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

[al66pine]

Call to 911. Delay or No Delay?

MOO there is no delay. They reacted and 911 call was made by them or whoever was with them when murders discovered on Sunday morning.
A delay would be not calling after doscovering the murders.

@Boxer Tho repeating the phrase "call delay" by another poster, I did not characterize the passage of time that way.

Not so briefly.
A post by @U.N. Known referred to "call delay," as something the state would need to "clear up."
Repeating that "call delay" phrase, I asked how the prosecutor might do that.

=====================================
Post by @U.N. Known

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

He was in a coterminal program (BA in psych). He might not have attended the undergrad ceremony (most co-terminal students I know do not, they want the fun of getting their grad degree). //Kohberger already had a bachelor's degree in psychology, and a master's degree in criminal justice from...

www.websleuths.com

My response

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

BBM https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11715673/Family-Ethan-Chapin-question-surviving-roommate-Dylan-Mortensen-didnt-call-cops.html DM is not on trial - but everything that happened that night must be examined, including what happened after the murders. The state of Idaho may execute...

www.websleuths.com

 

[WingsOverTX]

But asking an eyewitness whether s/he had been drinking would not be speculation, nor would it be an attack. Barring other, incriminating facts, asking about drug and/or alcohol use is no different than asking whether there was enough light in the room to see.

Per the NY POST--see link below--DM was 21, so of legal drinking age. Per me, DM had no way of knowing she would need to stay sober so she could describe the mass murderer with whom she would come face-to-face after 4 a.m.

Surviving Idaho murders roommates Bethany Funke, Dylan Mortensen: What we know

Bethany Funke and Dylan Mortensen were the only survivors and were the ones to find their friends’ bloodied bodies hours after the brutal attack.

nypost.com

Respectfully, I completely disagree unless her BAC was captured and could be entered into evidence. Even then, it would provide very limited info as others have pointed out in recent posts due to passage of time.

Asking about her alcohol use as an underage female is implicit bias, IMO.

As long as DM is a victim, I don't care & I don't see how it is relevant in a legal context.

<modsnip>

We will just have to agree to disagree.
MOO

 

[jepop]

Sure. I wasn't putting DM down or dismissing her value as a witness.

But unless there's a lot more to her testimony than what we read in the PCA, I don't think her description of the intruder can ever be considered definitive. (Again, not her fault: kudos to DM for not embellishing her story!)

This isn't to say that DM's testimony won't be key when combined with the circumstantial evidence we already know about. I only posted because I think we need to keep in mind that DM's identification, by itself, has never been complete or final; as reported, it probably fits a lot of young men in Pullman and Moscow, and a few of those may own Elantras.

BBM: Could be and if so I'm hopeful LE when going through 100s (?) of rego and liscences would have eliminated as many of these as possible. From that point of view, as pertains to due diligence DMs descriptions is very useful. I think LE would also have sought elimination of many other male white elantra drivers/owners, not just those that roughly matched DM's description. Prior December 2022 would have been a very busy month for this investigation with I think 100s of officers working around the clock.all MOO

 

[Cool Cats]

BBM 1- Interesting!! Link?? I didn't know the supposed messages from BK to one of the victims had only begun in the weeks prior to the murder.

I still haven't found any links to the piece of info about BK having messaged one of the victims via SM but there is a MSM link somewhere! Don't want to go against TOS so I'll preface by saying it was a rumor that people were speculating whether BK felt ignored as his messages were never returned etc.

BBM 2- All of this has been discussed multiple times but I too would like to review BKs' location and whereabouts in 2021 compared to the victims.

Also, see my post reply to Sister Golden Hair above (it was # 884).

Unless I am misunderstanding (entirely possible lol) there seems to be 2 separate warrants for the 20 redacted Tinder accounts. The dates of certain warrants being the same (see my post 884) is also making me wonder but it could also be meaningless.

FWIW

I am looking at your post #884 and I don't see 2 separate warrants for the same 20 redacted Tinder accounts, instead I'm seeing (from this post) 2 separate warrants for 19 or 20 Tinder accounts in 2022/2023 and 20 Tinder accounts in 2021.

Warrant issued 12-6-22 to search 19 or 20 Tinder accounts from 11-3-22 to present - now 2023.

