4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #81

[Erutan]

It says right here that BK was not involved in the crimes, so maybe the word of LE saying there is no connection is worth considering:

"No evidence at this time" does not mean no connection , but DS was found close to the Kohberger's house and they have been subpoenaed .
Sounds like LE have questions.
It's suspicious and imo worth looking into.

Or maybe it's a nothing burger, but LE may have questions about the alibi .
And it's possible BK's phone pinged in the area, or his vehicle gps was not where he said it was ?
Which would be standard practice, and not shady.
I've seen nothing thus far to hint that LE may be stooping to questionable or hinky behavior.
Rather, they've built this case patiently and carefully .

Wouldn't it be something if DS' family were to receive answers ?
So many suffering families at the hands of this BK.

Since he's been arrested and charged although not convicted, I think it's safe to say LE have their man and BK is not innocent, nor was his arrest an accident or a mistake.
Imo.

 

[Erutan]

The reason I write posts comparing BK to other known serial killers and mass murderers is that many do not have "a type." Elliot Rodger, a mass murderer, had a three phase plan with very different victims chosen for each phase (he never got to phase 2). Joe DeAngelo changed types consistently over the time he raped and murdered. Ted Bundy was a bit more consistently, but the Boston Strangler wasn't. Kemper was more consistent (except that time he killed his grandparents).

Killers kill for many complex reasons and often escalate/change strategies (that's how DeAngelo evaded being captured for so long - he was a policeman and knew that people put too much stock in "types" and so he changed up his "type" (began with teenage girls, IMO).

Choosing different types, in other words, would be a Rational Choice (the theory Kohberger espoused in his master's thesis as his main theory of how criminals plan or script their crimes according to his Prof, Prof B at DeSales).

However, the local PD denying having any evidence of such a connection certainly puts this GJ action in a peculiar light. Don't know what to make of it.

IMO.

Maybe -- they have evidence that BK was in town or in the area, but not enough to connect him ?
And they're not going to pursue this without enough proof ?
But the GJ wants to ask questions that must be answered under oath, and those being questioned have to be truthful or face consequences.
Facing a GJ is not an interrogation, more like a question and answer session, from what I've read.
So this request will probably be laid back and casual.
Just a way of tying up some loose ends ?
It's possible to clear someone of something, and still charge them with a different crime.

Imo.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

The quote from the police chief says there is "NO evidence" that BK is tied to DS in "any way." Both "no evidence" and "any way" are bolded. IMO, if there was a chance or if he was a POI in DS's murder, it would not be so definitive. It would have said "at this time" or it would have said they are continuing to investigate if any connection exists. IMO, a definitive statement like that means, to me, that they're spending their time investigating other leads/suspects.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

"No evidence at this time" does not mean no connection , but DS was found close to the Kohberger's house and they have been subpoenaed .
Sounds like LE have questions.
It's suspicious and imo worth looking into.

Stroud Area police: No evidence missing woman case tied to Kohberger

Police in the Poconos are speaking out amid reports involving the man charged in four Idaho killings and a local missing person's case.

www.wfmz.com

IMO the SAPRD aren't being coy by saying that they have no evidence. I don't think there's a "wink, wink" added onto that statement. People will Interpret as they wish, but I think this has been irresponsible reporting and speculation.

"Stroud Area Regional police say they have no evidence that the disappearance of Dana Smithers, whose remains were found in Monroe County nearly a year after she went missing, is tied to Bryan Kohberger, the Monroe man charged in the Idaho student slayings."

"The Stroud Area Regional Police Department is aware of the many currently reported news articles, in which various media outlets have reported connections between the SARPD’s Dana Smithers missing person investigation and Idaho murder suspect Bryan Kohberger," the police statement released midday Thursday says.

 

[Nila Aella]

Maybe -- they have evidence that BK was in town or in the area, but not enough to connect him ?
And they're not going to pursue this without enough proof ?
But the GJ wants to ask questions that must be answered under oath, and those being questioned have to be truthful or face consequences.
Facing a GJ is not an interrogation, more like a question and answer session, from what I've read.
So this request will probably be laid back and casual.
Just a way of tying up some loose ends ?
It's possible to clear someone of something, and still charge them with a different crime.

Imo.

