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

[Cool Cats]

We didn't know about the witness until the PCA, so he would have been processing that at the same time as the rest of us.

MOO

Nothing got out on SM about it?

It wasn't a secret who the witnesses were.

But, yah, her description may not have leaked out.

 

[PrairieWind]

No. When 911 was caledl does not have anything to do with when, why, how and who murdered the victims. At least not that I know of. DM, BF and the friends and Ethan's brother who arrived later that morning are all victims of these crimes. MOO

When were the murders carried out? who walked through the crime scene after the murders occurred and when?

 

[PrairieWind]

Thank you for your response. I apologize if my previous statement was misunderstood, and I appreciate the opportunity to further clarify my position. I understand that DNA evidence is not simply accepted solely due to its very nature or the concept of touch DNA, but rather it must meet several specific requirements to be admissible, including meeting evidentiary standards, being properly collected and preserved, and being analyzed and presented correctly in court.

Thus, my question is, how does the legal system determine whether DNA evidence is admissible, especially in cases where touch DNA is involved? And why is the correctness of DNA evidence identification, collection, and presentation so critical to legal trials?

Do you specialize in any particular area of law, such as criminal defense or civil litigation?

Moo

“FYI, touch DNA has no role to play in this case. All the discussions related to DNA are mere speculation that have been raised. It's important to note that we have limited information on this case. Therefore, any DNA-related discussions should be taken with a grain of salt.”

We don't know much about what evidence is available here. We know some sort of DNA sample was taken from the sheath snap area. We have had an unconfirmed report that it was sent to a second lab for further analysis to identify the dna. DNA is clearly very complicated and must be testified to by an expert. Expert testimony must meet standards known as Daubert standards. Courts are the gate keeper as to what is allowed. Is the evidence found here going to meet the standards to be admissible? How was it obtained? Who tested it, how? what process? is this process an accepted and well known, peer reviewed, challenged method with a proven track record? What is the failure rate? The PCA included this DNA issue and the father's DNA. I don't know that this method has met a Daubert challenge before. Or if there was a different lab's techniques used to identify BK's dna if that method has been Daubert cleared or not. They used this to help get an arrest, but I have questions if it will be admissible at trial or not.

 

[wary]

I think it's more than fair game; it's an essential part of the case that must be evaluated. if I were 10 minutes or even an hour, waiting to make sure he was gone, that's one thing. But this was over 7 hours and anyone could have entered during that time and many things could have been done during that time. To present a competent defense is AT's job, and ignoring the 7+ hours between murders an 911 would imo be negligent on both sides. Defense side for failing to provide the best possible defense, and prosecution's side for leaving an obvious appeal on the table. Someone has to explain. I imagine both sides will have a go. imo jmo.

I think that it’s extremely likely that DM, though startled, and maybe frightened, talked herself into thinking that she was being silly, and that there wasn’t anything really to be afraid of. I know exactly how that works; I did it myself in a situation that involved an attempted break-in.

 

[CGray123]

We know so little now. We may not know much more after the PH if the gag rule holds up and BK chooses not to call witnesses in the PH.

For now, the PCA can give us confidence that BK was not arbitrarily arrested, and also support our appreciation for LE's diligent response to a very challenging circumstance. But nothing more than that, IMO.

As pertinent to the period before trial, we don't know how the judge will rule on BK's inevitable legal challenges to every important piece of evidence, and how the prosecution will adapt its strategy - if it must and if it can. We don't even know the arguments that can be made in this particular case, for and against admissibility: we only know the rules that will be invoked and what may have happened when those rules were applied in other cases. Each case is different, so those other cases may not tell us much at this point.

For me, I have many many questions. But nothing I know currently gives me a basis to doubt that BK will be convicted at trial. And since the DP is not even on the table at this point, and I haven't heard his case in mitigation, I can't and won't speculate as to whether the DP will be imposed.

