4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 76

[jepop]

Good point that this is based off comments made in an interview on Fox lol!

There's no other way to say it: either a thing is wiped up or it isn't. I'm stumped on how a diamond pattern was detected. From the way it's been described and discussed, partial print sounds more accurate but we don't have any way to verify what is what. If BK had attempted to clean up his trail I think it would have been detected. JMO.

JMO also wondering when DM gave her witness statement, did she see the intruder wearing a coverall? Obviously the details of DMs' statement are not available to the public. Just wondering out loud here.

I discussed the print ad nauseum on previous threads so I won't repeat my speculations and opinion here in (excruciating!) detail. From memory there is detailed discussions on thread #74. Personally, I don't find the latent print as included in the PCA weird or odd, or anyway it doesn't keep me up at night. I think it was the tail end of some other prints left at the scene (probably a little blood was picked up on a shoe at the second (IMO) crime scene - XK's room :-(). MOO and just summary of the result of my thinking this over.

Good point on the cleaning up speculation. I would also assume that attempts to clean up would be likely to leave it's own trail of evidence (ie cleaning fluid or marks of scrubbing/wiping with a cloth?).

I believe it's most likely DM gave an official statement to Police the same day or very close to after the crimes were committed. That's just MOO but based on my understanding of what would be standard and diligent Police Procedure for such a serious case of homicide. In the PCA, there is no mention of coveralls. DM describes dark clothing and a mask covering the stranger's mouth and nose.

IMO, there was much speculation re the idea that the alleged killer may have been wearing coveralls and it may have grown some legs and become confused with what we actually know at this point. MOO

 

[katydid23]

I've been doing som emental gymnastics on this one. In this context, the only way I can see dna transfer happenning via a public laundromat washing machine is if the ('real') killer used a machine after BK had used it and (a) either washed the sheath in the machine whereupon some BK dna in the machine was transferred onto the snap button of the sheath (Forgive me, I think this is absolutely not what happenned and makes no sense whatsoever but maybe there is a remote possibility); or (b) the unknown/unarrested potential/speculated killer removed his clothes from a machine BK had previously used and got some BK dna on his hands. Or there was some BK dna on some of his clothes. This person then goes home or wherever and transfers this BK dna to the snap button of the sheath via his hands or via a piece of clothing. I'm no expert and I suppose there is this possibility. I'm not sure how such a scenario would be raised at trial but my guess is that if the defense wanted to argue this they would need the testimony of an expert and proof that BK used a public laundromat at the very least. It's not really provable IMO and the jury would have to consider it within the context of other circumstantial evidence presented. If the prosecution brings a strong circumstantial case with other evidence then I can't see it personally. If the prosecution has little else circumstantially tying the alleged killer to the scene it may be an avenue the defense could touch upon. MOO

The main problem with the defense trying to sell this theory, is that it would be very very very unusual that the random DNA source would then be someone potentially connected to the crime.

The washing machine would have dNa from babies, old ladies, teens, and a wide diverse range of people. What are the odds that the random DNA that found it's way to the sheath of the killer's knife, just happened to be from the owner of the car seen coming and going from the crime scene?

 

[jepop]

The main problem with the defense trying to sell this theory, is that it would be very very very unusual that the random DNA source would then be someone potentially connected to the crime.

The washing machine would have dNa from babies, old ladies, teens, and a wide diverse range of people. What are the odds that the random DNA that found it's way to the sheath of the killer's knife, just happened to be from the owner of the car seen coming and going from the crime scene?

Yes, absolutely! In isolation it's not something I would term as a reasonable possibility in the least. It falls into the realm of pure speculation and probably wouldn't be admitted to trial without some sort of reasonable grounds. For now to me it's a moot point. MOO

 

[CSIDreamer]

RBBM

How could the tread or print ever be seen let alone suggested or speculated to be a "diamond pattern tread" if the print had been wiped up? Since AFAIK there has only ever been mention of one single latent shoe print.

Yes there could still be faint DNA evidence/biological material not seen by the naked eye IMO there wouldn't be much of a print left if someone attempted to wipe it away.

Whenever I search I get a shoe sole with a diamond pattern on the heel and toe of the sole but there is more of a honeycomb pattern on the arch or mid-sole. FWIW as we discuss forensics, shoe size, gait etc.

