4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, 2022 #77

[maskedwoman]

Long time reader, first time poster with some thoughts...all JMO

1 - JMO, Kaylee, Madison get posthumous degrees, the others honorary. Colleges hand them out to folks that give commencement speeches. If not, probably a scholarship in their names. Just a thought and a new acronym: MWT (My Wishful Thinking).

2 - Way back in Thread 18 - 25 (maybe also in MSM section) Kaylee's sister was interviewed and said Murphy was a very timid dog and would probably hide in the closet vs bark. MOO that the bark caught on the neighbors cam wasn't Murphy. Agree thud was BKs trunk closing causing another dog to bark. It is MWT that his is the "animal hair" found at BKs apartment.

3 - JMO, 12 to 15 min is plenty of time for KB to do this. Try this: set an alarm clock for 12 min and sit still. It's an eternity. In me thinking out loud (MTOL) there is time.

4 - The house? Yes it's odd, but it's not a mirror maze or a place with 15 hallways; come in from slider and you're in the kitchen, then, you're in a living room. Which way to go? Try the hallway, turn, go up the stairs...2 bedrooms. Try a door. OOPS, dog! Close door. Try the other, bingo!
What the?! TWO GIRLS! At the end of what's happening in Madisons room BK hears the shout to be quiet, gets nervous/concerned, forgets the sheath and, as postulated earlier, BK goes back down stairs, sees light from Xana's room and we know what happens there. He then leaves, walking past DMs room to slider.

4 - For the evidence (which we know the PCA only divulged a fraction of) each item by itself seems almost insignificant, however, piece it all together and you have a lot of the puzzle coming together.
There's a fraction of evidence in the PCA because I highly doubt (again, mooo) that with the small amount of stuff disclosed in the PCA would it take up thousands of pages, thousands of pictures? And the DA keeps handing over more. Oh! (ala Perry Mason) there's also his DNA on the knife sheath.

Sorry if this is all disjointed, hope it makes sense. Have had an interesting journey through all 77 threads, keep it up!

Russ

That was a fabulous first post with some great points. Welcome aboard!

 

[girlhasnoname]

I believe BK had enough time even if he’d never been in the house and even if it was very dark. I think the “something” that is throwing people off is BK’s alleged comment “has there been any other arrests”. That comment is enough to cast doubt which is why I think he said it (if he did).

Good thought. I actually thought BK said it regarding his parents, were they arrested for some reason like harboring a fugitive or accessory after the fact, did BK use their computer?

I'm not saying they did these things at all, just that BK may have been worried about it after the very physical tactical SWAT raid on the house.

MOO

 

[U.N. Known]

There actually was plenty of "wiggle room."

The killer wasn't on a tight timetable. If the murders had taken more time then the killer would have left a little later.

If Bryan is the killer and they think they have evidence of when he left the house, then it is because he had time to do what he came to do and was ready to leave ....... or not.

It is actually a possibility that he would have killed everyone in the entire house except that Ethan and Xana surprised him.

I get the feeling he either had it in mind to kill only one specific person or wanted to attack the entire house, and his plan got side-tracked because of Ethan and Xana fighting back. If he had planned to kill everyone I think he changed his mind after the fight.

When the witness saw him he seemed to only be focused on making a hasty exit towards the 2nd floor sliding glass door like nothing else mattered.

I think he wasn't expecting to encounter awake individuals and it threw him off guard. So much so that afterward all he cared about was getting out. Apparently he didn't notice his missing sheath and he was peeling out fast with his car. This shows, to me, that he was shook up, his plan didn't go according to plan.

I think with all his driving around, and DoorDash only taking a minute to complete, he could have missed seeing DoorDash.

I find it hard to believe he would have even gone in if he saw someone was up getting food at 4:00am, seems too risky for a killer who did all that planning.

Why go in near 4:00am? Because he thought all were asleep. Note his alleged surveillance was at about this time.

2 Cents

Now that you mention it (in bold), I think that is one of the things that doesn't make sense. Was Xana waiting for her food in the dark? Did she eat in the dark? It's possible that she did. However, if she didn't, her light would have been visible from the street indicating that there was a probability that someone was awake and where that someone was located.

If the killer knew the layout of the house, he may have concluded that though Xana was likely awake, he could get in and out without disturbing her. Neither her room nor the bathroom appear to be visible from the 3rd floor staircase. (Yes, i'm arguing both points). That would still be risky. Perhaps that explains the trips around the house

 

[Boxer]

Now that you mention it (in bold), I think that is one of the things that doesn't make sense. Was Xana waiting for her food in the dark? Did she eat in the dark? It's possible that she did. However, if she didn't, her light would have been visible from the street indicating that there was a probability that someone was awake and where that someone was located.

