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

[Bogbacal2]

BBM

Family of Ethan Chapin question why Dylan Mortensen didn't call cops

An account believed to belong to Ethan's sister-in-law made several posts online before the arrest affidavit was unsealed for suspected quadruple killer Bryan Kohberger.

www.dailymail.co.uk

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 BK; it seems reasonable that all of the evidence should be presented, and that would include everything the living victims heard, saw, smelled, did, etc. not to prosecute DM & BF but to put into perspective everything that happened jmo imo. Witnesses testify - it's a thing. imo jmo.

Yes! Xana’s sister-in-law. THANK YOU

 

[jepop]

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

The murders were carried out before DM closed and locked her door (for the last time per PCA between 4am and 4.25am) and well before 911 was called (ie murders were between 4am and 4.25am), IMO. I have no reason to question the timing of the murders and that is not part of my reasoning. I have no problem with proving decontamination of the crime scene. That is essential IMO. I am only talking about the timing of 911 call as per my previous post. MOO

edited for clarity.
edited for spelling

 

[jepop]

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.

Just re potential contamination of the crime scene, I think it's possible the state would probably call some forensic expert or other who cleared the scene or whatever, to demonstate further and expertly that the contamination question has been addressed. MOO

 

[jepop]

dbm

 

[Nova]

Weak wind. But regardless, if it was open at 8:30 and the roommates didn't get up until 11ish, then the door was still open for 2.5 hours, unless we want to speculate the wind both opened and closed the door within minutes. I think that's a stretch. Whoever (or whatever) opened the wind, if the report is true, then the house provided open access to anyone for hours.

MOO.

Even without the front door, we know the intruder entered, most likely through the middle floor slider. To date, I've seen no claim that either of the surviving residents locked the slider behind him when he left.

So, in that sense, the house was "open" for 8ish hours regardless of whether the front door ever sprang ajar.

BTW and FWIW, my first encounter with the "front door open at 8:30" report came from one of the neighbors who also claimed to have responded to the two surviving roommates when they appeared hysterically in the parking area about 11 a.m. It was reported on YouTube but NOT by a WS-approved source.

For that reason alone, I've made no reference to an open, front door; nor will I until it is reported by an approved source. But at the time I found the neighbor's account seemingly convincing.

 

[Nova]

Well, so far not one thing has been right. For instance, you said it wasn't windy. What mph gust does it take to move a door that's ajar, whether or not it's level? I think that's an important fact. I live with a serial non door closer. It takes nothing to move a door that literally isn't shut. Our wind right now is like 9 mph and even with a storm door, the interior door was moving. And yes, I can slam a door that's merely ajar. JMO

Yes, and what's more, pressure in a building can be generated by the air outside cooling or heating. Wind on the night in question is not the only possible factor that could push open a door once it is ajar.

 

[Nova]

Yes, to what purpose and relevance would that line of questioning serve? The timing of the 911 calll isn't on trial. MOO

Well, just like some WS posters, the defense may want to argue that the delay in calling 911 suggests something untoward was going on in the house and that "something" may raise reasonable doubt as to whether BK did the murders.

Not saying *I* believe that, of course, just that there is an argument to be made about the delay. We've seen it made here (and I've seen it made on YT).

 

[NCWatcher]

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.

The number of 2022 graduation ceremonies at Desales matters because the supposition he may have skipped the undergrad ceremony in favor of the graduate ceremony can't be correct since there was only one combined ceremony. (And no, by suggesting he couldn't have completed an existing DeSales co-terminal Psychology/CJ 5-year program I certainly was not suggesting I thought he earned a master's degree without earning an undergraduate degree in something from somewhere.)

I said earlier, I can't find the DeSales graduation list for 2021. So perhaps he earned an undergraduate Psychology degree at DeSales in 2021 before subsequently entering the masters program in Criminal Justice. (The MA in CJ is only 30 hours.) I am 100% sure he didn't earn a BA in Psychology at DeSales though in 2022 or in an earlier year. DeSales offers the BS in Psychology, not the BA.