 

[Boxer]

I think it's more than fair game; it's an essential part of the case that must be evaluated. if I were 10 minutes or even an hour, waiting to make sure he was gone, that's one thing. But this was over 7 hours and anyone could have entered during that time and many things could have been done during that time. To present a competent defense is AT's job, and ignoring the 7+ hours between murders an 911 would imo be negligent on both sides. Defense side for failing to provide the best possible defense, and prosecution's side for leaving an obvious appeal on the table. Someone has to explain. I imagine both sides will have a go. imo jmo.

7 hours later is when they would be getting up after going to bed around 3-4 am. Not surprising.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I understand why LE led the public to believe both surviving roommates were asleep downstairs. But it makes me curious about what else has been manipulated by them to protect the witnesses and the integrity of the investigation.
If there had been a third party that was invited into house that night, there would have been leaks about that wouldn't there? We would have seen something in all the search warrants that would have suggested such, wouldn't we?
And although I see it might help explain in a convoluted way, the delayed call to 911 and perhaps the open door at 8:30am (their early exit?) - I argue against it as it seems it would have had to have appeared in the PCA. Or would it? Would informing the defense have satisfied the prosecution's duty to present a fair trial (while keeping that from the public)?
Do any of the warrants concerning the CI seem to fit into this niggling mind wandering?

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

7 hours later is when they would be getting up after going to bed around 3-4 am. Not surprising.

Per the PCA, I believe they were already in bed and DM was woken up at 4 am. Also, that plays into the cross-examination as well. She was woken up, saw something scary, and went back to bed. Did she think she was dreaming? And if so, how does she know it wasn't a dream? I mean, we know there were murders, but her eyewitness account, the shadowy figure? Was there a moment where she was having what's called a hypnagogic or hypnopompic hallucination? These are fairly common in everyone when they're woken up from sleep or when they're falling asleep, but something keeps them awake. How reliable is her description of bushy brows?

I think this will be a rich line of questioning for the defense. But as I said before, I don't think DM adds that much to the prosecution's case and IMO, I think her testimony is more risky than not.

Edited to change 3 am to 4 am

MOO.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

We would have seen something in all the search warrants that would have suggested such, wouldn't we?

Many of the warrants are redacted, some are sealed completely, and all of the supporting affidavits are sealed, so we would have no definitive answer on that. Imo jmo. Also, much supporting evidence to conclude there's a CI, so ???

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

I think that it’s extremely likely that DM, though startled, and maybe frightened, talked herself into thinking that she was being silly, and that there wasn’t anything really to be afraid of. I know exactly how that works; I did it myself in a situation that involved an attempted break-in.

That's perfectly valid. She was traumatized and scared. The mind can play tricks on you during trauma. But that said, I think it's naive of us to think this won't come up in court. There's no way a competent defense attorney won't probe this further. It's a major piece of the case.

MOO.

 

[whiterhino]

Per the PCA, I believe they were already in bed and DM was woken up at 3 am. Also, that plays into the cross-examination as well. She was woken up, saw something scary, and went back to bed. Did she think she was dreaming? And if so, how does she know it wasn't a dream? I mean, we know there was a murder, but her eyewitness account, the shadowy figure? Was there a moment where she was having what's called a hypnagogic or hypnopompic hallucination? These are fairly common in everyone when they're woken up from sleep or when they're falling asleep, but something keeps them awake. How reliable is her description of bushy brows?

I think this will be a rich line of questioning for the defense. But as I said before, I don't think DM adds that much to the prosecution's case and IMO, I think her testimony is more risky than not.

MOO.

Whether DM had some kind of hallucination or not, the fact is that someone was there inside the house at the same time DM claims she saw and heard someone. Whoever it was left items behind containing DNA that match the physical traits BK has. The same physical traits that DM described.

As I've said before, not exactly scientific but bolsters and adds to the rest of the evidence. Of course even if LE found BKs' bodily fluids at the scene (independent of sheath) and/or victim DNA on/at/near/with BK and/or his property, even then the defense would be questioning the validity of the DNA evidence, how it got there etc. TL;DR point being whether it's "DM was hallucinating" or "the sheath was planted" whatnot, the defense will have to choose which road they want to go down. JMO.