If the killer knew the layout of the house, he may have concluded that though Xana was likely awake, he could get in and out without disturbing her. Neither her room nor the bathroom appear to be visible from the 3rd floor staircase. (Yes, i'm arguing both points). That would still be risky. Perhaps that explains the trips around the house

MOO kitchen light was probanly on but maybe Xana's room would be dark since Ethan was sleeping. More MOO The bathroom light was likely for the hall and dim light for the bedroom.

 

[Gemmie]

Question wasn’t for me, but hope it’s ok to chime in. One thing that nags at me is why the killer would risk entering the home at all, assuming a theory that only one of the victims was a target. If the goal was SA or revenge, it would have been simpler to follow the targeted victim and attempt to attack in a secluded area (a dark bar parking lot, as an example).

Perhaps his purpose to attack at 4 am was based on the assumption that the target would be asleep. Still, so risky to enter a home without knowing who else might be there, or whether anyone might be armed.

jmo

It's more than OK to chime in!!! And glad you did. What you said makes total sense why it doesn't add up for you. It has also got me thinking. I like hearing other people's opinions, and why/how they came up with them. It helps me refine my own opinions.

As for following the intended victim and attack in a secluded area... I don't think those girls were ever alone. They were also aware that safety was in numbers. I think it was Kaylee's father that said something like that but Google isn't helping me find it so call it MOO.

And I totally agree with the 4am timing with him thinking the target would be asleep. I wonder if finding his target not alone in bed surprised him. Perhaps one moved, or murmured in her sleep, and it startled him so much that he dropped the sheath, and then things went wacko crazy, and not at all how the plan had been intended. I think it started out to be one thing, and then quickly spiraled out of control into what ended up happening. It's all very sad.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Respectfully, so far, all we have is the totality of information revealed in the PCA and a whole lot of inference and speculation. Much of that speculation and inference has been logical, and laid out by some pretty smart and/or knowledgeable folks. It may even turn out to be accurate. But - IMO - it remains inference and speculation at this point. I just think it's very early to be drawing any conclusions about a totality of evidence. MOOooo

That's exactly my point. That's why some of us have questions.

 

[Helechawagirl]

The PCA says the murders happened between 4-4:20am. We're led to believe the murderer most likely didn't enter the house until about 4:07 so that shaves a few minutes off their extremely tight timeline. And IMHO it leaves little room for errors or surprises. And if I'm reading right, you're saying you don't think everything went perfectly to plan, and if so I agree with you. If that's not what you mean, I apologize for taking it the wrong way. No matter his plan, I think there were surprises and things that happened that he might not have planned for. - With Ethan's presence possibly being the biggest surprise.

I'm not convinced he only intended for there to be one victim. If so, it seems like he could have waited for the right time and snatched that person off the street, taken him/her somewhere, killed them and disposed of the body. Instead he entered a house where several people were home (and where the parking area was full). And if he was only after Maddie, and he found her and Kaylee sleeping in the same room, he could have changed his plan and quietly left. I get the murderous intent, the build up, and maybe being fixated on doing it that night, but if he truly had only one target, it seems like logic and self preservation might have kicked in causing him to abort / delay / change his plan. Although it's possible he did change his plan, like you said, and decided to go after more than Maddy (if she was his original target). Or he fully intended to kill more than one person to start with. All speculation.

Yes, I do believe he could have met someone online while he was in PA or after he moved to WA, and then met them in person (once he moved to WA). Someone who was also interested in crime and murder and who made him feel accepted and who he trusted. That person could even have been aware of the house and/or the occupants and shared information with BK. Perhaps they stalked them together at times or ran together and passed by the house. Both of them could have gone to the house that night - one driving and the other going inside and committing the murders. Or the other person could have stepped back at some point prior to that night. Could something like this even be possible? I don't know. In some ways it makes as much sense as BK planning and executing all of this on is own. But if someone else was involved in any way, I don't think BK would give them up. All MOO with a bit of brainstorming on my part.

I think he was murdering the lifestyle—the privilege—the way everything came so easy to them (from his POV). His life was falling apart.

All he had was his academic excellence and he was in the process of being fired…after he had worked so hard…fought off his addiction…lost weight… worked out…took care of his appearance…moved cross country…and here was a house full of his peers living it up without an apparent care in the world.