I't's not a huge deal but I like to know accurate info. So I wondered where the coterminal idea came from as I couldn't find that reported anywhere else. Further, it's not clear to me when he developed an interest in Criminal Justice. Some say it dates back to high school. But if his goal was to complete a master's in CJ at DeSales, I do wonder why he (apparently) did not pursue the 5-year BA in CJ to MA in CJ. (He's not listed as receiving a BA in CJ when he received the MA. In 2022 he earned only the MA.)
JMO

 

[jepop]

Well, just like some WS posters, the defense may want to argue that the delay in calling 911 suggests something untoward was going on in the house and that "something" may raise reasonable doubt as to whether BK did the murders.

Not saying *I* believe that, of course, just that there is an argument to be made about the delay. We've seen it made here (and I've seen it made on YT).

Yes, but I think the prosecution would raise objections and the judge would want to know how and why the timing of the call might point towards this. I think the only way the defense could raise doubt about BK via DM would be through attacking DM's visual description of who she saw, not the timing of the 911 call or that she locked her door and stayed in her room. The visual descriptor line seems the most fruitful avenue for the defense,IMO. I've thought the defense might try to say she didn't see anyone/was too traumatised/hallucinated. Or that it was too dark for her to have any idea of the physical descriptors that she mentions in her statement. I can see this as a line the defense might take. Just to add via edit, that I actually don't see how defense might fruitfully use even this line of questioning and agree with @whiterhino's thoughts on this (posted here recently).

But not the other, not without the defense indicting to a judge as to why and to what purpose. MOO

ETA BBM: unless the Youtube source cited is approved here (I haven't seen it posted here), I guess I'lll just consider it as rumour so can't factor it into my reasoning.

ETA last line of first paragraph

 

[Nova]

Yes, but I think the prosecution would raise objections and the judge would want to know how and why the timing of the call might point towards this. I think the only way the defense could raise doubt about BK via DM would be through attacking DM's visual description of who she saw, not the timing of the 911 call or that she locked her door and stayed in her room. The visual descriptor line seems the most fruitful avenue for the defense,IMO. I've thought the defense might try to say she didn't see anyone/was too traumatised/hallucinated. Or that it was too dark for her to have any idea of the physical descriptors that she mentions in her statement. I can see this as a line the defense might take. But not the other, not without the defense indicting to a judge as to why and to what purpose. MOO

ETA BBM: unless the Youtube source cited is approved here (I haven't seen it posted here), I guess I'lll just consider it as rumour so can't factor it into my reasoning.

(Emphasis added.)

Yes, please do consider it a mere "rumor".

I intended my original post to say I do the same. I have no way of verifying the validity of that report from late November.

I only invoked that account because we were talking about potential lines of defense inquiry. It seems useful in that regard, as an example, but not usable as fact.

 

[jepop]

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.

Yes, it seems to me that the defense questioning the timing of the 911 call (just this, not her visual description) so as to somehow cast doubt as regards to who the alleged killer is, how the murders were carried out, when the murders ocurred and/or why the murders ocurred is groundless. DM, if called, can give a straitforward account of what she did, how she perceived matters, after seeing the stranger in the house and how events unfolded the next day. To my mind, the prosecution will object solidly to any defense cross that seeks to turn this on DM somehow and suggest it casts doubt on defendent. I don't see a line of questioning on cross, such as "why didn't you call 911 sooner", "why did you go back to sleep?", "wouldn't a person call 911 if they saw..." etc and so forth as having any bearing on the alleged killer's actions. Without a reasonable explanation as to how this might have a bearing on the evidence I think the prosecution would object and that would be sustained. MOO

I've speculated before over several threads that the prosecution will probably call DM, if only to prevent the defense calling her first. I think re crime scene contamination that could probably addressed through calling forensic witnesses.But that's just MOO. Anyway I'm currently of the opinion that would be the wisest move by the prosecution, seeing as how (to my understanding) the defense can call her themselves.MOO

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

This post lands at random.

DM is a victim in this matter and a witness. Questioning her credibility or potential testimony is not victim friendly.

Could we please move on from speculation that DM perhaps did not really see what she saw.

 

[al66pine]

How Can Prosecutor Clear Up DM's 911 "Call Delay?"

IMO, if they don't clear it up in some other way, she will need to explain the delay in the 911 call. If she does not , I foresee the defense attempting to use that and the early morning visitors to poke holes in the case.

@U.N. Known Interesting thought. (Not addressing the "early morning visitors.")

