4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, 2022 #79

[Twistinginthewind]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658781982271184896

 

[maconrich]

I remember you posting about it and I agreed with you (didn't laugh at all lol).

I've always leaned towards a GJ being convened in this case.

In light of the "nature of the crime" and what seems to me like overwhelming evidence against him, as well as all the sealed and redacted court documents that points towards privacy issues.

MOO

Do you think the sealed / redacted documents and privacy issues are why they've apparently gone this route?

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Do you think the sealed / redacted documents and privacy issues are why they've apparently gone this route?

Yes, I do, primarily based on the fact that a GJ is a private setting.

It could all be just too awful, some of the evidence, due to the heinous nature of the crimes, that should never see the light of day or be presented in open court for the public to know about.

Also, the GJ setting allows the prosecution to present their case without the defendant or their attorney present, which is another aspect of privacy that allows them to jump ahead and holds the defendant at arms length.

MOO

 

[maconrich]

Yes, I do, primarily based on the fact that a GJ is a private setting.

It could all be just too awful, some of the evidence, due to the heinous nature of the crimes, that should never see the light of day or be presented in open court for the public to know about.

Also, the GJ setting allows the prosecution to present their case without the defendant or their attorney present, which is another aspect of privacy that allows them to jump ahead and holds the defendant at arms length.

MOO

Ok, so grand jury instead of PH. Then arraignment where plea is made? Then trial? If so any mandatory time for when trial must start? Serious questions as I have no knowledge of how most of this works.

 

[schooling]

I honestly don't know what point you are making.

Yes, of course, if there is other evidence that confirms DM's testimony, then that will make her account seem more credible.

Nonetheless, if she were (note use of subjunctive mood to indicate statement in contrast to known fact) chemically impaired at the time of the murders, then that will lessen her credibility.

But the mere fact that her account falls short of an ironclad ID doesn't change the truth that an impaired witness is less likely to be believed.

The point: There’s a tendency here to look at each piece of evidence out of context. Or throw out random alternative explanations to individual pieces.

Like “the video is another car”. Completely ignoring the cell phone.

Or vice versa. “The cell phone data is unreliable”. Completely ignoring the video.

Rarely does anyone ever acknowledge and explain both together. That’s what i responded to. That’s not how these things are going to be presented to a jury.

IMO

Was that clearer?

Also, how do we know we are all not hallucinating right now? Therein lies the answer of accepting her testimony.

 

[schooling]

If you want to get technical, the DNA doesn't put him in the house either, unless there's more DNA than we've learned about.

I am not a professional so it was MOO.

 

[DizzyB]

Haven't caught up yet, but I agree they were interviewed before the 29th and before LE wrote the PCA.

It seems likely the girls were among those in front of the house "crying while draped in emergency blankets." And most likely, IMHO, they were in no condition to give intensive interviews right away. Which makes perfect sense. So IMHO maybe some basic questions at first and interviews set up for later: probably not much later. And IMHO it seems logical there would be several interviews, varying in depth and time, after that. Several considering that, as far as we know, they were the only two people in the house who survived the attack. I don't recall seeing when or if either girl hired an attorney at any point. I would hope they did, because it seems like LE would have come up with new questions as they found new information. IMHO from what we've seen the girls might have been protected to whatever extent from the media, which also makes sense. But protected or not, and lawyered up or not, it seems unlikely that LE stopped questioning them right up to or after the 29th. IMHO. Thus my curiosity.

Link to girls crying while draped in emergency blankets:

'Senseless acts of violence'

Nov. 15—As Moscow grapples with what the city mayor called "senseless acts of violence" that left four University of Idaho students dead, only a limited amount of details have been released about the case. The Moscow Police Department is investigating the alleged homicide after law enforcement...

news.yahoo.com

anyone can find those first photos of the group wrapped in blankets outside the house, it would be super. Links have been scrubbed and I’ve been searching since. I saw that article the first day and nothing from it is still around. I’d like to look again now that there is so much information out there.

I truly hope that BK’s attorneys don’t go the route of Barry Morphew’s. Getting evidence/testimony tossed is the only way out for BK, in my opinion.
Quote

 

[maconrich]

anyone can find those first photos of the group wrapped in blankets outside the house, it would be super. Links have been scrubbed and I’ve been searching since. I saw that article the first day and nothing from it is still around. I’d like to look again now that there is so much information out there.

I truly hope that BK’s attorneys don’t go the route of Barry Morphew’s. Getting evidence/testimony tossed is the only way out for BK, in my opinion.
Quote

I'm not finding any photos.