Did DMs' description include "coveralls"? I feel that if BK were spotted in that area of the house at that point he wouldn't have taken off any sort of covering just yet, had he been wearing one (if so and the print is BK, he was not wearing a shoe covering at that point, hmm).

One last thing I'm struggling with: The fact/possibility that BK was able to dispose of the evidence in a more discreet way than committing the crime itself. If there is a digital trail leading him from Pullman to Moscow the night of the murders, surely there must be some sort of trail leading LE to a weapon or some blood evidence, no??

Regarding coveralls. No, that is not in the description in the PCA. I'm not sure how DM could have classified someone as athletic but not muscular if he was wearing coveralls.

 

[CSIDreamer]

The main problem with the defense trying to sell this theory, is that it would be very very very unusual that the random DNA source would then be someone potentially connected to the crime.

The washing machine would have dNa from babies, old ladies, teens, and a wide diverse range of people. What are the odds that the random DNA that found it's way to the sheath of the killer's knife, just happened to be from the owner of the car seen coming and going from the crime scene?

Not to mention the likelihood that Kohberger used the university apartment complex laundry facilities. That opens up a whole new ocean of speculation. I won't go there.

JMO

 

[Kemug]

DNA transference in a washing machine may well happen, but there is surely a minus something percent chance that BK's DNA was accidentally transferred to an article found at the scene of a crime for which BK has been charged for other reasons. I don't buy it, and I don't think a jury will either.

 

[NCWatcher]

Regarding coveralls. No, that is not in the description in the PCA. I'm not sure how DM could have classified someone as athletic but not muscular if he was wearing coveralls.

Good point. But I'm not sure how someone could look athletic but not muscular in the dark in fark winter clothes either. And he must have had on winter clothes or that would have stood out, I'd think. She must be using those terms differently than I would or there are lots of details in her statement we aren't aware of. Or both.
JMO

 

[CSIDreamer]

Good point. But I'm not sure how someone could look athletic but not muscular in the dark in fark winter clothes either. And he must have had on winter clothes or that would have stood out, I'd think. She must be using those terms differently than I would or there are lots of details in her statement we aren't aware of. Or both.
JMO

The mental picture I got from the sparse description in the PCA made me imagine something form fitting. Like running clothes. JMO

I know some serious runners. They wear stuff like this:

https://www.amazon.com/1Bests-Running-Compression-Skin-Tight-Tracksuit/dp/B07D31BKFX/ref=sxin_22_pa_sp_phone_search_thematic_sspa?content-id=amzn1.sym.37e3b3b9-8d0e-45b0-93aa-6b62717fdd17%3Aamzn1.sym.37e3b3b9-8d0e-45b0-93aa-6b62717fdd17&crid=UXOOGLUZFSU1&cv_ct_cx=running+suits+compression+for+men+set&keywords=running+suits+compression+for+men+set&pd_rd_i=B07D31BKFX&pd_rd_r=1af87c53-fef5-480b-bfd3-ae642fdf9855&pd_rd_w=Mhjro&pd_rd_wg=XYgBC&pf_rd_p=37e3b3b9-8d0e-45b0-93aa-6b62717fdd17&pf_rd_r=T8EY1B7VP8Z3GBZZ0EPW&qid=1680524864&sbo=RZvfv%2F%2FHxDF%2BO5021pAnSA%3D%3D&sprefix=running+suits+compression+for+men+set%2Caps%2C197&sr=1-1-364cf978-ce2a-480a-9bb0-bdb96faa0f61-spons&psc=1&smid=A1OLYMIQ2WNSR1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUExWFpFNFQ0SjJZUzIxJmVuY3J5cHRlZElkPUEwNjMzMzg3M0I0N1FLMlA3NFNCTiZlbmNyeXB0ZWRBZElkPUEwMjc4NTgzMzIwTlE5Nzg1VFVNRiZ3aWRnZXROYW1lPXNwX3Bob25lX3NlYXJjaF90aGVtYXRpYyZhY3Rpb249Y2xpY2tSZWRpcmVjdCZkb05vdExvZ0NsaWNrPXRydWU=

 

[iamshadow21]

DNA transference in a washing machine may well happen, but there is surely a minus something percent chance that BK's DNA was accidentally transferred to an article found at the scene of a crime for which BK has been charged for other reasons. I don't buy it, and I don't think a jury will either.