Now, he knew that all his pain and sacrifice was for naught. He was broken. All was lost. But, he didn’t have to be the only one. He’d show them about loss.

Enraged and hurt he snapped and stabbed them to death. In his mind, his life was over anyway so might as well go out for a bang.

I also wonder if he knew any of the local cult members or read their propaganda and that fed into his reasoning.

I would not be surprised if he had a psychotic break, and, in a way, became someone else for awhile. This is the only way I can make sense of it all. This is just food for thought. I always want to know why, and no answer will ever justify what he did.

There’s no way a person can rationally believe that killing 4 strangers will make your life better.

Just some thoughts as we await more details.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

I think he was murdering the lifestyle—the privilege—the way everything came so easy to them (from his POV). His life was falling apart.

All he had was his academic excellence and he was in the process of being fired…after he had worked so hard…fought off his addiction…lost weight… worked out…took care of his appearance…moved cross country…and here was a house full of his peers living it up without an apparent care in the world.

Now, he knew that all his pain and sacrifice was for naught. He was broken. All was lost. But, he didn’t have to be the only one. He’d show them about loss.

Enraged and hurt he snapped and stabbed them to death. In his mind, his life was over anyway so might as well go out for a bang.

I also wonder if he knew any of the local cult members or read their propaganda and that fed into his reasoning.

I would not be surprised if he had a psychotic break, and, in a way, became someone else for awhile. This is the only way I can make sense of it all. This is just food for thought. I always want to know why, and no answer will ever justify what he did.

There’s no way a person can rationally believe that killing 4 strangers will make your life better.

Just some thoughts as we await more details.

That's not how a psychotic break would present. There's no evidence psychosis or mental illness played a role here.

 

[Boxer]

I think he was murdering the lifestyle—the privilege—the way everything came so easy to them (from his POV). His life was falling apart.

All he had was his academic excellence and he was in the process of being fired…after he had worked so hard…fought off his addiction…lost weight… worked out…took care of his appearance…moved cross country…and here was a house full of his peers living it up without an apparent care in the world.

Now, he knew that all his pain and sacrifice was for naught. He was broken. All was lost. But, he didn’t have to be the only one. He’d show them about loss.

Enraged and hurt he snapped and stabbed them to death. In his mind, his life was over anyway so might as well go out for a bang.

I also wonder if he knew any of the local cult members or read their propaganda and that fed into his reasoning.

I would not be surprised if he had a psychotic break, and, in a way, became someone else for awhile. This is the only way I can make sense of it all. This is just food for thought. I always want to know why, and no answer will ever justify what he did.

There’s no way a person can rationally believe that killing 4 strangers will make your life better.

Just some thoughts as we await more details.

MOO the girls that wouldn't talk to him as reported by BK's friend, girls wouldn't let BK near them in high school.
MOO BK fixed his appearance but disappointingly that did not work to gain acceptance by the girls he wanted and so he developed a theme of grievance.

 

[Auntie Cipation]

I think he was murdering the lifestyle—the privilege—the way everything came so easy to them (from his POV). His life was falling apart.

All he had was his academic excellence and he was in the process of being fired…after he had worked so hard…fought off his addiction…lost weight… worked out…took care of his appearance…moved cross country…and here was a house full of his peers living it up without an apparent care in the world.

Now, he knew that all his pain and sacrifice was for naught. He was broken. All was lost. But, he didn’t have to be the only one. He’d show them about loss.

Enraged and hurt he snapped and stabbed them to death. In his mind, his life was over anyway so might as well go out for a bang.

I also wonder if he knew any of the local cult members or read their propaganda and that fed into his reasoning.

I would not be surprised if he had a psychotic break, and, in a way, became someone else for awhile. This is the only way I can make sense of it all. This is just food for thought. I always want to know why, and no answer will ever justify what he did.

There’s no way a person can rationally believe that killing 4 strangers will make your life better.

Just some thoughts as we await more details.

It's certainly possible that he felt hopeless as his own life plans were falling apart.

But one thing that has struck me since the beginning of this case is his large and so-far-maintained weight loss as a teenager. That is something that many many people struggle with their whole lives without the kind of long-term success BK has achieved. (and even if he accomplished it in part by using drugs, he has maintained it without (as far as we know) continuing to use heroin).

It struck me right away that this accomplishment might have given him confidence and a mindset that "he could achieve anything he put his mind to". Which, for most people, I would say that's a positive thing, assuming they don't desire to be a murderer.

