ID - 4 University of Idaho Students Murdered - Moscow # 13

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
YankeeJAD said:
Moscow is literally right on the WA state border. Marijuana is legal in WA. If anyone from Moscow wants weed all they have to do is drive a few minutes down the road.
Click to expand...
mayhem911 said:
Have we ruled out any connections to marijuana you know people in non-recreational states still do kill over weed.
Click to expand...

Though I very much doubt these murders were due to the proverbial $500.00 recreational drug debt, one might need to drive further into Washington than just across the state line to buy legal marijuana.

As you pointed out, weed is legal in Washington. But.... Washington evidently also allows for towns, cities and counties to effectively zone it out via declining to issue a permit needed for legal sales.

Idaho borders Washington to the east (more conservative part of the State). As a result, there could be limited poins of legal sale in the area.
 
mayhem911 said:
For one person to kill four people with a knife in like 15 minutes would take almost an Olympian level of physical conditioning. Or a soldier with previous experience in urban combat during wartime. So I think that we are looking at two or more people doing this.
Click to expand...
I think you nailed it here. A targeted attack but a random target. They didn’t plan on killing 4 but it escalated . This case will never be solved.
 
sleepingmonkey said:
That is interesting bc to me she looks VERY intoxicated. I'm not judging her choice to drink a little or a lot, just the fact that it looks like she is having an interesting time trying to walk and maneuver around.
Click to expand...
I appreciate you bringing this up. LE are even wanting video and still shots from the frat house and club "before" any victims came home.

That said...if someone was watching anyone of them, noticing that their target is a bit more inebriated means a victim that would be less likely to fight back as much or will soon will be passed out.

All of this is moo.
 
nightrider17 said:
Could the person who did this own a dog too and had a reason to be walking in that area - leading up to the event, scoping for possible escapes routes and even stopping with the reason the dog is doing its business etc.


Thereby giving the perpetrator a reason to linger in an area longer getting a better insight to the property etc.

Also taking their dog out at odd times of the night - because their dog needed to do its business.

So it doesn't look weird to be in an area at odd times. Just walking my dog.

Maybe even the dogs crossing paths with each other? MOO
Click to expand...
I saw chain link fence in pictures of the house, wouldn't most just let the dog out in the back yard to their business? That's how my college house was, actually 3/4 of us had dogs (I had 2) and if one doggie needed out whoever was home would let all 4 dogs out at once.
 
hopewell said:
A single target doesn't follow, because once the target was killed in her sleep there would have been no other reason to kill everyone else in their sleep. If she was sleeping in the bed with Madison, then sure I could see that, but not E and X, who were also asleep, according to the coroner. Why go back downstairs and kill two sleeping kids?

My opinion.
Click to expand...
Let’s assume K is the target. The killer breaks into the house through the second floor glass door and goes straight to the third floor and K‘s room. To his surprise K and M are sleeping in the same bed. Instead of running away, he chooses to kill both of them. It’s possible that one of the victims wakes up and makes enough noise to wake E who then goes to check whats going on. Maybe E sees the killer and rushes back to X’s room to grab his phone and call the cops. The killer forces his way inside and kills him and X before running away through the glass door.

That would explain why the other roommates weren’t killed regardless of whether one of them was sleeping on the first or second floor. Some people are heavy sleepers and won’t wake up. I’m one of these people. I need multiple alarms right next to my head and even then it’s not a guarantee of success. Other people are startled by the faintest noise.

Then again, it’s just a hypothesis based on nothing. It‘s all pure conjecture at this stage. We don’t know anything.
 
Brues said:
I think you nailed it here. A targeted attack but a random target. They didn’t plan on killing 4 but it escalated . This case will never be solved.
Click to expand...
I still think it’s one person , very close to one of the victims . I think that LE is letting the public think certain individual(s) are cleared to make that person think everything is ok now . I feel an arrest coming sooner than later . I understand the families are getting frustrated with LE not giving information but perhaps the killer is close to/with the family all this time …
 
tokyorose said:
When you are drunk you have much poorer situational awareness and would make both girls easier potential victims than people who had not been drinking.
Click to expand...
Also, the flip side to this- when you are drunk, you may be the girl that says things more bluntly. I feel like I may be that girl lol! Won’t lie. Like, if you are weirding me out sober, I’m more than likely going to walk away from the situation but not tell you I’m weirded out. If I’m drunk, I’m going to make a point to let you know I’m uncomfortable and you are crossing the line! Not saying the girls made anyone mad and deserves this, saying maybe the girls were more blunt to turning someone away?
 
mayhem911 said:
I would never live in a house with a sliding glass door it's just asking for trouble and puts a big target on you.
Click to expand...
Out of the 6 houses we have owned, only one didn’t have a sliding glass door. It was built in 1912. I’ve never had a house built though, where I could opt out. I keep a metal pole in the track.
 