Also, nobody launders a leather knife sheath, so the transference isn't just from an item to another item in a machine. It's from BK to an item to the washing machine to another item to a person who touched the knife sheath (without leaving their own DNA) who then went and did a murder over the state border in the exact area of a town where BK had been stalking at night...

It's such a distant possibility that to me it seems absurd.

MOO

 

[CLGM]

A couple of questions this morning:

In what circumstances could LE have tried to lift BK’s fingerprints from the outside of his car (door handles, drunk latch, gas tank cover) anytime after they began to zero in in him and before he left for PA? Would a warrant be needed to pull fingerprints from a car in a public parking lot? What about the traffic stops? Could those have been attempts to collect fingerprints? If there were attempts and they didn’t get anything, would that suggest that BK scoured the exterior of his car very carefully in such a way that nobody does unless they have something to hide? The lack of a single print would be an interesting piece of circumstantial evidence.

Same questions for his apt doorknob? And the door frame. I guess I don’t get how the only piece of DNS they got was from a piece of trash in PA.

Second thought (unrelated) - imo jmo re: the timeline of possible SM nexuses- imo BK selected University of Idaho for its program. IMO, after he knew he was going there is when he started trolling SM for whatever purpose- to legitimately find friends/hook ups or something darker. IMO jmo

 

[maskedwoman]

Or.. it simply may have been correct. Why assume it is miscommunication?

Yes, it could be correct, but WSers have watched his graduation video and his degree was not announced as cloud forensics. He may have had some classes, but not a degree.

 

[whiterhino]

Regarding coveralls. No, that is not in the description in the PCA. I'm not sure how DM could have classified someone as athletic but not muscular if he was wearing coveralls.

I'm only basing my questions off the receipt for the Dickies item that has been referred to as coveralls. FWIW AFAIK there hasn't been any proof to say what exactly the item was IIRC. I didn't think there was any description for that in the PCA.

Good point, how would DM be able to describe BKs' body type if he were wearing coveralls? It's also the kind of thing I'd imagine would stand out and be worth mentioning in a statement. JMO.

@NCWatcher I'm not so certain that BK was wearing "winter clothes". He was driving and I imagine wouldn't want to wear anything bulky considering. JMO he wore light layers and something basic. I wonder though if BK didn't either add or remove a layer prior to or after entering the house.

 

[CSIDreamer]

Yes, it could be correct, but WSers have watched his graduation video and his degree was not announced as cloud forensics. He may have had some classes, but not a degree.

Which graduation?

 

[CSIDreamer]

I'm only basing my questions off the receipt for the Dickies item that has been referred to as coveralls. FWIW AFAIK there hasn't been any proof to say what exactly the item was IIRC. I didn't think there was any description for that in the PCA.

Good point, how would DM be able to describe BKs' body type if he were wearing coveralls? It's also the kind of thing I'd imagine would stand out and be worth mentioning in a statement. JMO.

@NCWatcher I'm not so certain that BK was wearing "winter clothes". He was driving and I imagine wouldn't want to wear anything bulky considering. JMO he wore light layers and something basic. I wonder though if BK didn't either add or remove a layer prior to or after entering the house.

As far as I remember, not only did the inventory receipt description not state coveralls, it also doesn't state the $$ for the Dickies item. For all we know, it's socks.

JMO

 

[NCWatcher]

I'm only basing my questions off the receipt for the Dickies item that has been referred to as coveralls. FWIW AFAIK there hasn't been any proof to say what exactly the item was IIRC. I didn't think there was any description for that in the PCA.

Good point, how would DM be able to describe BKs' body type if he were wearing coveralls? It's also the kind of thing I'd imagine would stand out and be worth mentioning in a statement. JMO.

@NCWatcher I'm not so certain that BK was wearing "winter clothes". He was driving and I imagine wouldn't want to wear anything bulky considering. JMO he wore light layers and something basic. I wonder though if BK didn't either add or remove a layer prior to or after entering the house.

That could be. But if I were him I wouldn't have taken off clothes after entering the house. I'd also think the clothes must have passed for late fall/winter clothes or that would have stood out to DM as she saw enough of his body to give a physical description. Or at least it would have stood out to me in Nov in a colder climate. (But maybe UI students run around in shorts and t-shirts when it's 20°) If he did wear layers though, it would seem those would have obscured his "athletic" build too.
JMO

 

[Montecore1]

Which graduation?