Another reason I don't think the crime was his way of lashing out against his life falling apart is -- I think the draw toward studying criminal justice in the first place was an indication of his already-present compulsion to kill. Of course that isn't true for every CJ student, but for him it's my opinion that it was connected. And if not from the start, then definitely by the time he designed the survey for uncaught criminals.

MOO

 

[Twistinginthewind]

I recall it being BK himself so I Goog'ed for it. I suppose if you took the time (I didn't) to find a MSM source that says a reporter asked that, and not BK, one might be found. lol). Anyway, here's one source saying it was BK:

After being booked into Monroe County Jail, the Washington State University criminology student allegedly asked police whether anyone else had been arrested, NewsNation correspondent Brian Entin reported.

Idaho murder suspect Bryan Kohberger allegedly asked police if anyone else had been arrested

Bryan Kohlberger is facing extradition from Pennsylvania to Idaho for the slayings of four University of Idaho students

sports.yahoo.com

And from BE himself:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1608883613369786368

Thanks, @Gemmie

This is what I recalled reading, that BK allegedly asked LE whether anyone else had been arrested right after he was booked into the jail.

Presumably, if he asked this question, he could have been wondering if anyone at all had also been arrested for any or all of the 5 charges for which he was arrested -- 1 count of felony burglary and 4 counts of murder in the 1st degree -- and also perhaps related charges?

I know there has been a lot of discussion of why he may have asked this, and there is no proof he did ask it, but here are my current theories for what it's worth and/or for target practice : }

Did he allegedly say this because:

(a) He was counting on the fact that there would be so much "DNA noise" from other people who had been at the house, and that he had been so very very careful not to leave his DNA at the crime scene, that at least one (or more) person's DNA would turn up (that wasn't his) that would catch LE's interest. So he assumed all along that LE would be looking at 'other suspects' from the get-go and that would lead them on a wild goose chase they may never recover from, and he wanted to know if that had played out to his advantage. If he asked because he thought he wouldn't be "the one and only arrestee" related to the murders in the totality of the case, I think he was very surprised this was the case because he thought he had pulled off the perfect crimes with no one the wiser. Hence why he was surprised to be arrested and hadn't gone on the run or done something elsewise to avoid being arrested -- he was that arrogant and confident in how careful he was and that other people would be implicated, IMO. This is most likely IMO.

or

(b) His question was not specific to the charges he was arrested on, and he was just wondering if anyone else had been arrested in any way related to the murders. Because, for example, hypothetically, someone else could have given him the lock code that enabled him to get in the house and commit the murders (assuming the door was locked) and so they could also be charged related to the burglary for 'aiding and abetting' or what have you. Or he was wondering if other people were charged with other offenses related to the murders, for example, hypothetically, someone else had participated in some way leading up to the murders, ranging from online encouragement to shared voyeurism to outright collusion. This is less likely IMO.

All MOO

 

[Montecore1]

I'm still not comfortable with the time line that's presented in the PCA though. It might be do-able but it's just a bit too tight. IMHO, MOO

It's difficult to explain since I don't understand it myself. It's like I'm looking at BK on one hand and at the murders on the other. There's no coming together or connecting the two yet. As in I can question and look at the murders and see things logically (even if I dismiss some of them - like most of the News Nation stuff); but I use the terms murderer or intruder when discussing things because I'm not putting a face to the killer. BK on the other hand, despite some odd and off the wall things that have been reported, what we know of him is extremely limited. But I am inclined to believe, based on what's been reported, that he's a rather strange young man. But there are a lot of strange and even bizarre people that aren't killers. So did he do it? Maybe. Did he act alone? Maybe. Or maybe there's some sort of connection between him and the victims that goes beyond him allegedly trying to contact them on social media or even possibly stalking them. Between him and the victims or between someone else and the victims that he could have gotten pulled into (most likely by choice). Basically an illusive something that I do think (or at least hope) will come out so things will fall into place. Again, I can't really explain it because I don't understand it. I do think I'll have an Eureka moment if /when the missing information comes out though.

^^^ Agreed and thank you for being open minded MOO

I'll assume the tire marks were entered as evidence.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1594055435556122625

^^^I haven't seen anything to that effect, they were only taking measurements at that was back on Nov 19th

Not in an Elantra. trust me on that one LOL. No way an Elantra can do that... I have one.

Probably was going to fast and hit the brakes and skidded.