Warrant issued 12-22-22 to search 20 Tinder accounts covering the entire month of March, 2021.

Accused Idaho Killer Bryan Kohberger Repeatedly Messaged One of the Victims on Instagram: Source

"He was persistent," an investigative source on the case tells PEOPLE

people.com

Two weeks before the slayings of four University of Idaho students last November, the man now accused of killing them sent a series of messages to one of the victims on Instagram, an investigator familiar with the case tells PEOPLE.

In late October, an account that authorities believe belonged to Bryan Kohberger sent a greeting to one of the female victims, the source says. When he didn't get a reply, he sent several more messages to her.

"He slid into one of the girls' DMs several times but she didn't respond," the source tells PEOPLE. "Basically, it was just him saying, 'Hey, how are you?' But he did it again and again."

"She may not have seen them, because they went into message requests," says the investigation source. (Instagram users are not notified when they receive a message from someone they do not follow back, and the messages go into a special folder.) "We're still trying to determine how aware the victims were of his existence."

"There's no indication that he was getting frustrated with her lack of response," the source adds, "but he was definitely persistent."

 

[whiterhino]

An unverified source "close to the investigation". Instagram. People Mag. I view this with a grain of salt. If BK did delete an instagram acc then LE will be able to still get that info IMO. Also if BK looked at the accs on a third party app without an acc, that data will in theory be recoverable via BK's search history on phone/laptop or other device. MOO

Bryan Kohberger Followed All 3 Female Idaho Victims on Instagram: Source

Bryan Kohberger is accused of murdering Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin

people.com

EBM spelling

Thank you so much for providing the link! I didn't mean to put Cool Cats on the spot either. Someone else was asking me to provide a link and I knew I'd read it somewhere but couldn't find it. In fact, it was that same article lol (I swear I even linked to it early on).

With a grain of salt? Do you mean you aren't sold on the validity of this piece of info? If it's true that BK was trying to message any of the victims weeks prior to the murders, it would be significant. Especially if BK were also trying to contact any of the victims via other platforms. Particularly if BKs phone attempted to connect to the wifi at 1122 King. Honestly, when you add it all up it's really

 

[Tricia]

Short Version. We need donations to pay for the server and other bills. Please use one of the following cash apps.

Please use PayPal Pay Websleuths.com, LLC using PayPal.Me
If the PayPal link does not work for you go to www.paypal.com and put in the email websleuths.com@gmail.com and you can send a donation that way.

Venmo name is Tricia-Griffith-14

OR

Cash App $tgrif14

If you can donate we would be so grateful

Hi Everyone,
(PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS DONATIONS ON THIS THREAD. CLICK HERE FOR DISCUSSION)
Websleuths is very expensive to run. Most months we make enough to pay for the server, pay the IT guy, and a bit of money left over for me for some bills or food. This way I can keep Websleuths free for everyone.
There are months when this is not the case.
I recently pre-paid the server fee and almost all I owed our IT guy. I knew the money coming in for the month from advertising would not cover the bills but I thought I had another revenue stream coming in so I wasn't worried. That revenue stream didn't happen.

Basically, I need donations to cover the server and what I owe the IT and a bit extra for my groceries.

I have provided Websleuths free for almost 20 years (since 2004) and will do my best to keep Websleuths free for members and visitors.

This month we need 2700 dollars to keep Websleuths running. I don't know what next month's ad dollars will be. Hopefully, you won't be hearing from me.

Let me stress if you cannot afford a donation please do not send anything. I understand times are hard.

When we reach our goal I will announce it and stop accepting donations. It is urgent however that we raise the money as fast as possible.

Please use PayPal Pay Websleuths.com, LLC using PayPal.Me
If the PayPal link does not work for you go to www.paypal.com and put in the email websleuths.com@gmail.com and you can send a donation that way.

Venmo name is Tricia-Griffith-14

OR

Cash App $tgrif14
Thank you everyone for your help.
Tricia

 

[jepop]

I am looking at your post #884 and I don't see 2 separate warrants for the same 20 redacted Tinder accounts, instead I'm seeing (from this post) 2 separate warrants for 20 redacted accounts in 2022/2023 and 20 redacted accounts in 2021.

Warrant issued 12-6-22 to search Tinder accounts from 11-3-22 to present - now 2023.

