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

[CSIDreamer]

This caught my attention. What do you mean by "something?"

Zombies? Animals? Ghosts?

Well, my initial thought is wind can blow a door the rest of the way open. Also, if a door isn't hung 100% level it can tend to swing in one direction.

I'm a self styled expert in doors not being closed properly.

JMO

 

[NCWatcher]

If the defense starts trying to grill the witness as to why 911 wasn't called sooner and gets off topic away from her description. Defense trying to open doors to what went on with other people in the house that morning. Defense has to stick to a specific line of questioning on cross examination, can't just introduce a new line of questioning or lead the witness down a "yellow brick road."

When a judge rules the objection is "sustained" it means the judge agrees the question was improper under the rules of evidence.

True. But do we expect that the state won't ask DM anything about calling 911 or calling anyone else? That they'll only ask her about seeing someone she described as having bushy eyebrows? And ask what time that happened?
JMO

 

[GRT]

Well, my initial thought is wind can blow a door the rest of the way open. Also, if a door isn't hung 100% level it can tend to swing in one direction.

I'm a self styled expert in doors not being closed properly.

JMO

Ah, got it.

I agree. A strong wind will blow most doors open if they aren't tightly closed. BK might not have pulled the door all the way shut when he left.

 

[Justice101]

I bet he was home watching the news on his computer and couldn't believe nothing was coming in about the murders.

So he finally gives up waiting and drives down out of sheer curiosity. He looks for signs of a crime like police vehicles all over. Doesn't take him long to see nothing is happening so he goes back to his apartment to wait again.

Apparently he was at his apartment and wasn't in Moscow very long that morning.

He was probably shocked at how long it took for the news to pick it up. I bet he wasn't expecting to wait so long for news.

And I wonder if he was shocked when he heard a witness saw him and described him enough not to rule him out. If that was him.

2 Cents

Bingo! I agree!

I think he went back to see what "excitement/chaos" he had created with the murders.

I think he was probably stunned that there were no police there. However, you know.. if he didn't see DM, he may have thought he ended up killing everyone in the house... so he probably rationalized that no police presence was because there was no one left alive there to report it.

I think looking for the lost sheath in the back mini-lot would have been really risky so he probably chickened out with that.
Also, I think his phone or laptop internet searches BEFORE the crime was discovered will end up becoming very damning evidence when LE finds that. You know the guy searched "Moscow murders" or "U of Idaho murders" or something very similar very early Sat morning. He probably thought an online search like that AFTER the bodies were discovered would be easily explained.... but doing it BEFORE they were reported would seal his doom.

 

[Cool Cats]

True. But do we expect that the state won't ask DM anything about calling 911 or calling anyone else? That they'll only ask her about seeing someone she described as having bushy eyebrows? And ask what time that happened?
JMO

It was about bringing in a line of questioning involving other witnesses and other witnesses being at the crime scene and contaminating the scene. Speculation of what could have been happening in the house in the hours before 911 was called.

Going too far off her description (to raise doubt about that morning) could raise objections from the prosecution.

 

[Justice101]

Re the open front door

Maybe BK left in a hurry through it?

I know he was seen by D moving to the kitchen, but maybe he changed his mind?

Maybe leaving through the front door was less conspicuous?

JMO

I thought the PCA showed that the car was seen disappearing (presumably) behind the house in that small parking lot in the back. If so, I assume he left thru the upstairs sliding door like was stated also in PCA.

 

[NCWatcher]

It was about bringing in a line of questioning involving other witnesses and other witnesses being at the crime scene and contaminating the scene, getting away from the prosecution's line of questioning. Speculation of what could have been happening in the house in the hours before 911 was called.

Right. But once the state has asked DM questions about when 911 was called and what prompted the call, it seems that would allow the defense to explore that area too including what was going on before 911 was called The state may say it's not relevant but I'm not seeing why it would be beyond the allowable limits of cross-examination.
JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

Right. But once the state has asked DM questions about when 911 was called and what prompted the call, it seems that would allow the defense to explore that area too including what was going on before 911 was called The state may say it's not relevant but I'm not seeing why it would be beyond the allowable limits of cross-examination.
JMO

The defense will need to call the other witnesses at the scene to testify on their own behalf rather than have DM answer questions about them. There are other witnesses who were on scene that morning and this is separate information from her suspect description.

