4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, 2022 #78

[PrairieWind]

BF was one floor down from the murders and on the other side of either exit to the house.

Did you hear anything? A: maybe but it did not wake me up enough to get up and tell them to be quiet.

That might be the entire story that BF can truthfully tell

I think there is a lot more to her story than that.

 

[PrairieWind]

If the DA feels the validity of PCA may be called into question (ie. exculpatory evidence supposedly known by BF, disclosed info to Defense re cop on scene with IA investigation (Brady), they can still convene a GJ to indict BK before the PH.

We wouldn't know if there is/was/will be a GJ or not until after the fact. Right? Or maybe not even after because of the gag order. IDK

JMO

I think if a DA jumped to a GJ to avoid a Preliminary Hearing because he thought the defendant might learn too much, or he couldnt get the case bound over, would be an incredibly unethical prosecutorial tactic.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I have seen no media suggesting this, and since charges are already filed it would be odd, procedurally - unless the DA chooses to dismiss the case against BK and conduct further investigation through a grand jury. A grand jury could not complete its work before the PH IMO. A probable cause finding by the judge after the PH would mitigate the need for an indictment.

The motion to add counsel does not mention a grand jury, nor does the law require the local prosecutor to ask for a state grand jury in order to request and avail his office of the staff and resources of the Attorney General.

I am not sure where this grand jury assumption comes from.

Respectfully, IANAL, but I thought if the State was in fear of PCA not being strong enough to bind him over to court during the PH, they could impanel a GJ to indict BK before the PH. Is that not true?

MOO

 

[PrairieWind]

Exactly what I think. BK isn't getting enough attention. That is HIS INVESTIGATOR, and HIS PD. Also interesting that they went after another pretty blond. IMO. Something else to consider, tho, is that NOT ALL THE INFORMATION AND EVIDENCE GATHERED is in the PCA. And the public has no access to what's NOT in the PCA. Maybe they are playing games, and doing exactly what you said, @detectivewannab : chumming the waters for some DOUBT.

His public defender is a very experience and professional attorney. She isn't taking his orders on how to handle procedures regarding discovery.

 

[U.N. Known]

I think this is a total PR for defense. They want to get some type of doubt out in the public.

The defense does not need PR. Every court record is public. Some of the records are sealed, but their existence is not. It makes complete sense that the defense team would want to speak with anyone they feel has information that may be useful to their client. If they hadn't felt the need to use a subpoena, there is a good chance the public wouldn't even know anything unless/until BF appeared at the hearing.

 

[girlhasnoname]

It was filed in a Nevada court, so not under the gag order.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documentto...ial-witness-warrant/43954cdb14544969/full.pdf

Kind of like PA meaning free to publish their AA.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I think if a DA jumped to a GJ to avoid a Preliminary Hearing because he thought the defendant might learn too much, or he couldnt get the case bound over, would be an incredibly unethical prosecutorial tactic.

Thanks for the reply, but would it be against the law vs. unethical tactic?

 

[whiterhino]

Snipped by me for focus.

The comment you quoted from me was in response to this from a different poster (BBM): "The police have the time stamped cctv of the Elantra driving off at high speed and the neighbours doorbell footage of the loud thud, so they’re pretty confident of the actual time the murders occurred."

The PCA makes it clear that the white Elantra was at the scene and therefore, the driver was at the scene of the murder. So, in that case, since they're using the Elantra to place the suspect at the scene of the murder, they need time of the murder based on other evidence (such as autopsies, which is what they're doing, IMO). We can all speculate, but I was talking about in court, legally. That's how it all started and as forums are prone to do, led in other directions.

But that aside, @whiterhino you should feel free to question or correct me. I've been wrong about a lot in this case. There are some things I feel strongly about and likely won't change my mind without evidence, but I accept that it could turn out that I'm 100% wrong about everything I've said about this case.

RBBM

Ah, of course I missed that initial comment. You're so right I stand corrected! (although I did disclaim that I did not know who, if anyone, had been suggesting that the car be used to approximate the time the murders occurred).

Absolutely correct. I couldn't understand why/how you'd need to explain it lol. The time of the murders is determined by the time of death, not when the Elantra left the scene (I really thought you were talking about submitting information as pieces of evidence and how legally the pieces of information cannot be used for more than one purpose, as in "if you're going to do A with X piece then you cannot also do B with X piece" ok clear as mud)

To the last bold, cannot tell if you're being genuine or if this is a trap (half joking plz don't feel the need to explain) I'm not trying to change anyones mind about anything. I'm not even certain of my own thoughts on this case.

 

[Dotta]

"Surviving Idaho University murders roommate AGREES to be interviewed by Bryan Kohberger's defense team at Nevada home - after they subpoenaed her as a witness to the 4am killings."

Surviving Idaho roommate AGREES to be quizzed by Kohberger's defense

Bethany Funke, 21, will meet with lawyers for Bryan Kohberger at her home in Reno, Nevada, after trying to argue that she should not have to testify.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[CGray123]

Respectfully, IANAL, but I thought if the State was in fear of PCA not being strong enough to bind him over to court during the PH, they could impanel a GJ to indict BK before the PH. Is that not true?