Quote from article, there are plenty more confirming this

He submitted his application to the police department at some point during the fall semester, when he took his first semester of classes at WSU after graduating from DeSales University with a master’s degree in psychology and cloud-based forensics in June 2022.

Idaho murders: Bryan Kohberger applied for internship at Pullman Police Department in fall 2022

Brian Kohberger, the criminology Ph.D. student accused of stabbing four University of Idaho students to death in November, applied for an internship in the fall with the local police department in Pullman, Washington, according to a newly released probable cause affidavit.

www.q13fox.com

 

[maskedwoman]

Ever since @10ofRods explained how DNA can remain even after a laundry cycle, I've been a little iffy on the DNA. Assuming BK used a laundromat to wash his clothes, I'm wondering if his DNA could have been in a washer that someone later used.

https://www.floridaforensicscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/DNA-Transfer-During-Laundering-May-Yield-Complete-Genetic-Profiles.pdf

DNA Can Be Innocently Transferred Through a Load of Laundry

DNA testing has come a long way and is now more sensitive than ever. There is a new study showing that DNA can be transferred through laundry. Learn more.

www.bhwlawfirm.com

I'm not sure I follow. Are you concerned that BK used a public laundry, and that the 'real killer' happened to use the same machine and somehow transferred BK's DNA to the knife sheath? Or that someone washed the sheath in a public machine and it picked up his DNA from the machine? I googled and was surprised to find that complete DNA profiles can be transferred from one piece of clothing to another during laundering.

I just have a hard time thinking that a suspect who left no other evidence of his visit to the house, just happened to use the same machine as a guy who happened to generally match the witness' description, and who also owned a car matching a car that shows up on video, and a phone that had been in the area numerous times. That sounds a lot like a Zebra that BeginnerSleuther talked about, but that's totally MOOooo and not worth much. LOL

 

[maskedwoman]

Which graduation?

At DeSales.

 

[Justice101]

I discussed the print ad nauseum on previous threads so I won't repeat my speculations and opinion here in (excruciating!) detail. From memory there is detailed discussions on thread #74. Personally, I don't find the latent print as included in the PCA weird or odd, or anyway it doesn't keep me up at night. I think it was the tail end of some other prints left at the scene (probably a little blood was picked up on a shoe at the second (IMO) crime scene - XK's room :-(). MOO and just summary of the result of my thinking this over.

Good point on the cleaning up speculation. I would also assume that attempts to clean up would be likely to leave it's own trail of evidence (ie cleaning fluid or marks of scrubbing/wiping with a cloth?).

I believe it's most likely DM gave an official statement to Police the same day or very close to after the crimes were committed. That's just MOO but based on my understanding of what would be standard and diligent Police Procedure for such a serious case of homicide. In the PCA, there is no mention of coveralls. DM describes dark clothing and a mask covering the stranger's mouth and nose.

IMO, there was much speculation re the idea that the alleged killer may have been wearing coveralls and it may have grown some legs and become confused with what we actually know at this point. MOO

I thought someone said there was a receipt in the PCA showing Dickies clothing?

 

[Justice101]

I'm not sure I follow. Are you concerned that BK used a public laundry, and that the 'real killer' happened to use the same machine and somehow transferred BK's DNA to the knife sheath? Or that someone washed the sheath in a public machine and it picked up his DNA from the machine? I googled and was surprised to find that complete DNA profiles can be transferred from one piece of clothing to another during laundering.

I just have a hard time thinking that a suspect who left no other evidence of his visit to the house, just happened to use the same machine as a guy who happened to generally match the witness' description, and who also owned a car matching a car that shows up on video, and a phone that had been in the area numerous times. That sounds a lot like a Zebra that BeginnerSleuther talked about, but that's totally MOOooo and not worth much. LOL

I mean anyone can come up with a wild explanation as to why X, Y or Z evidence is someone else's DNA evidence or that they happened to do A,B, or C at the same time at 4 in the morning, etc.

But a jury is not going to buy 20 different crazy coincidences occurring all at once on one poor unlucky person.

The jury will likely conclude that the preponderance of all the evidence, leads to guilty or not guilty...not weak excuses. That's where the "reasonable doubt" thing loses it's credibility for me.

I'd love to be on the jury... not because I have made up my mind and it can't be changed, but because I have a scientific background and I can discern fact from fiction pretty well. I think I could be unbiased and reach a conclusion based on the evidence presented then.