^^^A couple things here...An Elantra does have a limited slip differential (aka Positrack) so even an Elantra can do a "burn out" when one of the drive tires looses traction. If ya Google it there are plenty of videos of people abusing their Elantras by "smoking the tires"
It can be done several ways...the car can be revved up and hastily dropped into gear, if it was in reverse and then quickly shifted into drive with the backwards momentum or even if it was just punched upon take off, especially on an incline. HOWEVER, this would only occur if the Traction Control feature was disabled. The TC feature reduces power and adds torque that works with the electronic stability control on vehicles, it is designed to prevent loss of traction of the drive wheels, it's basically a safety feature on most modern vehicles. Traction Control is always on and the driver would have to hit a button to disable it which will put an orange or green squiggly light on the instrument panel warning the driver that it is off. There is rarely a need for turning it off and someone living in a icy and snowy climate would not turn it off.

Is there any proof those are tire marks made by his car? Maybe I missed something in the PCA? Maybe they have before & after video of some kind?

^^^Not that I'm aware of and thats probably why nothing after the medias pics from Nov 19th even materialized MOO

As far as the skid marks in the street...
I'm in the auto business and IMO and IME the tire marks are indeed made from a quick take off aka accelerator marks. They show deep black marks that are swaying to the left then fade away as the tires gain traction. They are not brake skid marks nor are the yaw (cornering) marks. They look nothing like the ladder two at all. All three types are very distinctive and all three are easily noted in there differences. IME

It's definitely true and I don't think there's anything wrong with normalizing having a different opinion. Even the "totality of evidence" isn't close to a slam dunk, IMO, when there are so many holes. Nothing wrong with saying that.

^^^Absolutely IMO

3 - JMO, 12 to 15 min is plenty of time for KB to do this. Try this: set an alarm clock for 12 min and sit still. It's an eternity. In me thinking out loud (MTOL) there is time.

^^^Welcome to WS!
I have to respectfully disagree with ya on this one russoca at least I dont think IMO thats a fair analogy.
IMO there is a huge difference with setting a timer and just staring at the ceiling waiting for it to end. I would argue set a timer to 14 mins then, perform arduous and difficult task that you have never done before, in a strange place, with surprises coming at you...oh yeah in the dark! ie like parking a car, walking to an house, gaining entry, moving thru that dark unfamiliar multilevel place, go upstairs, possibly deal with a family pet by putting him in a room...a room that may have someone in it, go to a second bedroom kill someone by multiple stab wounds, then another person in the same fashion, make your way back downstairs to find two more adults at least one wide awake, kill both of them by multiple stab wounds with at least one of them "putting up a hell of a battle", then find your way back out of the residence, walk back to your vehicle, start it and then be seen driving away from the area where you were parked all within the same 14 mins. Oh yeah, all of this also in the dark. MOO

4 - For the evidence (which we know the PCA only divulged a fraction of) each item by itself seems almost insignificant, however, piece it all together and you have a lot of the puzzle coming together.
There's a fraction of evidence in the PCA because I highly doubt (again, mooo) that with the small amount of stuff disclosed in the PCA would it take up thousands of pages, thousands of pictures? And the DA keeps handing over more. Oh! (ala Perry Mason) there's also his DNA on the knife sheath.

^^^Actually we don't know that only a fraction of the evidence was divulged in the PCA. There has been discussion about this ad nauseam about what and how much evidence was given in the PCA, IMO, I'm in the camp that thinks the PCA indeed put the strongest evidence in the PCA for the judge to move forward, IMO there would be no reason to withhold key evidence that would be instrumental to getting BCK on his way to trial. With that being said, I think its obvious they didn't put everything in the PCA but I don't feel as strongly about what was held back as some folks here.

 

[Gemmie]

Thanks, @Gemmie

This is what I recalled reading, that BK allegedly asked LE whether anyone else had been arrested right after he was booked into the jail.

I know there has been a lot of discussion of why he may have asked this, and there is no proof he did ask it, but here are my current theories for what it's worth and/or for target practice : }

Did he allegedly say this because:

(a) He was counting on the fact that there would be so much "DNA noise" from other people who had been at the house, and that he had been so very very careful not to leave his DNA at the crime scene, that at least one (or more) person's DNA would turn up (that wasn't his) that would catch LE's interest. So he assumed all along that LE would be looking at 'other suspects' from the get-go and that would lead them on a wild goose chase they may never recover from, and he wanted to know if that had played out to his advantage. If he asked because he thought he wouldn't be "the one and only arrestee" related to the murders in the totality of the case, I think he was very surprised this was the case because he thought he had pulled off the perfect crimes with no one the wiser. Hence why he was surprised to be arrested and hadn't gone on the run or done something elsewise to avoid being arrested -- he was that arrogant and confident in how careful he was and that other people would be implicated, IMO. This is most likely IMO.