If they go after DMs recollection, I'd think they would also maybe focus on the delay in calling 911. If I were the defense, I'd question the timing of the call over making suggestions that DM was hallucinating. I do agree, putting DM on the stand would be risky. JMO.

 

[whiterhino]

I think that it’s extremely likely that DM, though startled, and maybe frightened, talked herself into thinking that she was being silly, and that there wasn’t anything really to be afraid of. I know exactly how that works; I did it myself in a situation that involved an attempted break-in.

Same here! Fell asleep without locking the door. When I awoke to lock the door, I swore I'd seen someone lurking in the hallway. Wasn't sure of myself so I let it slide (still don't know what I saw). Several weeks later, turns out there had been a prowler lurking around the area (he was also targeting campus and a house full of female students). If I had called police, maybe they would have found something but I second guessed myself. If LE had been involved and I'd given a statement, I too would have been questioned. Terrible feeling. Sorry if that was a bit OT

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Whether DM had some kind of hallucination or not, the fact is that someone was there inside the house at the same time DM claims she saw and heard someone. Whoever it was left items behind containing DNA that match the physical traits BK has. The same physical traits that DM described.

But that's just it. That's my point. The defense can argue that if DM was half-asleep, she might have imagined the bushy brows or whatever traits BK has when, in fact, the killer is a a 6'5" blonde due, for example. Will it work? I don't know, but my point is that I think naive to think the defense won't even question it.

As I've said before, not exactly scientific but bolsters and adds to the rest of the evidence. Of course even if LE found BKs' bodily fluids at the scene (independent of sheath) and/or victim DNA on/at/near/with BK and/or his property, even then the defense would be questioning the validity of the DNA evidence, how it got there etc. TL;DR point being whether it's "DM was hallucinating" or "the sheath was planted" whatnot, the defense will have to choose which road they want to go down. JMO.

With the exception of the sheath being planted, they can go down all those roads and likely will, IMO.

If they go after DMs recollection, I'd think they would also maybe focus on the delay in calling 911. If I were the defense, I'd question the timing of the call over making suggestions that DM was hallucinating. I do agree, putting DM on the stand would be risky. JMO.

I think you're misunderstanding. I'm not saying their defense will rely on DM hallucinating. I'm saying their job is to poke holes in her testimony. They'll likely do that by asking if she was woken up. If yes, how awake was she? How reliable is her memory? Could she have been so sleepy that she's fuzzy on the details? Why did she go back to sleep or was it that she wasn't scared? Was it that she thought she was dreaming? Could she have been half-asleep and had a hypnopompic hallucinations (again, it's common; this is NOT psychosis or any other health disorder)? Could she have seen someone in the house, but the bushy brows were part of her fuzzy recollection?

Discrediting her memory is a tactic they could very well use and I don't see why that would be considered over the line or unacceptable.

MOO.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Does anyone else remember that trash was flown from PA back on a plane to ID? If you can point me in the right direction with a link, I'd appreciate it. My Google search turned up nothing about the plane (only that they collected BK's dad trash) and I'm trying to make sense of it because it seems very bizarre to me.

MOO.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

There's no way a competent defense attorney won't probe this further. It's a major piece of the case.

Exactly, and neither side can just assume she went back to sleep and just woke up 7 hours later, and no one can or should ask a jury to blindly make an assumption about that either. Is it reasonable to sleep from 4 a.m. to 11ish a.m.? Yes. Do we know that she was asleep all of that time? No, we don't, and neither side can assume, esp because there are texts and calls to potentially support the narrative. imo jmo. Although difficult, living victims do testify, and in this case, it will be essential imo jmo.

