4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 72

[ktm44]

Its strange to me that the killer didn't track bloody shoe prints all over, especially coming from X's room, if not a lot at least a few, heck even a fading trail as the blood wore off as the killer walked away. IMO

I find this single shoe print confusing as well, how can there be one lone shoe print with latent blood? Not even one or two before it? I know the same ol' same ol' explanation that the PCA didn't list everything, only what was needed, but I think that if there were other bloody, visible shoe prints they would have been listed on the PSA before a single barely visible latent one that was originally overlooked would have been. MOO

The only reason that particular shoe print was included in the PCA would be to try and confirm he could have been close enough for the roommate to have seen him.

I’m sure there are other much more visible footprints in the house but likely not near her door or there could be others near her door that LE doesn’t want to disclose yet.

 

[Kemug]

I wonder if BK's parents will have to testify at his trial? They may be needed to fill in all sorts of details. Especially in the time leading up to his arrest.

 

[kae27]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1624222624602804227

Wow. From that article: "The faculty made the decision at the department’s end-of-year meeting in December, during which professors were also told that some female students reported that Mr. Kohberger had made them feel uncomfortable. In one of those instances, Mr. Kohberger was accused of following a female student to her car, according to two people familiar with the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case."

The student he followed must be totally freaked out by what happened, knowing what she knows now.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

It'd because we are talking about the PCA not the trial IMO. Evidence to prove and convict comes at trial stage IMO

ETA: I'm sorry if I sounded abrupt, ofcourse it's fine to speculate along these lines re what's mssing from PCA and why. I guess my real point is that I don't find it useful,but I respect that others do.

yes, I get what we're talking about. I understand the difference between PCA, BARD, trial, etc. I mean this respectfully, not in a snarky way, but if you don't find my questions useful or interesting, then that's okay. I felt that way about the Murphy discussions and the endless Greek tragedy, and I just scrolled on by.

but jmo and respectfully, I don't think asking legitimate questions about the PCA is speculation. I didn't speculate at all. I questioned it. And while I appreciate you taking the time to explain your abruptness, I do believe it's okay for me to ask critical questions and others to share their ideas. imo jmo the reason I am here is to question what we know and why things are written the way they are. I'm looking at the written words and the facts that we know, and I'm trying to put them together. When I find a missing puzzle piece, I wonder about it. natural curiosity. I also know that both sides of this will be looking at every chink in the armor, every conceivable weakness in their own evidence and the other side's as well.



imo jmo that footprint is a big question mark, and I wondered if there were any logical ideas others had to address it.

 

[DetRavioli]

“Which now apply to victim’s families.” That was my point, earlier—that there’s considerable confusion on that subject

Hopefully I won’t get dragged for this, but, I feel horribly for the families. And it’s impossible for me to imagine what I would do in their place. But I think if it were to serve getting justice for my loved one’s murder, I would comply readily to a gag order. Especially if even the prosecution was in favor of it. I wouldn’t want to do ANYTHING to risk the trial/investigation. I guess I just don’t understand what there is to communicate at this point. Are social media memorial pages dedicated to the victims (and not the case) considered a breach of the gag order? Because I do think those should be permitted, if possible.

 

[Sundog]

Could it be cause he's in jail?

It's an interesting situation. The statement by WSU says that BK no longer has his teaching assistantship. Also that BK is not a currently enrolled student at WSU. I think WSU can say this probably because BK did not enroll this semester. He would have had to pay his tuition and fees by the start of the spring semester in January to be enrolled, and pay out of his own pocket since he lost his TAship/scholarship. And I assume that he did not do so, so he is not currently enrolled.

Since he hasn't been found guilty of a crime at this point, the university probably wouldn't have grounds to expel him/stop him from registering for the spring semester if BK had paid his tuition and fees in January for the spring semester. So I'm guessing that takes care of things for now. They can expel him once he is found guilty. JMO on this.