SBMFF
LOLOL @ "and/or for target practice". I laughed so hard at that I had to wipe tears from my eyes!

With that said (and still laughing, BTW...) I'm gonna take shots at it:

1) "and that he had been so very very careful not to leave his DNA at the crime scene" - I'll bet he figured out at some point (from immediately to days later) that he no longer had his sheath which could have his DNA on it. Although, to your point, perhaps he thought he had been super careful with it since purchase, never touching it with his bare hands, except 1 time (which is all it takes) that he doesn't recall doing.

2) "he was surprised to be arrested and hadn't gone on the run or done something elsewise to avoid being arrested" - I'd characterize his drive across the country, AND the fact he quickly swapped out his plates shortly after the murders, as trying to avoid being arrested (in that they might be looking for different plates of white Elantras on the road at first glance so his car no longer matched (unless they dug deeper)).

The man accused of killing four University of Idaho college students received a new license plate for his car five days after the deaths, according to records released Wednesday.

The licensing documents in Washington state show that the vehicle driven by the suspect, Bryan C. Kohberger, was a white Hyundai Elantra, the type of vehicle that investigators had been seeking in recent weeks.

Suspect got new license plate days after Idaho killings

The man accused of killing four University of Idaho college students received a new license plate for his car five days after the murders, according to records released Wednesday.

www.seattletimes.com

*blows smoke from the end of my gun and attempts to reholster it, surprised to find my holster is no longer hanging from my belt and wonders where in the *BLEEP* I left it*

 

[maskedwoman]

That's exactly my point. That's why some of us have questions.

As do I. I just find it premature, I guess, to conclude there are a lot of holes in a case, or find one to be a slam dunk, at a point when so much remains unknown. Of course, maybe folks mean "based on what we know today" by default and I am just failing to read that into it. I'm also aware that there may be as many definitions of "beyond a reasonable doubt" as there are people on a jury. I once sat on a jury where the prosecution did everything but let the accused shoot the victim again in front of the jury, only for one jury member to begin by saying she felt the prosecution just hadn't proven their case. We got to a verdict, and it wasn't particularly painful, but there sure were some funny looks around the table when she said that. LOL

 

[wary]

Thanks, @Gemmie

This is what I recalled reading, that BK allegedly asked LE whether anyone else had been arrested right after he was booked into the jail.

Presumably, if he asked this question, he could have been wondering if anyone at all had also been arrested for any or all of the 5 charges for which he was arrested -- 1 count of felony burglary and 4 counts of murder in the 1st degree -- and also perhaps related charges?

I know there has been a lot of discussion of why he may have asked this, and there is no proof he did ask it, but here are my current theories for what it's worth and/or for target practice : }

Did he allegedly say this because:

(a) He was counting on the fact that there would be so much "DNA noise" from other people who had been at the house, and that he had been so very very careful not to leave his DNA at the crime scene, that at least one (or more) person's DNA would turn up (that wasn't his) that would catch LE's interest. So he assumed all along that LE would be looking at 'other suspects' from the get-go and that would lead them on a wild goose chase they may never recover from, and he wanted to know if that had played out to his advantage. If he asked because he thought he wouldn't be "the one and only arrestee" related to the murders in the totality of the case, I think he was very surprised this was the case because he thought he had pulled off the perfect crimes with no one the wiser. Hence why he was surprised to be arrested and hadn't gone on the run or done something elsewise to avoid being arrested -- he was that arrogant and confident in how careful he was and that other people would be implicated, IMO. This is most likely IMO.

or

(b) His question was not specific to the charges he was arrested on, and he was just wondering if anyone else had been arrested in any way related to the murders. Because, for example, hypothetically, someone else could have given him the lock code that enabled him to get in the house and commit the murders (assuming the door was locked) and so they could also be charged related to the burglary for 'aiding and abetting' or what have you. Or he was wondering if other people were charged with other offenses related to the murders, for example, hypothetically, someone else had participated in some way leading up to the murders, ranging from online encouragement to shared voyeurism to outright collusion. This is less likely IMO.

All MOO

The idea that’s been discussed a lot, and that seems quite likely to me, is that BK, after LE smashed into the house so dramatically, may have wondered if his parents had been arrested too—for aiding and abetting, perhaps?

Assuming that he actually said it, of course.