 

[WingsOverTX]

Same here! Fell asleep without locking the door. When I awoke to lock the door, I swore I'd seen someone lurking in the hallway. Wasn't sure of myself so I let it slide (still don't know what I saw). Several weeks later, turns out there had been a prowler lurking around the area (he was also targeting campus and a house full of female students). If I had called police, maybe they would have found something but I second guessed myself. If LE had been involved and I'd given a statement, I too would have been questioned. Terrible feeling. Sorry if that was a bit OT

It's not off topic IMO. Waking up in a groggy, half-aware state is something almost everyone here has experienced.

I would consistently pop awake at 3:30 a.m. for many years due to a prowler/stalker who opened my door in the middle of the night 20 years ago & hissed until I woke up. Something worse could have happened - much worse - but didn't, thankfully. No one believed me that it was a nearby neighbor.

Crimes in the dead of night are creepy because our level of awareness being different makes us more vulnerable.

I have a lot of empathy for DM, who just wanted to sleep & awoke to find herself in a mass murder crime scene.
JMO

 

[whiterhino]

But that's just it. That's my point. The defense can argue that if DM was half-asleep, she might have imagined the bushy brows or whatever traits BK has when, in fact, the killer is a a 6'5" blonde due, for example. Will it work? I don't know, but my point is that I think naive to think the defense won't even question it.

With the exception of the sheath being planted, they can go down all those roads and likely will, IMO.

I think you're misunderstanding. I'm not saying their defense will rely on DM hallucinating. I'm saying their job is to poke holes in her testimony. They'll likely do that by asking if she was woken up. If yes, how awake was she? How reliable is her memory? Could she have been so sleepy that she's fuzzy on the details? Why did she go back to sleep or was it that she wasn't scared? Was it that she thought she was dreaming? Could she have been half-asleep and had a hypnopompic hallucinations (again, it's common; this is NOT psychosis or any other health disorder)? Could she have seen someone in the house, but the bushy brows were part of her fuzzy recollection?

Discrediting her memory is a tactic they could very well use and I don't see why that would be considered over the line or unacceptable.

MOO.

RBBM

I don't think anyone here is arguing the fact that defense will likely attempt to question DM or her recollection.

No offense but if my defense attempted to suggest that DM was hallucinating, I'd be concerned. ICBW but it seems a very weak argument. I realize essentially you're saying the defense will do it's job in pecking away at whatever they can. It's just that you have mentioned hallucinations several times.

Of course they will likely go down the "are you sure you saw what you say you saw" road. IMO this is a waste of time. Also risky IMO as IMO whatever DM says she saw corroborates the rest of the evidence (some of which is much more damning and I imagine worrisome for defense, such as digital/mobile data and DNA).

If there was no other evidence and the bulk of the prosecutions argument relied on whatever DM says she saw, then I would say the defense suggesting hallucinations would have more weight towards reasonable doubt.

JMO.

 

[10ofRods]

I realize that's what the word co-terminal means.

I was under the impression you were saying he earned-- in a co-terminal fashion-- a BA degree in Psychology and an MA degree in Criminal Justice. At any rate the quote from a link you provided was:

"//Kohberger already had a bachelor's degree in psychology, and a master's degree in criminal justice from DeSales University in Center Valley, Pennsylvania.//"

You also wrote "He was in a coterminal program (BA in psych)."

What I'm saying is the DeSales university catalog doesn't use the word "coterminal" or "co-terminal" and there is nothing I can find suggesting the existence of a 5-year program that combines an undergraduate degree in Psychology (DeSales offers the BS, not the BA) with a graduate degree in Criminal Justice. The ONLY even slightly relevant program I can see in the catalog is the 5-year program I mentioned that leads to a BA in Criminal Justice, not in Psychology, and an MA in Criminal Justice. Frankly, creating 5-year opportunities across departments/disciplines isn't all that common in my experience although sometimes dual enrollment grad programs are seen (e.g., public health and law)

I do see 5-year programs for Accounting to MBA, for Business Admin to MBA, for Finance to MBA, for International Business to MBA, for Management to MBA, for Sports Management to MBA.. so most of the 5-year programs are in business areas leading to the MBA.