IF
the parents were required to testify, as I understand it, those questions and answers can be forwarded to Idaho. Requiring the parents to give information under oath in PA which could then be used for the Idaho trial makes me want to know more about how this process unfolded and what the questioning was about. JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

Hi @Cool Cats just wondering if you can clarify something for me please in those documents ??

I have read multiple times that the Prosecution have dropped “the sheath” from the evidence, after Ann Taylor challenged the type of testing that was done to obtain the DNA evidence???

Is this correct???

I believe the information was in those documents lodged to date ….and the Prosecution has now removed the sheath from the probable cause statement entirely. (Apologise if that is the wrong terminolog) So that Ann Taylor could not get everything from that statement dropped due to one item ….IYKWIM?

I did have a rest from following this case as it was consuming my life, trying to follow every written word about the case …. So apologise if this has been answered in a prior thread…

All IMO

Utter nonsense.
Preposterous, that just because a defense lawyer is doing their job and having their own DNA experts test the sheath DNA, that the prosecution would simply toss out this evidence.

Not you, your fine, your questions are good, no negative reflection on you whatsoever.

First of all, the Probable Cause Affidavit (PCA) is not going to be changed, it was used to obtain Warrants to make Kohberger's arrest and for searches, which have now been completed. The PCA has served it's purpose and now the prosecution and defense are gathering the actual evidence such as
the phone records, the videos, the LE investigative reports and interviews, etc....

Secondly, the PCA states very clearly that the PCA is not using the DNA evidence in securing the Warrants. The reason is - just in case the judge finds the DNA inadmissible. This way the PCA will not have been secured on inadmissible evidence.

We do not even know if the DNA will be admissible and this is up to the judge.

The way it works is the defense would file a Motion to Suppress Evidence. This is a request by the Defense asking the judge to disallow or ‘throw out’ specific evidence well in advance of trial, in this Case, the DNA.

Then the Prosecution would file their Opposition Motion to counter the Defense Motion to Suppress. The judge is the one who makes the ruling on whether or not to grant or deny the Defense's Motion to Suppress the DNA evidence.

None of this has even happened.

2 Cents

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

could then be used for the Idaho trial makes me want to know more about how this process unfolded and what the questioning was about.

"Their compelled testimony under oath may be shared with prosecutors in Idaho, according to the source. Pennsylvania law allows judges to release transcripts of witness testimony before grand juries to other investigative agencies after a court hearing."

But "may be shared with prosecutors in Idaho" is not the same as "used for the Idaho trial". Those are two different things.

"By law, a Monroe County grand jury can only review potential crimes that occurred within Monroe County, Pennsylvania. It is unclear what potential crime they are investigating."

Parents of Idaho student murder suspect subpoenaed to testify before Pennsylvania grand jury

By law, a Monroe County grand jury can only review potential crimes that occurred within Monroe County, Pennsylvania. It is unclear what potential crime they are investigating.

abc7chicago.com

 

[Rumination1]

I just had a thought about this grand jury. Perhaps the parents are being compelled to testify they knew their son had the knife and had been seen using it
Then that testimony can be used towards linking him with the sheath in idaho

None of that necessarily means there is connection enough to link him to DS but the grand jury is investigating a tip which came in.

Idaho will be trying to prove every link they have to BK and perhaps they hope the PA grand jury can assist or clarify

 

[SLouTh]

Utter nonsense.
Preposterous, that just because a defense lawyer is doing their job and having their own DNA experts test the sheath DNA, that the prosecution would simply toss out this evidence.

Not you, your fine, your questions are good, no negative reflection on you whatsoever.

First of all, the Probable Cause Affidavit (PCA) is not going to be changed, it was used to obtain Warrants to make Kohberger's arrest and for searches, which have now been completed. The PCA has served it's purpose and now the prosecution and defense are gathering the actual evidence such as
the phone records, the videos, the LE investigative reports and interviews, etc....

Secondly, the PCA states very clearly that the PCA is not using the DNA evidence in securing the Warrants. The reason is - just in case the judge finds the DNA inadmissible. This way the PCA will not have been secured on inadmissible evidence.

We do not even know if the DNA will be admissible and this is up to the judge.