Warrant issued 12-22-22 to search 20 Tinder accounts covering the entire month of March, 2021.

RSBM

IDK, but I think both warrants would likely relate to the same 19 (or is it 20 lol) accounts? But I may be reading the details of what was being sought incorrectly. MOO. That info is towards the bottom of each of the links.

Warrant 1) For 19/20 redacted tinder accounts. Information regarding the accounts is for the scope 3 Nov 2022 to "present" (ie 6 Dec). Warrant obtained and served Dec 6th 2022.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/030723%20Order%20to%20Seal%20%20Redact%20-%20Match%20Group%20LLC%202.pdf

Warrant 2) For 19/20 redacted tinder accounts. Information regarding the accounts for the scope 1-31 March 2021. Warrant obtained/served (?) 22 Dec 2022.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/030723%20Order%20to%20Seal%20%20Redact%20-%20Match%20Group%20LLC%204.pdf

MOO

EBM: added 2022 at end of second paragraph

ETA: the word "present" in the Warrant obtainde on the 6th Dec 2022 has to refer to what was "present" at the time it was granted IMO. So the warrant was for the time period 3 Nov 2022 to 6 Dec 2022. MOO

 

[jepop]

Thank you so much for providing the link! I didn't mean to put Cool Cats on the spot either. Someone else was asking me to provide a link and I knew I'd read it somewhere but couldn't find it. In fact, it was that same article lol (I swear I even linked to it early on).

With a grain of salt? Do you mean you aren't sold on the validity of this piece of info? If it's true that BK was trying to message any of the victims weeks prior to the murders, it would be significant. Especially if BK were also trying to contact any of the victims via other platforms. Particularly if BKs phone attempted to connect to the wifi at 1122 King. Honestly, when you add it all up it's really

No biggie. Yes I'm not sold on the validity of the source that's all. I don't take it as fact. If BK was messaging the victims then LE will have that info I hope. MOO

ETA: I take this article with a grain of salt to be clear. I'm simply cautious with unverified sources.

 

[whiterhino]

I am looking at your post #884 and I don't see 2 separate warrants for the same 20 redacted Tinder accounts, instead I'm seeing (from this post) 2 separate warrants for 19 or 20 Tinder accounts in 2022/2023 and 20 Tinder accounts in 2021.

Warrant issued 12-6-22 to search 19 or 20 Tinder accounts from 11-3-22 to present - now 2023.

Warrant issued 12-22-22 to search 20 Tinder accounts covering the entire month of March, 2021.

Accused Idaho Killer Bryan Kohberger Repeatedly Messaged One of the Victims on Instagram: Source

"He was persistent," an investigative source on the case tells PEOPLE

people.com

Two weeks before the slayings of four University of Idaho students last November, the man now accused of killing them sent a series of messages to one of the victims on Instagram, an investigator familiar with the case tells PEOPLE.

In late October, an account that authorities believe belonged to Bryan Kohberger sent a greeting to one of the female victims, the source says. When he didn't get a reply, he sent several more messages to her.

"He slid into one of the girls' DMs several times but she didn't respond," the source tells PEOPLE. "Basically, it was just him saying, 'Hey, how are you?' But he did it again and again."

"She may not have seen them, because they went into message requests," says the investigation source. (Instagram users are not notified when they receive a message from someone they do not follow back, and the messages go into a special folder.) "We're still trying to determine how aware the victims were of his existence."

"There's no indication that he was getting frustrated with her lack of response," the source adds, "but he was definitely persistent."

The quote from People doesn't seem like a very solid piece of information now that I'm reading it for a third time. However, if the source is correct and there is some proof (as @jepop said this can be proven/disproven) then it would be significant (not even IMO just stating the obvious).

Here is my confusion: Are "19 or 20 Tinder Accounts" and "20 Tinder Accounts" one in the same or ? I see the 2 separate warrants, I see the distinction in the wording. Disclaiming that for various reasons, I've been experiencing a lot of stupidity lately and am therefore not very sharp!

 

[jepop]

The quote from People doesn't seem like a very solid piece of information now that I'm reading it for a third time. However, if the source is correct and there is some proof (as @jepop said this can be proven/disproven) then it would be significant (not even IMO just stating the obvious).