Anyone who discovers a crime scene is considered a witness. Other people came into the house that morning.

 

[Montecore1]

Well, there's this:

“I’m not even sure where that came from, to be quite honest,” Fry told the Daily Mail on Thursday, adding that it was the first time he had heard anything about an open door.

Chief Fry also stated that both BF and DM were asleep on the first floor...

 

[NCWatcher]

The defense will need to call the other witnesses at the scene to testify on their own behalf rather than have DM answer questions about them.

I guess I'm not understanding why the defense can't ask what DM did and who she called before calling 911 IF the state asks her about calling 911. If the state only asks her about seeing a guy with bushy eyebrows that's one thing. But if the state asks her other stuff, why can't the defense question her on those other topics too? (While not being too "heavy-handed") I'm not suggesting the defense would ask her about what other people said to each other. But it would seem the defense ought to be able to ask who, if anyone, DM called and when that happened and when others arrived at the house, who those others who arrived were, and what she observed them doing. They may not choose to ask all of that but I don't see why that would not be allowed if the state asked about calling 911.
JMO

 

[PrairieWind]

I don't think the report shows that there was access to house for several hours. Report just says a neighbour told fox news that they saw the front door open at 8.30 am. No indicators in the report that the neighbour confirmed or noted that the door had been open for hours, when it was opened or when it was shut. MOO

Idaho students’ front door was left open on morning of murders: neighbor

The unnamed neighbor in Moscow, Idaho told Fox News that the front door of the three-floor home wasn’t shut around 8:30 a.m.

nypost.com

"The unnamed neighbor in Moscow, Idaho, told Fox News that the front door of the three-floor home wasn’t shut around 8:30 a.m. Nov. 13."

Also below, adds nothing of substance IMO if you listen to the report.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1601291856738160641

It seems to me that that is exactly what the reports are saying. The neighbor says the door was open at 8:30 in the morning. The DD guy arrives and leaves around 4 a.m.. The call for help doesn't come until 11 something. The house was wide open for 7 hours or so.

 

[RedTRex]

If I was a juror in the trial, BK’s DNA present on the knife sheath would likely be enough for a guilty verdict.

Hmmm, with it being a well known party house that is quite a reach.

 

[Sundog]

I guess I'm not understanding why the defense can't ask what DM did and who she called before calling 911 IF the state asks her about calling 911. If the state only asks her about seeing a guy with bushy eyebrows that's one thing. But if the state asks her other stuff, why can't the defense question her on those other topics too? (While not being too "heavy-handed") I'm not suggesting the defense would ask her about what other people said to each other. But it would seem the defense ought to be able to ask who, if anyone, DM called and when that happened and when others arrived at the house, who those others who arrived were, and what she observed them doing. They may not choose to ask all of that but I don't see why that would not be allowed if the state asked about calling 911.
JMO

I have no doubt that DM will be questioned by the defense on why she didn't call 911 when she saw the masked person in the house, especially since she told LE that she was in some kind of frozen/fear state. But then she went to bed and fell asleep? I am sure the jury will want to know as well, and I am sure the judge would allow this kind of questioning as it calls into question was she really in a frozen/fear state if she didn't call 911 and just went to bed/fell asleep.

edited to clean up post formatting

 

[U.N. Known]

I guess I'm not understanding why the defense can't ask what DM did and who she called before calling 911 IF the state asks her about calling 911. If the state only asks her about seeing a guy with bushy eyebrows that's one thing. But if the state asks her other stuff, why can't the defense question her on those other topics too? (While not being too "heavy-handed") I'm not suggesting the defense would ask her about what other people said to each other. But it would seem the defense ought to be able to ask who, if anyone, DM called and when that happened and when others arrived at the house, who those others who arrived were, and what she observed them doing. They may not choose to ask all of that but I don't see why that would not be allowed if the state asked about calling 911.
JMO

This is my line of thinking as well. Unless there are so many other compelling things to prove for or against BK being in the house that night and committing the murders, IMO, the "missing 8 hours has to be discussed. If the prosecution puts DM on the stand to describe what she heard, saw and did through the time the intruder walked past her then the door is open for questioning about what happened between then and the time the police arrived.

