s defense would have to have a jury believe that someone stole both his car and his phone, drove to Moscow with a knife sheath that just happened to be in BK’s “stolen” car, left the sheath at the murder scene, then drove it back to HIS apartment.

If he says he lent both his car and phone to someone, he would have to name the person, who likely could provide his own alibi for being elsewhere.

He may try to argue he sold the knife but, whoever he sold it to must have also “borrowed“ his car and cell phone.

Just his car.


"According to police, suspect Kohberger's phone went off the grid at approximately 2.45am near his Washington State University apartment at a location just before reaching Pullman-Moscow Highway (Route 270), the main thoroughfare between the two cities."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
2,669
Total visitors
2,756

Forum statistics

Threads
590,009
Messages
17,928,902
Members
228,037
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top