AngTxGal said:
I have an issue with the idea that someone was a ‘target’ .
I think it is one line of thinking and only matters to the investigators, so keep it to yourself.

How does that make a parent feel to know your child was or was not the target Of a murderer? That is a very strange place to put a grieving parent either way.

Think about it, your loved one died but they were not the target- they were collateral damage. The killer was actually after someone else.. for whatever reason. Really? It isn’t even a fact. Why on earth would LE make such a statement to the parents and public?

Consider the flip side, your child was the target of a killer and three other people were collateral damage. They were not intending on killing them, but they did to get to your child.

The only thing such as statement does is divide the parents who should be supporting each other. Saying such a thing to me reeks of poor judgment

JMO
Click to expand...
My thought is that LE believes they were targeted rather than someone entering a random house to murder the inhabitants. The perp(s) may have targeted one or more of them that night. IMO someone saw them when they were out and followed them home to commit this crime. This would make the fact that two of the residents of the house were not killed more reasonable because the killer(s) would not know they were in the house.
 
ACG2x said:
So the more I have thought about this case, I keep going back to the 911 call. However, not what you might think. I'm not that concerned with the fact it didn't take place until 11:58 AM on Sunday, but rather the events that led to it occurring.

Let's assume the murders occurred during the timeframe the coroner said and it was between 3-5 AM on Sunday. The 911 call happened at 11:58 AM so that's a gap of a minimum of six hours. The hangup here isn't that it took six hours but that LE has already confirmed there were others in the house besides the two surviving roommates when responding officers arrived and multiple people talked with the 911 operator.

Since there are two surviving roommates, it's possible it could be the two of them passing the phone back and forth, however it was strongly implied that it was more than that given the others in the home at the time who presumably where not there overnight when the murders occured. From this I can presume the other individuals in the home with the survivors were called before LE - which can also easily be verified with phone records.

Using those circumstances, the questions I keep tossing around are:
  1. When did the two roommates wake up downstairs on Sunday and when did they decide to go upstairs? Was it one or both of them?
  2. What/who did they see and what happened immediately after? I am guessing they'd freak out and scream, but then run back downstairs and tell the other one? Call them up there?
  3. At some point, a decision was made to call another party or parties instead of 911. Who made that decision and perhaps as important - why? Please note that I do not believe any other party in the house when LE arrived has any involvement in the murders whatsoever - zero, none. It's just not the normal course of events in a situation like this.
  4. Who came over and how long were they there before LE arrived? Or even before 911 was called? Did they go through the house? One theory I have is they had friends come over and essentially 'clear' the house to make sure the perp wasn't still there. If anyone else walked through that home, they had the best of intentions but may have unknowingly contaminated a crime scene.
So we have three periods of time after the murders occurred:
  • When killer left to when surviving roommates went upstairs and found whatever they found
  • When others were called and before LE was
  • Once LE was called until when they arrived and secured the scene
Would like to understand how long each of these was in that approximately six hour span, but I would really like to know why others were called first before 911 and when those individuals arrived, did someone say hey we should call the police? I can't wrap my head around the AM hours before LE arrived.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking along these lines. One of the roommates wakes up, goes upstairs to the kitchen area. Maybe sees something out of place, then maybe a speck of blood and dirt tracked in the hallway. Wonders what the heck. That's a good case to get the attention of x whose room is on that floor. Knocks on the door, nobody answers. Tries to open the door. The door is locked. Goes outside to see X's car is parked out front. Goes back inside and goes to the 3rd floor and knocks on the doors up there. Nobody answers and their doors are locked. Having somebody coming into the house and killing everybody on the 2nd and 3rd floor is the furthest thing in her mind but there has to be a good reason nobody is answering. She calls or heads out to the apartments nearby to check with mutual friends to see if they stayed with them. They say no but head back to the house because they were told there was blood on the floor and something serious might be wrong. Maybe they look through one of the windows next to the deck and see one of the victims in bed but they can't see any blood, hence the "unconscious roommate".

*actually, this would entail that k and m were sleeping in the same room and k's room would have been open for the roommates and friends to access the deck. Something to ponder.*


911 is then called.

Basically, the friends were nearby acquaintances and were only called because the surviving roommates thought x,e,k,m stayed with them since they didn't answer to the knocks and the survivors saw their vehicles out front. Mass killer in the house would have been the last thing that would have crossed their minds.MOO.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 174 more.
Total: 3,721 (members: 175, guests: 3,546)

Online statistics

Members online
175
Guests online
3,546
Total visitors
3,721
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,269
Messages
17,966,470
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top