 

[maskedwoman]

If you want to get technical, the DNA doesn't put him in the house either, unless there's more DNA than we've learned about.

I agree that, under certain circumstances, DNA on a mobile item would not necessarily put someone at the scene of a crime. However, presenting DNA on the use point of the sheath of a murder weapon, found in the intimate zone beside one of the four victims' bodies? More evidence is always better, but I don't think there has to be more DNA. I don't think only DNA will convict BK. It will be one piece of evidence among many. Most of which will never have been hinted at up to this point. Just like with any other trial.

 

[schooling]

I agree that, under certain circumstances, DNA on a mobile item would not necessarily put someone at the scene of a crime. However, presenting DNA on the use point of the sheath of a murder weapon, found in the intimate zone beside one of the four victims' bodies? More evidence is always better, but I don't think there has to be more DNA. I don't think only DNA will convict BK. It will be one piece of evidence among many. Most of which will never have been hinted at up to this point. Just like with any other trial.

In context it’s damning and places him in the house, out of context it’s much more susceptible to being doubtful by a reasonable person.

Also, if the reports are true (still waiting for
sources beyond the two posted here) about the grand jury. Then prosecutors likely have A LOT more that they don’t want revealed to the public just yet.

MOO

 

[NyxNY]

DBM. Question answered

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Ok, so grand jury instead of PH. Then arraignment where plea is made? Then trial? If so any mandatory time for when trial must start? Serious questions as I have no knowledge of how most of this works.

IMO, that's the general process. IANAL, though !

Searching the Idaho criminal rules and statutes, I didn't see a mandatory or statutory maximum timeframe to set the trial date after the arraignment. It's probably based on the court calendar and availability of judges, attorneys, etc. And IIRC, BK waived his right to a speedy trial, so the trial date could just be set at the discretion of the judge.

 

[Warwick7]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658718631662960640

 

[maconrich]

IMO, that's the general process. IANAL, though !

Searching the Idaho criminal rules and statutes, I didn't see a mandatory or statutory maximum timeframe to set the trial date after the arraignment. It's probably based on the court calendar and availability of judges, attorneys, etc. And IIRC, BK waived his right to a speedy trial, so the trial date could just be set at the discretion of the judge.

Thank you!!

 

[Warwick7]

In context it’s damning and places him in the house, out of context it’s much more susceptible to being doubtful by a reasonable person.

Also, if the reports are true (still waiting for
sources beyond the two posted here) about the grand jury. Then prosecutors likely have A LOT more that they don’t want revealed to the public just yet.

MOO

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658718631662960640

 

[schooling]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658718631662960640

I find myself stuck somewhere between the famous quote that a grand jury will “indict a ham sandwich” and “they MUST have something earth shattering that’s not in the PCA!”

 

[Twistinginthewind]

The thing about Secret Grand Juries, is that they're secret !

I'm just being cheeky, partially, but guessing if it's true that BK has been indicted by a Secret Grand Jury, we are not going to hear anything about it, the court documents will not be available to the public, there will be a speedy trial, he will be found guilty on all counts, and then off to the hoosegow for ole BK.

MOO

 

[Warwick7]

I agree that, under certain circumstances, DNA on a mobile item would not necessarily put someone at the scene of a crime. However, presenting DNA on the use point of the sheath of a murder weapon, found in the intimate zone beside one of the four victims' bodies? More evidence is always better, but I don't think there has to be more DNA. I don't think only DNA will convict BK. It will be one piece of evidence among many. Most of which will never have been hinted at up to this point. Just like with any other trial.

BBM

I agree.

Also, there is always more DNA than we've learned about...killers tend to do that.

Along with this, there is no doubt in my my there has always been more evidence never hinted at.

 

[Warwick7]

I find myself stuck somewhere between the famous quote that a grand jury will “indict a ham sandwich” and “they MUST have something earth shattering that’s not in the PCA!”

Seeing that there has been a grannd jury the trial will most likely begin faster. Without a grand jury indictment, the prosecutor has to demonstrate to the trial judge that he has enough evidence to continue with the case.

However, with a grand jury indictment, the prosecutor can skip that step and proceed directly to trial. MOO is: you better believe they have something earth shattering....

 

[Warwick7]

I have always been intrigued by Locard's exchange principle.

In forensic science, Locard's principle holds that the perpetrator of a crime will bring something into the crime scene and leave with something from it, and that both can be used as forensic evidence. Dr. Edmond Locard was a pioneer in forensic science.

It has always been my own opinion thst BK left more than DNA on a sheath.