Here is my confusion: Are "19 or 20 Tinder Accounts" and "20 Tinder Accounts" one in the same or ? I see the 2 separate warrants, I see the distinction in the wording. Disclaiming that for various reasons, I've been experiencing a lot of stupidity lately and am therefore not very sharp!

BBM IMO, don't sweat it. It's not exactly a walk in the park thinking about all these warrants! IMO stupidity doesn't come into it.

 

[Helechawagirl]

Whoa!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1643792466212995072

Isn’t this old news and they didn’t find anything?

 

[whiterhino]

IDK, but I think both warrants would likely relate to the same 19 (or is it 20 lol) accounts? But I may be reading the details of what was being sought incorrectly. MOO. That info is towards the bottom of each of the links.

Warrant 1) For 19/20 redacted tinder accounts. Information regarding the accounts is for the scope 3 Nov 2022 to "present" (ie 6 Dec). Warrant obtained and served Dec 6th 2022.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/030723%20Order%20to%20Seal%20%20Redact%20-%20Match%20Group%20LLC%202.pdf

Warrant 2) For 19/20 redacted tinder accounts. Information regarding the accounts for the scope 1-31 March 2021. Warrant obtained/served (?) 22 Dec 2022.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/030723%20Order%20to%20Seal%20%20Redact%20-%20Match%20Group%20LLC%204.pdf

MOO

EBM: added 2022 at end of second paragraph

ETA: the word "present" in the Warrant obtainde on the 6th Dec 2022 has to refer to what was "present" at the time it was granted IMO. So the warrant was for the time period 3 Nov 2022 to 6 Dec 2022. MOO

Felt the need to post this...

This one has 19 bullet points:

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/030723%20Order%20to%20Seal%20%20Redact%20-%20Match%20Group%20LLC%202.pdf

This one has 20 bullet points:

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/030723%20Order%20to%20Seal%20%20Redact%20-%20Match%20Group%20LLC%204.pdf

Assuming the bullet points indicate individual items/accounts but maybe that is incorrect?

@jepop Idk, my last few posts on this thread have been doozies lol I'm over here counting dots

 

[jepop]

Felt the need to post this...

This one has 19 bullet points:

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/030723%20Order%20to%20Seal%20%20Redact%20-%20Match%20Group%20LLC%202.pdf

This one has 20 bullet points:

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/030723%20Order%20to%20Seal%20%20Redact%20-%20Match%20Group%20LLC%204.pdf

Assuming the bullet points indicate individual accounts but maybe that is incorrect?

@jepop Idk, my last few posts on this thread have been doozies lol I'm over here counting dots

I'm with you. I counted the dots a few times too and likewise over it. I assume the same as you that each dot represents a separate account. Even if one has 19 and one has 20 maybe one was just removed and or added per investigation unfolding, but yeah I aint going back to count those dots again!

 

[katydid23]

I don't know that anyone has refuted the neighbor's statement, have they?

But we don't know that they made any kind of formal statement to LE or if it is even credible. A random neighbour said that in a media interview. How accurate is it? How do we know if this is a serious, honest account of that morning?

I'd like it to be vetted by investigators before we accept it as fact. Was that neighbor home that morning? Do they have a view of that front door? Were they being truthful or were they just wanting to give an interesting media interview?

 

[katydid23]

Weather in November 2022 in Moscow, Idaho, USA

Weather reports from November 2022 in Moscow, Idaho, USA with highs and lows

www.timeanddate.com

Little to no wind all night. It was calm, cold and foggy.

How foggy? Would a neighbor even be able to see that front door from their own house?

 

[al66pine]

Saving Victims from More Trauma? Legally Viable Route?

I think the motivation to deal would be that a plea saves the extensive number of victims from further drama & trauma. Of course, I realize that legally that may not be a viable route for the prosecution to pursue....

snipped for focus. @WingsOverTX
Not sure if ^ stmt is directed at this case specifically or to prosecutions generally.

Not uncommon for prosecutors make public stmts to that effect --- this plea agreement saves victims from the trauma of a trial---
many times over the years. LEGALLY VIABLE.

OTOH, reaching a plea agreement (no matter what the terms) in some cases may be POLITICAL SUICIDE (or close to it) for a publicly elected prosecutor.