Psychology at DeSales offers the forensic track I mentioned, but also the ever-popular clinical track, an experimental research track, and a general track. I'm not sure I personally see the rationale for creating a 5-year Psychology to Criminal Justice program. And so far as I can tell, DeSales does NOT require a senior capstone project of the sort you mentioned so there would be no rationale for allowing a student to skip that as you mentioned.

I know it's been reported Bryan earned an AA degree in Psychology at a community college. Other than what some who say they knew him say, do we really have any evidence he was in a combination Psychology/Criminal Justice program at DeSales? So far as I can tell, that's not true.

Here is the spring 2022 commencement program. DeSales has only one ceremony-- it does not have separate undergrad/grad ceremonies. His name appears only as an MA in Criminal Justice recipient, not as a recipient of the BS in Psychology. That's why there's no film of Bryan accepting his undergraduate degree at the 2022 ceremony-- it likely didn't happen. Had there been separate ceremonies it's possible BK would have skipped the undergrad one as you mentioned earlier. But there was only one ceremony and BK is not listed as the recipient of a Psychology degree.

Program - DeSales University Class of 2021 Commencement

devweb.desales.edu

I cannot find commencement lists for earlier years on the DeSales site. Perhaps he earned a Psychology degree in an earlier year. But there's no evidence of anything co-terminal.
JMO

I'll concede it. I know I've read it and when I find the MSM link (to the fact that BK matriculated to grad school AND bachelor's simultaneously at DeSales).

It's immaterial in any case. He got an AA from a community college and a BA (Psych) and Master's (CJ) from DeSales. One an contact the registrar and they will send you that information directly.

IME. IMO. There's no reason to suppose he has a BS in Psych either. Did you check 2021? That would be in support of your theory that he already had a BA/BS in Psych.

The number of ceremonies is immaterial. He entered DeSales without an undergrad degree and got a grad degree. Anyone can calculate the needed number of units and it's a common way of getting a degree (and DeSales does allow it).

Because it affects federal financial aid, it makes sense for the school to spell out the ways in which adult learners can gain a grad degree (while still using some of their financial aid from undergrad as needed - it is an accreditation/Federal FA requirement that it be spelled out).

It's fine with me if you believe he received his bachelor's degree elsewhere, or not at all, or if you think DeSales gave him a master's without a bachelor's. But DeSales is known for its "accelerated" bachelor's program. It's possible he has no degree in psychology other than an AA (which makes WSU's acceptance of him a mystery to me, but also may predict his failure to integrate himself into the criminology part of their program).

It's possible he took a BA in Criminal Justice at DeSales (but again, I urge people with a real interest in what degrees he had to contact DeSales - they will verify the name, years of attendance and degrees awarded).

//Students who major in criminal justice can earn both an undergraduate degree in criminal justice and a Master of Arts in Criminal Justice (MCJ) in the five-year Bachelor’s to Master’s in Criminal Justice degree program. Students in their junior year majoring in criminal justice and who have earned a cumulative GPA of 3.00 or higher, are eligible to apply for admittance in the Five-Year BA/MACJ degree program. Students begin taking graduate level courses during their senior year of undergraduate study. //

So perhaps he has a BA in criminal justice. Whatever his bachelor's was in, MSM is reporting that he has one:

//Kohberger was born on Nov. 21, 1994. In 2018, he finished an associate's degree in psychology at Northampton Community College, then went on to complete a bachelor's degree at DeSales University in 2020.//

What we know about Bryan Kohberger, the man charged in the Idaho quadruple murders

Bryan Kohberger faces murder and burglary charges in the gruesome November murders of four college students.

www.cbsnews.com

To be co-term in CJ, he may have had to change his undergrad major to CJ:

//Students who major in criminal justice can earn both an undergraduate degree in criminal justice and a Master of Arts in Criminal Justice (MCJ) in the five-year Bachelor’s to Master’s in Criminal Justice degree program. Students in their junior year majoring in criminal justice and who have earned a cumulative GPA of 3.00 or higher, are eligible to apply for admittance in the Five-Year BA/MACJ degree program. Students begin taking graduate level courses during their senior year of undergraduate study.//

(Although apparently the 5 year program may allow for a student to major in something other than CJ to get into the Master's program).