 

[whiterhino]

Yes, there are different angles, lots of guesses, and it is complex

Killers don't walk into houses to kill in front of a bunch of people, they pick the middle of the night so they can actually get in through the door or window without being seen or stopped. No doubt this killer picked the time he did based on not being seen.

I think he spied on the house from the back of the house with the very easy road access. He wouldn't have seen DoorDash from there.

If he saw DoorDash why did he go in so soon after?

Because through spying and watching what lights were on and off inside, he could deduce everybody was in their rooms so he could then get in undetected.

But still, why chance it?

Because he was obsessed with going through with it that night. I don't think he came ready the other nights because his alleged surveillance was over a period of months. I think he was ready that particular night. He had on his mask and had his knife and probably had some plastic or extra clothes to protect his car etc...

So he was ready and determined to do it. He saw his target was home, if he was targeting one person. Likewise, he saw ALL were home if targeting the entire house. So he was willing to take his chances with someone eating at 4:00am.

Plus, he was running out of time.

No, not for that night, but because of the end of the semester coming up in just the next month. He had to get this done now or there wouldn't be enough time for him to hang around and watch and listen to all the many reactions going on around him. A neighbor, someone, even mentioned that he brought up the murders.
He wanted time to be in the thick of it, not just hearing about it from across the country.

......The professor reportedly emailed Kohberger on October 21 to tell him he had failed to meet the expectations set out in the meeting earlier that month.

They met again on November 12 to discuss an "improvement plan."

Bryan goes out to commit murder that same night, the 12th, which turned into November 13.

Bryan commits murder just 4 weeks before finals. He would be busy with finals and busy with his dad and packing up to drive to Pennsylvania for Christmas break. No time to commit murders.

He put off the murders until he couldn't anymore with only 4 weeks left - and made the mistake of not waiting for everyone to go to sleep. Was in a hurry to get it done.

1. Final examinations begin on Monday, December 12, 2022 to Friday, December 16, 2022.

2 Cents

RBBM to say This!

Not to mention: (JMO speculation) BK wasn't just obsessed and taking a chance, BK was taking a risk which IMO is a thrill seeking component. The thrill of stalking/surveilling, repeated "visits" were probably a rush for BK.

A dispute within the workplace could be considered a personal conflict AKA precipitating factor (JMO). The timing is IMO an important point. Not to mention KG was moving away and BK wouldn't have this chance again.

Agree, it makes more sense IMO for BK to have positioned himself at the back of the house entering and exiting via the slider.

Too bad the 3D animation doesn't include a model of the DD vehicle.

 

[Boxer]

As do I. I just find it premature, I guess, to conclude there are a lot of holes in a case, or find one to be a slam dunk, at a point when so much remains unknown. Of course, maybe folks mean "based on what we know today" by default and I am just failing to read that into it. I'm also aware that there may be as many definitions of "beyond a reasonable doubt" as there are people on a jury. I once sat on a jury where the prosecution did everything but let the accused shoot the victim again in front of the jury, only for one jury member to begin by saying she felt the prosecution just hadn't proven their case. We got to a verdict, and it wasn't particularly painful, but there sure were some funny looks around the table when she said that. LOL

I am interested in what holes you see.

 

[russoca]

^^^Welcome to WS!
I have to respectfully disagree with ya on this one russoca at least I dont think IMO thats a fair analogy.
IMO there is a huge difference with setting a timer and just staring at the ceiling waiting for it to end. I would argue set a timer to 14 mins then, perform arduous and difficult task that you have never done before, in a strange place, with surprises coming at you...oh yeah in the dark! ie like parking a car, walking to an house, gaining entry, moving thru that dark unfamiliar multilevel place, go upstairs, possibly deal with a family pet by putting him in a room...a room that may have someone in it, go to a second bedroom kill someone by multiple stab wounds, then another person in the same fashion, make your way back downstairs to find two more adults at least one wide awake, kill both of them by multiple stab wounds with at least one of them "putting up a hell of a battle", then find your way back out of the residence, walk back to your vehicle, start it and then be seen driving away from the area where you were parked all within the same 14 mins. Oh yeah, all of this also in the dark. MOO

^^^Actually we don't know that only a fraction of the evidence was divulged in the PCA. There has been discussion about this ad nauseam about what and how much evidence was given in the PCA, IMO, I'm in the camp that thinks the PCA indeed put the strongest evidence in the PCA for the judge to move forward, IMO there would be no reason to withhold key evidence that would be instrumental to getting BCK on his way to trial. With that being said, I think its obvious they didn't put everything in the PCA but I don't feel as strongly about what was held back as some folks here.