IDK if that would hold true for this case. As others have pointed out, BK does not have the classic bases (offering to disclose where victim's remains are or to testify against the crim ringleader) to interest prosecutor in a plea negotiation.
jmo

 

[Cool Cats]

The quote from People doesn't seem like a very solid piece of information now that I'm reading it for a third time. However, if the source is correct and there is some proof (as @jepop said this can be proven/disproven) then it would be significant (not even IMO just stating the obvious).

Here is my confusion: Are "19 or 20 Tinder Accounts" and "20 Tinder Accounts" one in the same or ? I see the 2 separate warrants, I see the distinction in the wording. Disclaiming that for various reasons, I've been experiencing a lot of stupidity lately and am therefore not very sharp!

For me to know (more clearly) if it is 19/20 Tinder accounts or actually 39/40 accounts total, I need to check the Order to Seal Documents to see how it is written. I have all of them in my Download File so I will take a look.

The information seems more solid to me because we have more than just an anonymous investigator talking to People Magazine. People Magazine saw Kohberger's account themselves and noted Kohberger followed the 3 female victims:

"Kohberger's now-deleted Instagram account — which was viewed by PEOPLE before it was removed — followed the accounts of Mogen, Gonclaves and Kernodle, but there was no public interaction."

Your right, if the article is correct then it would be significant.

Question:

How can the prosecution claim that Kohberger was stalking the victims if they can't prove Kohberger even
knew who the victims were?

To stalk someone you have to know who they are.

The thing is, they don't have any proof that Kohberger was on King road those dozens of times that his phone pinged from the Moscow area. All they have is that his phone pinged from the same cell tower that services the residents who live on King road.

I would have to research it but I can bet dollars to doughnuts that the range of the King Rd cell tower expands to quite a large range out from King Rd. Maybe even out of town.

The defense can say there is no proof Kohberger was stalking the victims, he was just out doing XYZ in the area, or he wasn't even in that area because his phone pinged erroneously on that tower or was transferred over to that tower, not unheard of.

Point is....

It would bolster the prosecution's case (phone evidence shows stalking) if they can prove that Kohberger knew who the victims were - if they can prove that he followed 3 ladies on Instagram who happen to be the same 3 ladies he killed that night. The 2 women he didn't kill in that house might be alive because he did not know who they were, did not follow them on Instagram.

And if they can prove that just a couple of weeks before the murders he tried to communicate with one of them but was ignored by her, then that shows some level of escalation and bolsters the stalking evidence.

Note all the SM accounts in evidence. They are looking for BK's connection to the victims. Proof he knew them.

2 Cents

 

[Cool Cats]

Saving Victims from More Trauma? Legally Viable Route?

snipped for focus. @WingsOverTX
Not sure if ^ stmt is directed at this case specifically or to prosecutions generally.

Not uncommon for prosecutors make public stmts to that effect --- this plea agreement saves victims from the trauma of a trial---
many times over the years. LEGALLY VIABLE.

OTOH, reaching a plea agreement (no matter what the terms) in some cases may be POLITICAL SUICIDE (or close to it) for a publicly elected prosecutor.

IDK if that would hold true for this case. As others have pointed out, BK does not have the classic bases (offering to disclose where victim's remains are or to testify against the crim ringleader) to interest prosecutor in a plea negotiation.
jmo

I think it is also worth noting another benefit to the victims in a plea deal:

No appeals.

If Bryan goes to trial and loses, the families get to hear all about his appeals and how he says he is innocent and why he should get a new trial and how a certain ruling hurt his right to a fair trial and so forth.
His appeals will definitely make the news cycles.

If he is under the death penalty then his appeals could "outlive" some of his victims.

A plea deal of LWOP would give immediate closure. He is sentenced, no appeals, it's over.

Can you appeal a guilty plea? A defense lawyer explains

You generally cannot appeal a conviction stemming from a plea of guilty or no contest. But you can make a motion to withdraw a guilty plea or no contest plea. If a judge grants the motion, you are then given the chance to withdraw the prior plea and substitute it with a plea of not

www.shouselaw.com

You generally cannot appeal a conviction stemming from a plea of guilty or no contest. But you can make a motion to withdraw a guilty plea or no contest plea.