The way it works is the defense would file a Motion to Suppress Evidence. This is a request by the Defense asking the judge to disallow or ‘throw out’ specific evidence well in advance of trial, in this Case, the DNA.

Then the Prosecution would file their Opposition Motion to counter the Defense Motion to Suppress. The judge is the one who makes the ruling on whether or not to grant or deny the Defense's Motion to Suppress the DNA evidence.

None of this has even happened.

2 Cents

Thankyou …. For the wonderful explanation! Greatly appreciated!
It can be difficult to understand the US Court process…

 

[10ofRods]

Hi @Cool Cats just wondering if you can clarify something for me please in those documents ??

I have read multiple times that the Prosecution have dropped “the sheath” from the evidence, after Ann Taylor challenged the type of testing that was done to obtain the DNA evidence???

Is this correct???

I believe the information was in those documents lodged to date ….and the Prosecution has now removed the sheath from the probable cause statement entirely. (Apologise if that is the wrong terminolog) So that Ann Taylor could not get everything from that statement dropped due to one item ….IYKWIM?

I did have a rest from following this case as it was consuming my life, trying to follow every written word about the case …. So apologise if this has been answered in a prior thread…

All IMO

I thought it was only removed from the PA PCA?

This is huge news, if not. And I haven't seen any discussion until right now.

IMO.

 

[10ofRods]

I just had a thought about this grand jury. Perhaps the parents are being compelled to testify they knew their son had the knife and had been seen using it
Then that testimony can be used towards linking him with the sheath in idaho

None of that necessarily means there is connection enough to link him to DS but the grand jury is investigating a tip which came in.

Idaho will be trying to prove every link they have to BK and perhaps they hope the PA grand jury can assist or clarify

If this is what's going on, that seems really...oblique, but somehow doesn't surprise me since it is probable that PA can claim BK was concealing evidence at his parents' home. OTOH, this whole thing looks like a sticky wicket to me.

IMO.

 

[Erutan]

I just had a thought about this grand jury. Perhaps the parents are being compelled to testify they knew their son had the knife and had been seen using it
Then that testimony can be used towards linking him with the sheath in idaho

None of that necessarily means there is connection enough to link him to DS but the grand jury is investigating a tip which came in.

Idaho will be trying to prove every link they have to BK and perhaps they hope the PA grand jury can assist or clarify

The cause of death for DS could not be verified due to the length of time before she was found, iirc ?
Maybe the tip was that a knife may have been used, i.e., marks on the bones/remains ?
Imo.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

I just had a thought about this grand jury. Perhaps the parents are being compelled to testify they knew their son had the knife and had been seen using it
Then that testimony can be used towards linking him with the sheath in idaho

None of that necessarily means there is connection enough to link him to DS but the grand jury is investigating a tip which came in.

Idaho will be trying to prove every link they have to BK and perhaps they hope the PA grand jury can assist or clarify

Well, that would be about a crime in IDAHO, not PA. And a Grand Jury in PA can't investigate a crime in IDAHO. The PA GJ can only investigate crimes in PA, and in that specific county. Not crimes in other parts of PA or crimes in ID. Now if DS were killed by a Ka-Bar knife in PA, and the parents testified that BK had the Ka-Bar knife in PA, that information could be shared with ID, but that does not put the knife in ID, either.

The GJ seems to have been an investigatory one, and there are lots of posts above about that. There are also posts that LE says they have no evidence linking BK to the murder of DS.

jurisdiction

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[10ofRods]

Maybe -- they have evidence that BK was in town or in the area, but not enough to connect him ?
And they're not going to pursue this without enough proof ?
But the GJ wants to ask questions that must be answered under oath, and those being questioned have to be truthful or face consequences.
Facing a GJ is not an interrogation, more like a question and answer session, from what I've read.
So this request will probably be laid back and casual.
Just a way of tying up some loose ends ?
It's possible to clear someone of something, and still charge them with a different crime.

Imo.

Truthfully, @Erutan, this seems like the most sensible take on this whole situation. BK was in the area; someone called the tip line; GJ is reviewing all evidence in order to make a recommendation to the DA (not an indictment). The more I think about it, the more this little quirk in PA procedure makes sense: if a GJ finds the initial evidence (similar to a PCA) to be incriminating, they can recommend to the DA to charge - and the DA at least knows how a reasonable group of BK's peers are thinking about what is already known.