Interesting thoughts about the timing. I'll just add we have no idea about how dark the house was. I personally think 12, 14, 15 minutes (ballpark) is plenty of time. I do appreciate the discussion and all the scenarios/opinions, I'll agree there are many unconfirmed pieces to this puzzle with the limited info we have. I will be very interested when the hearing takes place in a couple months.

 

[Cool Cats]

MRBBM: Great post and good details that flesh out potential context IMO. I hate to pick on the little things...but...am going to :-(). So, he met with his prof, as reported by News Nation, on November 2nd, not November 12th. It was reported by NN as November the 2nd, they apparently had exclusive access to some docs from WSU. I remember going over this in Feb and it turned out some other outlets re-reported as November 12th. Conveniently 'inadvertent' typo by those outlets....I guess....MOO

None of that takes away from the points you're making re BK's life and plans potentially teetering into an abyss by early November (which could have contributed to a sense of time running out). MOO

I did a quick google and didn't come up with the NN original but even the Daily M ended up reporting the date of BK's meeting to discuss 'improvement plan' as Nov 2nd. I can check out some posts for mid Feb to find the relevent sources a bit later. MOO

Bryan Kohberger was FIRED from his teaching job days before arrest

Bryan Kohberger, 28, was let go from his teaching assistant job due to 'behavioral problems' and for having a 'sexist attitude toward women.'

www.dailymail.co.uk

NYT also reports Nov 2nd (article behind paywal but search results show Nov 2nd).

"https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/10/us/idaho-murders-kohberger-fired-wsu.html

University Investigated Idaho Murder Suspect's Behavior Around ... 13 Feb 2023 ... Bryan Kohberger had a verbal altercation with a professor and was ... Then, on Nov. 2, department leaders met with Mr. Kohberger to discuss ..."

I appreciate you double checking the date. To me it seemed significant that he would have this stressful conversation with a prof and go out that night armed with a knife at 4:00am.
I am glad you corrected this assumption.

It is really important to look at what a suspect was doing in the months before and after their crimes.
Many defendants leave NO DNA or fingerprints behind and get convicted by some of what they did before and after.

A father and his 2 sons, in southern Ohio, went out at night and murdered 7 people in a family plus the finance of one of them. Some were murdered only because they were there.

They left no DNA or fingerprints but they did leave shell casings and bloody footprints. But that wasn't enough to convict all 4, including the mother who helped plan it.

The investigators gathered alot of evidence of what the 4 did before and after the murders including their interactions with the victims that would precipitate a strong motive. This included digital evidence and purchase history and Other Acts Evidence.

So what is there so far from before? I'm not seeing much of significance from after the murders but it only took them 47 days to arrest him.

Video evidence of the car. (multiple)
Phone records. (multiple)
Possible social media connections.
No alibi.
Familiar with the area and in close proximity to the King Rd. house.
Possible evidence discovered during 4 searches. Apartment, house, office, car.

Other Acts Evidence if allowed in by the judge:

Serious problems with college faculty regarding his teaching methods - potential job loss.
Student complaints especially female students - not treating his women students fairly.
Past problems with women.
Staring down women on the Idaho campus.
Criminal studies in college showing familiarity with homicides.
Reddit questionnaire inviting felons to spell out their motivations for their crimes.

I think anything significant found in relation to afterwards would be if they found evidence in their searches such as blood in his car or "trophies" collected from victims such as ID tags. These are clearly things from "after" the murders.

Information on his computer about the victims such as the floor plan of their home or
receipts showing a knife or other "murder kit" purchases fall under the category of "before" the murders.
BK could have researched information about the house and it's layout. Heck, he could have called up the landlords and asked for information pretending to be a potential renter.

LE is looking for any and all connections there could be to BK and the victims. If they do not find any:

Digital evidence - Trophies - Physical evidence - Murder Kit purchases....

....That tie BK to the murders then the prosecution better hope their DNA evidence is strong because car video and phone evidence, alone, doesn't seem like enough to convict beyond the reasonable doubt threshold.

He wasn't seen in the car on video and his phone only pinged in the area.

2 Cents

 

[Auntie Cipation]

I'll just add we have no idea about how dark the house was.

RSBM

When this was discussed in the early threads, some of us thought there were some neon-type signs and fairy light strings that would likely have been on. Not bright, but enough to navigate the house by. (though whether that step mid-house would have been visible to an unsuspecting intruder, who knows). I suppose we won't know for sure until one of the survivors speaks about it. MOO