Hypo:
Prosecutor calls DM to testify and asks very narrow questions about what she saw and she answers very narrowly (at approx. 4:__ a.m. [Sorry, I, al66pine, forgot the time], I opened/cracked my bedroom door and saw guy in mask & dark clothing, bushy brows, certain height, walking in this direction.)

How can prosecutor "clear up" DM's delay in calling 911 herself or in prompting/urging/begging someone else to call 911?

Anyone? TiA.

 

[jepop]

The PCA is not admissible at trial. But regardless, where in the PCA does it say the Idaho State police lab identified the dna found on the sheath as belonging to BK? Where does it indicate the methods used to obtain those results? Where does it state the methods used to analyze the sample belonging to the father? The PCA says the Id lab said the PA sample could not be excluded as the biological father of the suspect dna (sheath). It says nothing else. You have filled in the rest yourself. Who did the actual DNA analysis? We don't know.

BBM: I don't understand but is this where the confusion is arising from?

"The Idaho State lab later located a single source of male DNA (Suspect Profile) left on the button snap of the sheath" Page 2 of PCA.

In the context of this sentence in the PCA, the words "Suspect Profile" in brackets don't convey that the sample located is being identified as BK's IMO. The affiant is using this as a generic term, the sample located on the sheath is simply referred to as a "Suspect Proile". MOO. Also the term" located" in this sentence I read as synonymous with extracted. So to me this sentence conveys that the ISL extracted/located a single source of male dna on the button snap. The affiant refers to this as a "Suspect Profile" in brackets. MOO

And to belabour the point for clarity's sake, I read the PCA as then going on to to show how the unidentified/unknown "suspect profile" was identified via the method described on page 18 of the PCA which in summary is.
1. 27th Dec LE/fbi obtained trash from PA residence
2. Trash was sent to Idaho State Lab. Must have been via plane IMO because...
3. 28th Dec IDSL identified BK dad dna from trash and matched it to the dna sample on the sheath snap to show the extreme likelihood that the dna sample on sheath snap was BK's. MOO

ETA: Sorry If I've missed the point. I may be late to the latest discussion, as I am addressing the notion that the ISL state lab may not have done the original extraction of the sample themselves. I agree that the testing method via BK's dad's dna might well be questioned by the defense. And I am assuming that since the arrest BK has been swabbed (actually at arrest) and that his actual dna has been matched to the sheath button sample. I guess that may not be true though not sure why. MOO

 

[whiterhino]

Can we shift to 2021 for a minute? IIRC there are a few different things which seem to point back to 2021.

An interview (Fox) with a former tenant who lived at 1122 King during their junior year: Idaho murders: Footsteps can be heard on 'every floor,' former tenant says

Were there not pings from BKs cellphone to the wifi at 1122 King as early as June 2022? I don't have a link for that.

BK worked as a security guard in Pleasant Valley until August 2021 according to this link: Kaylee Goncalves’ family see ‘connections’ to Bryan Kohberger after arrest

"The six-foot, 185-pound suspect worked as a part-time security officer at Pleasant Valley School District, which listed his mother as a paraprofessional, until at least August 2021, according to school agenda records."

There is the account connected to Tinder with the dates of between March 1, 2021 and March 31, 2021 (apparently there are about 20 redacted accounts) https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case...Order to Seal Redact - Match Group LLC 4.pdf

I'm not really sure where I'm going with the 2021 thing, just trying to change up the subject. The 20 some odd redacted Tinder accounts likely belong to BK and were probably part of his stalking tactic. How many other dating accounts were there? Apologies for being repetitive.

 

[maskedwoman]

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.

I just want to point out two things. The first is that there is still an ocean of things we don't know (I realize you all know this too), and that includes DM's state of mind when she saw the intruder. The delay in the 911 call has been discussed at length here and elsewhere, and most people have assumed she was too traumatized to take action. Many have shared heart-rending stories of feeling that same way. But if she did assume they were just being noisy (as some accounts have claimed), then I think we just can't know if she was necessarily experiencing trauma in that moment. The PCA doesn't specifically say she was afraid or traumatized. Just that frozen moment when she saw the person walking through. As near as I can tell, we have assumed or inferred everything from the time she closed and locked her door until the friends arrived later that morning. At least IMO.