Appealing a Conviction After Pleading Guilty - FindLaw

FindLaw's overview of appealing a conviction after pleading guilty, including information on procedure and habeas petitions. Learn more about this and related topics at FindLaw's section on Criminal Appeals.

www.findlaw.com

The Constitution guarantees criminal defendants certain rights. Among these are the right to due process and right to a speedy jury trial. But since you've told the judge in open court (and under oath) that you want to give up that right to a jury trial and plead "guilty," the factual issues and legal questions won't be decided by a judge or a jury. You won't get to cross-examine witnesses in your criminal case. All that's left now is receiving your sentence.

But moments after you do it, you begin to question if this was the correct move. The prosecutor didn't seem to be trustworthy and you think she was bluffing about the evidence. You also think the police officer is lying. Perhaps the judge did something wrong when taking your plea. What now?

Here you'll find a brief explanation of the feasibility of appealing a conviction after you enter a guilty plea, what the standard is for withdrawing your plea, and much more. It's important to always understand your trial rights and the maximum time behind bars you are looking at when considering pleading guilty in a criminal case, never let anyone pressure you, and always seek the advice of an experienced lawyer.

 

[NCWatcher]

All trials are risky.
MOO LWOP would be a good deal for the families.

You are correct, trials are risky. Not only is it always possible the defendant will be found not guilty, but the victims are not treated with kid gloves in the courtroom-- they can't be. But it's still the case that many, if not most, families want to see the defendant in court. They don't realize a trial, if held, won't really be about their loved one. (When a trial is about to start you often hear families say things like "the trial should be about X [the loved one] not about Y [the defendant]. But it can't work that way.)

Even though all that's true, families still often want trials. And I expect that's especially true some of these these families.
JMO

 

[jepop]

RSBM

Question:

How can the prosecution claim that Kohberger was stalking the victims if they can't prove Kohberger even
knew who the victims were?

To stalk someone you have to know who they are.


The thing is, they don't have any proof that Kohberger was on King road those dozens of times that his phone pinged from the Moscow area. All they have is that his phone pinged from the same cell tower that services the residents who live on King road.

RSBM

It would bolster the prosecution's case (phone evidence shows stalking) if they can prove that Kohberger knew who the victims were - if they can prove that he followed 3 ladies on Instagram who happen to be the same 3 ladies he killed that night. The 2 women he didn't kill in that house might be alive because he did not know who they were, did not follow them on Instagram.

And if they can prove that just a couple of weeks before the murders he tried to communicate with one of them but was ignored by her, then that shows some level of escalation and bolsters the stalking evidence.

Note all the SM accounts in evidence. They are looking for BK's connection to the victims. Proof he knew them.

2 Cents

BBM: Absolutely @Cool Cats and I think that the prosecution and investigators must have, it's absolutley logical, that they would have been working towards proving BK's prior contact through social media and digital 'stalking" (for want of a better word) from the moment he became a prime suspect. MOO

The avenues for finding this boltering evidence are numerous I think. Not just through some of the SM warrants we know about but also through forensic examination of his phone, his apps, his laptop and whatever other digital devices which have been in the possession of investigators since the Return of the two major residential search Warrants (WA flat, PA parent's residence). Internet search history may show him looking up the victims and the residence. The applications for both PA and WA residences show the level of digital detail investigators were seeking. It is astoundingly detailed and reassuring (link for WA warrant app at end post but PA warrant is similar and even more detailed). MOO

So many other possibilities with modern forensic recovery methods even if the alleged killer did some deletions of incriminating files or data. Also if forensics have examined routers in the King Road residence, and I believe there is at least one warrant amongts what we have so far for a router company (unstudied by me so far but I have seen it), there is possible evidence in terms of external device numbers that were picked up. MOO.

In regards to Instagram we have yet to see a warrant for a BK account. That doesn't mean there hasn't been one. It might be completely sealed and unnamed or simply not released. Also forensic examination of alleged killer's devices (phone,laptop and others) may have uncovered a deleted Instagram account and LE may have been able to access that and recover data sans warrant. IF alleged killer was looking at victim's Insta through 3rd party app then that data will likely be recoverable through forensics also. IMO. MOO

ETA: linking WA App for Search Warrant showing details of level of digital evidence being sought. From page 49 of the pdf and from Point (6) beginning on that page.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/search%20warrant%20for%20bryan%20kohberger%20apartment/ddb059f6cc8e24c1/full.pdf