 

[CSIDreamer]

Chief Fry also stated that both BF and DM were asleep on the first floor...

Which was corrected in the PCA. I'm fairly certain that was to protect the life of DM.

This has never been corrected.

Just my opinion, not arguing something none of us can prove lol.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

Right. But once the state has asked DM questions about when 911 was called and what prompted the call, it seems that would allow the defense to explore that area too including what was going on before 911 was called The state may say it's not relevant but I'm not seeing why it would be beyond the allowable limits of cross-examination.
JMO

imo jmo
A man's life may be on the line, and the defense has a duty to defend their client fully. Failure to question the two people who were in the crime scene for 7+ hours after the murders and any who came prior to the 911 call would, at the very least imo jmo, be a failure to fully represent the defendant. 7+ hours - lots could happen - and imo this is potentially more complex than we know.

To be clear, I'm not saying, implying or even thinking that the roommates had anything to do with the murders - but a full defense would require that the hours between the murders and the 911 call be fully explained. Otherwise, there are big holes about how evidence came into and left the scene, and that is just for starters imo jmo. Juror questions and opportunity for a whole lot of conjecture.

Add to that, inadequate representation is grounds for appeal.

Criminal Appeals

When and why may a criminal defendant appeal a conviction, and what is the process for doing so?

www.justia.com

Standards for the Defense Function

Fourth Edition of the Criminal Justice Standards for the Defense Function. Copyright by the American Bar Association. This work (Criminal Justice Standards) may be used for non-profit educational and training purposes and legal reform (legislative, j

www.americanbar.org

 

[Cool Cats]

Which was corrected in the PCA. I'm fairly certain that was to protect the life of DM.

This has never been corrected.

Just my opinion, not arguing something none of us can prove lol.

That sounds really familiar.

That it was made to look like DM was not on the 2nd floor so the killer at large wouldn't see her as a witness.

 

[PrairieWind]

Scenario. Xana picked her DD order up when it was left and in trying to be quiet didn't get the door closed properly. In this scenario, the door was never closed, so no one opened it. It blew open. Since a neighbor saw it open at 8:30, we don't know how long it had been that way or when it got closed. JMO

I think this is certainly plausible. I've wondered what door the DD guy used.
But regardless, it shows that the home was open from 4 a.m. to 11 a.m. to anyone who wanted to come and go.

 

[PrairieWind]

I guess I'm not understanding why the defense can't ask what DM did and who she called before calling 911 IF the state asks her about calling 911. If the state only asks her about seeing a guy with bushy eyebrows that's one thing. But if the state asks her other stuff, why can't the defense question her on those other topics too? (While not being too "heavy-handed") I'm not suggesting the defense would ask her about what other people said to each other. But it would seem the defense ought to be able to ask who, if anyone, DM called and when that happened and when others arrived at the house, who those others who arrived were, and what she observed them doing. They may not choose to ask all of that but I don't see why that would not be allowed if the state asked about calling 911.
JMO

The Defense can call DM as a witness and ask her anything they want. Her statements are certainly going to be pivotal to a defense, her actions, inactions, observations, who she called and when.

 

[PrairieWind]

This is my line of thinking as well. Unless there are so many other compelling things to prove for or against BK being in the house that night and committing the murders, IMO, the "missing 8 hours has to be discussed. If the prosecution puts DM on the stand to describe what she heard, saw and did through the time the intruder walked past her then the door is open for questioning about what happened between then and the time the police arrived.

The Defense can call DM as a witness whether the prosecution does or not, and ask her whatever they want. The Defense can, and almost certain will, ask to talk to her, interview her well before trial, and may have already done so.