 

[Helechawagirl]

Could be, but there would still be prints, right? And if so, then a potentially bloody smeared trail of prints would still indicate that the killer was headed from one direction to another? IMO JMO. IDK just seems odd to me because even with shoe covers, if there was blood on the cover, then print, even if smeared, and if there was no blood, then no print. One lone print is confusing. If no shoe covers were worn, then it's still baffling that there's only one print that was found on the second processing which doesn't seem to indicate bloody trail. IDK. I'm very curious about that. It defies logic. imo JMO

I’m with you on that. For it to be the worst crime scene some had ever seen, you would think there would be blood on the floors—but if the girls were stabbed in the torso, may have bled out on the bed and not much on the floor? Or they have more footprints than they have mentioned and this one was mentioned to support DM’s account. JMO

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

Its strange to me that the killer didn't track bloody shoe prints all over, especially coming from X's room, if not a lot at least a few, heck even a fading trail as the blood wore off as the killer walked away. IMO

I find this single shoe print confusing as well, how can there be one lone shoe print with latent blood? Not even one or two before it? I know the same ol' same ol' explanation that the PCA didn't list everything, only what was needed, but I think that if there were other bloody, visible shoe prints they would have been listed on the PSA before a single barely visible latent one that was originally overlooked would have been. MOO

thank you. it's not like the killer can fly, most likely, so it seems like there wouldn't be just one whoopsie-daisy-is-that-a-latent footprint imo jmo. it seems reasonable that if there were going to be a bloody footprint, it would be closer to the bodies and blood, and that yes, it would get more faint as the killer moved away imo jmo. Per the PCA, the latent shoe print was only found on the second processing, too, so it must not have been that obvious, and if they had more, why not say so? It's not like evidence can be hidden. There would be no reason not to include more bloody prints in the PCA imo jmo.

 

[I'm Nobody]

Wow. From that article: "The faculty made the decision at the department’s end-of-year meeting in December, during which professors were also told that some female students reported that Mr. Kohberger had made them feel uncomfortable. In one of those instances, Mr. Kohberger was accused of following a female student to her car, according to two people familiar with the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case." The student he followed must be totally freaked out by what happened.

Thanks for posting this, although stalking stuff makes me furious.
This killer came for those girls and yet some on SM are judging the survivors, hard.

IMO BK is a stalker, prob has been for a long time. He should have been reported long before. And maybe he was.
Victims need to be believed. Stalkers need to be prosecuted.
Stalking in this case seems a slam-dunk.
The DA needs to add stalking charges to BK for those 12, at least twelve, occasions prior to November 13,2022.

Oh Vey MOO

Idaho Law: "following you or maintaining surveillance (electronic or otherwise) on you"

Stalking Idaho
Stalking in the first degree is a felony punishable by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or imprisonment in the state prison for not less than one (1) year nor more than five (5) years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

Stalking Prevention, Awareness, and Resource Center (SPARC) (USA) | Coalition Against Stalkerware (EN)

stopstalkerware.org

What is the legal definition of stalking in Idaho?

Stalking is when an abuser intentionally and maliciously engages in a “course of conduct” that:

www.womenslaw.org

Section 18-7905 – Idaho State Legislature

legislature.idaho.gov

Section 18-7906 – Idaho State Legislature

legislature.idaho.gov

edit: punctuation

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

dp dbm

 

[Helechawagirl]

I wonder if BK's parents will have to testify at his trial? They may be needed to fill in all sorts of details. Especially in the time leading up to his arrest.

That would be painful to see.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

The only reason that particular shoe print was included in the PCA would be to try and confirm he could have been close enough for the roommate to have seen him.

If that's the reason, then wouldn't it have been more compelling and convincing to mention other footprints near that door to make that case that he was close enough for her to see? it certainly wouldn't undermine the argument, imo jmo. if more footprints existed in that same place, why not mention them? and if they didn't exist, that seems weird to me since it is one random footprint. that was my whole point with the question. why only that one footprint? jmo imo it doesn't make sense nor does it make a convincing argument imo jmo.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

I’m with you on that. For it to be the worst crime scene some had ever seen, you would think there would be blood on the floors—but if the girls were stabbed in the torso, may have bled out on the bed and not much on the floor? Or they have more footprints than they have mentioned and this one was mentioned to support DM’s account. JMO

I agree. thank you! IMO JMO if they had more footprints outside DM's room, they would have mentioned it, I think, because it makes a stronger argument. instead, and with it only being found second pass, it sounds like they just have the faint one, and I'm baffled, if that's the case, and if it's not, then why not add in the others to strengthen DM's account of things? if I'm trying to bolster someone's story, I don't choose the least of it. truly baffling. I'd sure like to listen in on the defense war room.