My second point is that, based on what we know of that morning's events, the delay does appear to leave a hole in the prosecution's timeline that I think the defense will try to exploit. Depending on how the questioning goes, I would be very surprised if one side or the other doesn't end up asking why she didn't call 911 immediately after seeing this person. It could be a simple as not realizing anything horrible had happened, she didn't see a need to call anyone. Even if a juror or two don't understand how that's possible, it doesn't necessarily follow that the prosecution's timeline would collapse. If she had not waked up and seen the intruder, they would have to establish the timeline in other ways. So, there may be more than sufficient evidence to establish events even though no one immediately called 911. But I would be shocked if the defense does not try.

Edited for clarity.

 

[Montecore1]

If DM did call the other roommates after hearing noises (crying, dog barking, commotion) that would have, imo, spooked BK to hear phones ringing, beeping…just a thought. I don’t remember, I don’t think it is in the statement that DM called the roommates. I’ll have to find the source unless someone remembers.

IIRC DM at the very least texted a few of the roommates...

 

[U.N. Known]

I'm not really sure where I'm going with the 2021 thing, just trying to change up the subject. The 20 some odd redacted Tinder accounts likely belong to BK and were probably part of his stalking tactic. How many other dating accounts were there? Apologies for being repetitive.

That is a bit of a stretch, no? IMO most anything is possible when it comes to online dating, but connecting BK to redacted Tinder accounts nearly a year and a half before he was in the area is a bit much for me. In addition, those 20 accounts could be redacted for several reasons including: they were cleared and deserve privacy or they are still under investigation and LE does not want that known. Of course, BK could be one of those people, but if one of them is, why redact his info now that he is in jail?

 

[CGray123]

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.

RBBM. DM is an important witness in that she helps to establish the time of the murders. She will be called, if only for that purpose. Obviously, she can't identify BM but her description - told to police before they even knew who BM is and therefore not influenced by anything or anyone - is consistent with him being there.

I agree that the reliability of DM's description of what she saw and when will be challenged. All eyewitnesses are subjected to this. Since I don't know what her answers will be, it seems premature to conclude that her testimony is "risky."

MOO.

 

[PrairieWind]

BBM: I don't understand but is this where the confusion is arising from?

"The Idaho State lab later located a single source of male DNA (Suspect Profile) left on the button snap of the sheath" Page 2 of PCA.

In the context of this sentence in the PCA, the words "Suspect Profile" in brackets don't convey that the sample located is being identified as BK's IMO. The affiant is using this as a generic term, the sample located on the sheath is simply referred to as a "Suspect Proile". MOO. Also the term" located" in this sentence I read as synonymous with extracted. So to me this sentence conveys that the ISL extracted/located a single source of male dna on the button snap. The affiant refers to this as a "Suspect Profile" in brackets. MOO

And to belabour the point for clarity's sake, I read the PCA as then going on to to show how the unidentified/unknown "suspect profile" was identified via the method described on page 18 of the PCA which in summary is.
1. 27th Dec LE/fbi obtained trash from PA residence
2. Trash was sent to Idaho State Lab. Must have been via plane IMO because...
3. 28th Dec IDSL identified BK dad dna from trash and matched it to the dna sample on the sheath snap to show the extreme likelihood that the dna sample on sheath snap was BK's. MOO

ETA: Sorry If I've missed the point. I may be late to the latest discussion, as I am addressing the notion that the ISL state lab may not have done the original extraction of the sample themselves. I agree that the testing method via BK's dad's dna might well be questioned by the defense. And I am assuming that since the arrest BK has been swabbed (actually at arrest) and that his actual dna has been matched to the sheath button sample. I guess that may not be true though not sure why. MOO

I think I haven't done a good job explaining my point, and I apologize for that. The PCA states the Idaho lab located a sample on the sheath. It doesn't say (nor would the affiant really have knowledge of) who actually conducted the dna analysis. If the sample was very small, it could be that the Idaho State lab was unable to process it, as seems to be referred to in that article discussed earlier and it was contracted out to another entity for testing. Those results come back to the Idaho state lab which coordinates them with the sample obtained from PA. So the PCA can say "Idaho lab" but that doesn't mean the did the actual testing. This could be important, but maybe not. If there is more BK dna found at the scene, it really becomes irrelevant. If this is the only dna, then it is important.

Also, just to add. I believe the DNA from PA is now irrelevant. It was important for identifying BK to get the arrest. Now that BK is identified, I believe that DNA is irrelevant and we will not hear much more about it.