MOO

The limitations on use of grand juries are more practical than legal IMO. Especially for a small prosecutor's office empaneling, training, and staffing a grand jury diverts scarce resources to a time-consuming process that, in this case, would duplicate the ongoing efforts of prosecutors and investigators who have not encountered the kind of challenges and obstacles the grand jury was designed to overcome: subpoenas and secrecy to overcome the reluctance of witnesses, and independence to overcome political pressures.

Could the prosecutor call a grand jury into existence? I suppose so. But why do that after his investigation has already proved sufficient to support a charge?

 

[PrairieWind]

Thanks for the reply, but would it be against the law vs. unethical tactic?

I don't know because I have never ever heard of it. If you are a long time District Attorney in a small county, do you now want to jeopardize the biggest murder case in your state's history by starting to play games? If he thinks he can't get his case set for trial after a preliminary hearing, then he shouldn't be prosecuting it.

 

[girlhasnoname]

The limitations on use of grand juries are more practical than legal IMO. Especially for a small prosecutor's office empaneling, training, and staffing a grand jury diverts scarce resources to a time-consuming process that, in this case, would duplicate the ongoing efforts of prosecutors and investigators who have not encountered the kind of challenges and obstacles the grand jury was designed to overcome: subpoenas and secrecy to overcome the reluctance of witnesses, and independence to overcome political pressures.

Could the prosecutor call a grand jury into existence? I suppose so. But why do that after his investigation has already proved sufficient to support a charge?

I personally believe they do have enough for the PH also. Was just wondering because I've seen it being talked about. Thanks for the response.

 

[DizzyB]

I think there is a lot more to her story than that.

Therein lies the tale. Could DM have seen BK, and was so spooked that she waited for some time, then went down the stairs to BF’s room and stayed with her all night, locking themselves in?

 

[10ofRods]

If the State doesn't have a lot more evidence by June (and I personally believe it has a lot more) OR if that evidence doesn't corroborate the PCA, then, yes, BK is well situated to avoid trial and be a free man again. Using the same pile of evidence with a GJ is unlikely to return results, if the evidence is so poor.

IMO.

 

[wary]

Therein lies the tale. Could DM have seen BK, and was so spooked that she waited for some time, then went down the stairs to BF’s room and stayed with her all night, locking themselves in?

Not exactly exculpatory for BK, though...

MOO

 

[10ofRods]

Not exactly exculpatory for BK, though...

MOO

Exactly. The subpoena specifically states that she has knowledge that could be exculpatory. It cannot be that BF was frightened (which also contradicts what the two roommates told the police upon arrival and what has been reported in MSM - which is that both women were asleep/in their own rooms until near to the time of the 911 call). BF and DM being frightened is not exculpatory.

If BF's testimony is that she heard nothing and it was a completely normal night, that does go a very small way to impeaching what DM said she heard. If so, then of course the Defense is grasping at straws and hoping for more from BF. If it's something else (BF had a stalker, was worried that guy would do something to her), that could be big. If BF thinks she saw the murderer, herself, and the description varies a great deal from DM's, then that impeaches DM.

IMO.

 

[Trebor5591]

Finally, I believe the Mirror article quotes the defense investigator's affidavit for something it does not say, and conflates DM's experience with BF's:

"According to the affidavit, she allegedly witnessed a naked man run through a rear sliding door. She lived on the first-floor of the home and came face-to-face with the alleged killer."

All MOO.

What? Is this a typo? A naked man?

 

[Boxer]

If the State doesn't have a lot more evidence by June (and I personally believe it has a lot more) OR if that evidence doesn't corroborate the PCA, then, yes, BK is well situated to avoid trial and be a free man again. Using the same pile of evidence with a GJ is unlikely to return results, if the evidence is so poor.

IMO.

MOO i believe the evidence is good. The eyewitnesses may have different accounts but the car and DNA on a weapon sheath seem complete.

 

[girlhasnoname]

MOO i believe the evidence is good. The eyewitnesses may have different accounts but the car and DNA on a weapon sheath seem complete.

Plus you've got cell data, previous trips by the house, video of his car leaving the area and so much more that we don't have a clue about yet.

MOO

 

[Helechawagirl]

Exactly. The subpoena specifically states that she has knowledge that could be exculpatory. It cannot be that BF was frightened (which also contradicts what the two roommates told the police upon arrival and what has been reported in MSM - which is that both women were asleep/in their own rooms until near to the time of the 911 call). BF and DM being frightened is not exculpatory.

If BF's testimony is that she heard nothing and it was a completely normal night, that does go a very small way to impeaching what DM said she heard. If so, then of course the Defense is grasping at straws and hoping for more from BF. If it's something else (BF had a stalker, was worried that guy would do something to her), that could be big. If BF thinks she saw the murderer, herself, and the description varies a great deal from DM's, then that impeaches DM.

IMO.

Based on the Mirror’s story BF must have eyes that extend 15 feet or see thru walls! I will be embarrassed if BF did see something because I % believe it is pure fiction at this point.

Not likely a man would run outside naked—in fact, a rape strategy for women is to run outside because a naked rapist won’t follow. And 28 degrees? And his body issues? And a naked man running around would definitely cause a 911 call.

In my mind, it is possible she looked out of her window—especially since roomies were texting each other. She may have looked out the window at the request of DM…but possible she didn’t see anything.