 

[jepop]

yes, I get what we're talking about. I understand the difference between PCA, BARD, trial, etc. I mean this respectfully, not in a snarky way, but if you don't find my questions useful or interesting, then that's okay. I felt that way about the Murphy discussions and the endless Greek tragedy, and I just scrolled on by.

but jmo and respectfully, I don't think asking legitimate questions about the PCA is speculation. I didn't speculate at all. I questioned it. And while I appreciate you taking the time to explain your abruptness, I do believe it's okay for me to ask critical questions and others to share their ideas. imo jmo the reason I am here is to question what we know and why things are written the way they are. I'm looking at the written words and the facts that we know, and I'm trying to put them together. When I find a missing puzzle piece, I wonder about it. natural curiosity. I also know that both sides of this will be looking at every chink in the armor, every conceivable weakness in their own evidence and the other side's as well.



imo jmo that footprint is a big question mark, and I wondered if there were any logical ideas others had to address it.

I meant no offence to you. I think we are all speculating about different things here and as I said I respect your's and others wish to do so in terms of what's missing from the PCA, or what appears odd or unusual to you. I don't consider speculation a dirty word, and had no intention of conveying such a message. I have no problem with speculation, we do it re motive, we do it re gaps in knowledge re BK's life, we do it in terms of what evidence might come to bear in trial, for defense and prosecution.

I hope you will have rigorous discussions with other interested people here about the points that interest you and not only ask questions but also venture speculative answers! We are all fine to discuss what we each find stimulating and useful. MOO

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

I meant no offence to you. I think we are all speculating about different things here and as I said I respect your's and others wish to do so in terms of what's missing from the PCA, or what appears odd or unusual to you. I don't consider speculation a dirty word, and had no intention of conveying such a message. I have no problem with speculation, we do it re motive, we do it re gaps in knowledge re BK's life, we do it in terms of what evidence might come to bear in trial, for defense and prosecution.

I hope you will have rigorous discussions with other interested people here about the points that interest you and not only ask questions but also venture speculative answers! We are all fine to discuss what we each find stimulating and useful. MOO

thank you, and no worries, I didn't take offense. I was just clarifying. I have seen some wild speculation, and I know my own theories at the start of this were part fact, part intuition. as it was, I was pretty close on the mark if BK is the killer. Although I thought he'd be short (wrong), I was pretty sure on the worked at a university in WA and he took Sand road. I never thought he was part of their circle, and I believed that he had watched from afar, SM, MG, etc. I also thought he'd be intelligent, but if BK is the killer, I sure missed on that one. anyway, not sure where I'm going with that except to say, yes, speculation has its place, but now I'll just be picking away at the PCA because there are holes and leaps, and I know that is what his defense is looking for and the prosecutor is trying to fill, and I like thinking from that perspective. I'm really looking forward to the trial analysis, too. anyway, no worries, I think there's a place for everyone and appreciate those who are examining different aspects of this.

 

[jepop]

Hopefully I won’t get dragged for this, but, I feel horribly for the families. And it’s impossible for me to imagine what I would do in their place. But I think if it were to serve getting justice for my loved one’s murder, I would comply readily to a gag order. Especially if even the prosecution was in favor of it. I wouldn’t want to do ANYTHING to risk the trial/investigation. I guess I just don’t understand what there is to communicate at this point. Are social media memorial pages dedicated to the victims (and not the case) considered a breach of the gag order? Because I do think those should be permitted, if possible.