Program: Criminal Justice, Criminal Justice/Social Studies Education Track (BA) - DeSales University - Modern Campus Catalog™

A complete listing of the academic degree and certificate programs, majors, minors, courses and course descriptions at DeSales University.

catalog.desales.edu

So he did one or the other thing (got a BA in Psych or CJ). If he did CJ, he would have found a less competitive pathway into the Master's program at DeSales. Not sure if the BA in Psych (where did he get it, I wonder?) would do the trick.

I'm assuming he did all his post CC/pre-doctoral coursework at DeSales until I hear othrwise.

IMO.

 

[10ofRods]

RBBM

I don't think anyone here is arguing the fact that defense will likely attempt to question DM or her recollection.

No offense but if my defense attempted to suggest that DM was hallucinating, I'd be concerned. ICBW but it seems a very weak argument. I realize essentially you're saying the defense will do it's job in pecking away at whatever they can. It's just that you have mentioned hallucinations several times.

Of course they will likely go down the "are you sure you saw what you say you saw" road. IMO this is a waste of time. Also risky IMO as IMO whatever DM says she saw corroborates the rest of the evidence (some of which is much more damning and I imagine worrisome for defense, such as digital/mobile data and DNA).

If there was no other evidence and the bulk of the prosecutions argument relied on whatever DM says she saw, then I would say the defense suggesting hallucinations would have more weight towards reasonable doubt.

JMO.

Yep, agree. DM's statements are not crucial, but they are definitely going to back up what is found via GPS, video and cell tower records.

I also believe that LE took a regular witness statement from DM and didn't just allow her to speak without them asking questions. She likely immediately established the "maleness" of the person she saw (which Mr. Goncalves really wanted LE to release as pertinent information). I assume they also took her through the regular crime reporting process (as much information about skin color, hair color, eye color, height, weight, build, etc. as the witness could remember). If it turns out she could not say whether she thought the person was white or black or other; or that she doesn't know the color of those "bushy eyebrows" against the background of his skin, then, well, she's not the world's best identifier of people while under stress (some people aren't very good at it).

IMO. So yeah, I believe LE had a little snapshot of who they were looking for (white male, about 5'10"-6' tall, lean build, etc) even if they did not reveal their hand in the early days of this investigation.

Somehow, I can't keep out of my own mind the fact that BK had "friended" the 3 women who became victims via Instagram. But if DM had said the person was a woman or dark-skinned, I don't think BK would have been arrested.

IMO.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Just a quick reminder that DM was probably awake for several minutes before opening her door for the third time when she saw the intruder. So, IMHO, was wasn't all that groggy as when she was first awakened.

"Mortensen, who also slept on the second floor, later told police in an interview that she opened her door three times after waking up at around 4 a.m. to what she thought "sounded like Goncalves playing with her dog in one of the upstairs bedrooms, which were located on the third floor," according to the affidavit.

"A short time later, D.M. said she heard who she thought was Goncalves say something to the effect of 'there's someone here,'" the affidavit says. However, investigators pointed out that it could have been Kernodle's voice, since records from a forensic download of her cell phone "indicated she was likely awake and using the TikTok app at approximately 4:12 a.m."

Mortensen told police that she "did not see anything" when she looked out of her bedroom for the first time after hearing the voice. When she opened her door a second time, after hearing what she believed was "crying coming from Kernodle's room," Mortensen said that she heard a man's voice say "something to the effect of 'it's ok, I'm going to help you,'" according to the affidavit.

Mortensen said that she heard crying again later and opened her door for the third time, investigators said in the document. . ."

Surviving roommate heard Idaho murder victim and saw masked man in home, police affidavit says

One of two roommates who survived an attack that left four University of Idaho students dead told investigators she saw a masked man leaving her home after the victims were fatally stabbed.

www.kpax.com