I wouldn't think sm memorials, remembering the victims and so forth would be a violation of the gag order. MOO

 

[Ghostwheel]

I

I see what your getting at but the next sentence seems to suggest Xana was inside the room?

PCA p 1
"As I approached the room, I could see a body, later identified as Kemodle's, laying on the floor.Kernodle was deceased with wounds which appeared to have been caused by an edged weapon .Also in the room was a male, later identified as Ethan Chapin,
hereafter, "Chapin"."

122922 Affidavit - Exhibit A - Statement of Brett Payne.pdf | PDF Host

PDF Host read free online - 122922 Affidavit - Exhibit A - Statement of Brett Payne.pdf

pdfhost.io

100 percent hear what you are saying and it can totally be interpreted that way. But I have to wonder why not say "I could see a body in the room"? Why say "as I approached the room". What does that have to do with the price of butter, in my mind? Why not even "as I approached the room, I could see a body on the floor of the room." In my house, you could approach the open front door and see something on the floor of the entry, floor of the dining room, floor of the kitchen and/or floor of the family room. Also someone half out of the office, hallway and/or living room. In that case "as I approached the front door, I could see a body on the floor" means nothing except that there is a body on the floor of the entry or dining room or kitchen or family room or partly in the living room or partly in the office or partly in the hallway. Also, in the kitchen was another body. (As an example where the placement of a comma changes the meaning)

It's why I keep an open mind and believe accuracy in what we say anything "says" is important. Ethan was in the room (or at least part of him was) per the words in the PCA. But Xana was just "on the floor" and could be seen "as I approached the room" per the words in the PCA. Words following that can be interpreted multiple ways. Occam's razor isn't always the sharpest tool in the box.Your mileage may vary.

We all get to believe what we want. I haven't closed my mind to different possibilities yet. JMO.

 

[Ghostwheel]

thank you. it's not like the killer can fly, most likely, so it seems like there wouldn't be just one whoopsie-daisy-is-that-a-latent footprint imo jmo. it seems reasonable that if there were going to be a bloody footprint, it would be closer to the bodies and blood, and that yes, it would get more faint as the killer moved away imo jmo. Per the PCA, the latent shoe print was only found on the second processing, too, so it must not have been that obvious, and if they had more, why not say so? It's not like evidence can be hidden. There would be no reason not to include more bloody prints in the PCA imo jmo.

That makes me wonder, would there be any reason TO include more bloody footprints in the PCA? Would there be more probable cause for this particular guy if there were? If the latent print was simply to prove DMs story someone was there, would there need to be mention of more elsewhere in the house? Or might that be something to save for the trial? (I don't have any idea if it would have been useful or not. Open to thoughts)

 

[Nova]

"The affidavit said that officers responded to reports of an unconscious person at the property at 4 p.m. the same day."

At 4 p.m.???

Delayed Idaho murders 911 call finally explained

It took eight hours for the roommates of the slain students to call the police, but a new report offers an explanation as to why the alarm wasn't raised sooner.

www.newsweek.com

I understood the PCA to say that detectives arrived at 4 p.m.

When patrol officers/EMTs first responded to the 911 call wasn't specified, but I assume it was probably quickly because the dispatcher mentioned the "non-responsive person".

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

That makes me wonder, would there be any reason TO include more bloody footprints in the PCA? Would there be more probable cause for this particular guy if there were? If the latent print was simply to prove DMs story someone was there, would there need to be mention of more elsewhere in the house? Or might that be something to save for the trial? (I don't have any idea if it would have been useful or not. Open to thoughts)

thank you, and idk which is why it's so baffling. imo, if there were more to mention in front of DM's room, it would certainly have strengthened her story imo jmo

if there were not more in front of her room, how did one errant footprint not found until the second pass get there? if the killer walked there, then one there and only one just seems out of place.

I'm not sure that it would be necessary to mention the others in the house, though why saving that for trial doesn't make any sense to me either, but ICBW. that info is all going to th defense during discovery anyway. but I'm open to thoughts, too, and that's why I brought this out. there are things I can understand holding back (first, witnesses, of course) but this, no. but icbw.