OTOH, if the GJ says "Nope, this is all weak evidence," BK is exonerated in PA for the time being. BK's parents might also be left with the notion that they have helped clarify the DS case - because no one wants the wrong person to be charged.

IMO. IOW, the quickest way to quash rumors of BK's involvement is for the parents to step up. If that's what happened.

 

[SpiderFalcon]

From: What is a grand jury, and how does it work?

The advantage of the grand jury process is two-fold:

It allows police or prosecutors to compel production of documentary evidence; and to force reluctant witnesses to testify through the power of subpoena.

Sometimes those witnesses are granted immunity from prosecution.

All evidence in a grand jury investigation is presented in strict secrecy before the panel, which consists of 23 members of the public selected from a multi-county pool when the jury is authorized.

Once in session, grand juries typically meet for three or four days once a month for 18 months, although the terms can be extended for six months to two full years.

Each grand jury's case log can be long, so it is typical for a session week to be split among several different cases.

Since the Monroe County LE stated that BK is NOT TIED TO DSmithers, couldn't the questioning of his parents have to do with a different case? Isn't being a fugitive from justice a crime, and since he was in Monroe Co, doesn't that mean the Grand Jury in Monroe Co can investigate him? Also, all the "evidence" (the car, his person, and other listed items on the return of search warrant) being in Monroe Co would give the Grand Jury there the right to investigate? There's also those ID cards. Maybe the Grand Jury in Monroe Co was investigating those, and they were in the Kohberger house, so they subpoenaed the parents. IMO, MOO, IANAL

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Since the Monroe County LE stated that BK is NOT TIED TO DSmithers, couldn't the questioning of his parents have to do with a different case? Isn't being a fugitive from justice a crime, and since he was in Monroe Co, doesn't that mean the Grand Jury in Monroe Co can investigate him? Also, all the "evidence" (the car, his person, and other listed items on the return of search warrant) being in Monroe Co would give the Grand Jury there the right to investigate? There's also those ID cards. Maybe the Grand Jury in Monroe Co was investigating those, and they were in the Kohberger house, so they subpoenaed the parents. IMO, MOO, IANAL

"A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime."

"Although a person must be charged with a crime to be a fugitive from justice under the Extradition Clause, the Extradition Clause does not require the state demanding extradition (the demanding state) to have charged the fugitive before he left the state. Instead, the Extradition Clause only requires the accused to be located in a state different from the one in which he is charged.1 Moreover, the accused may have left the state for reasons other than avoiding justice because the reason the accused departed is immaterial.2"

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIV-S2-C2-2/ALDE_00013633/

This has never applied to BK.

 

[10ofRods]

The cause of death for DS could not be verified due to the length of time before she was found, iirc ?
Maybe the tip was that a knife may have been used, i.e., marks on the bones/remains ?
Imo.

Exactly. Or someone might have added some other BK-unfriendly detail to a tip. Most tiplines allow anonymity (as they should).

IMO.

 

[arielilane]

Stroud Area Regional Police Dept. in PA has released a statement saying there is no evidence the Dana Smithers case is connected to Bryan Kohberger. We reported yesterday he has a "strong alibi." Why the grand jury still wanted to question Kohberger's parents - we don't know.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1661790672968613888

https://twitter.com/BrianEntin

5/25/2023

 

[SpiderFalcon]

"A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime."

"Although a person must be charged with a crime to be a fugitive from justice under the Extradition Clause, the Extradition Clause does not require the state demanding extradition (the demanding state) to have charged the fugitive before he left the state. Instead, the Extradition Clause only requires the accused to be located in a state different from the one in which he is charged.1 Moreover, the accused may have left the state for reasons other than avoiding justice because the reason the accused departed is immaterial.2"

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIV-S2-C2-2/ALDE_00013633/

This has never applied to BK.

From: Moscow murder suspect Bryan Kohberger waives extradition to Idaho

Also:

Suspect in Idaho quadruple murder arrested in Monroe County

Bryan C. Kohberger, the suspect in the murder of four college students in Moscow, Idaho, has been arrested in Monroe County.

monroecountyda.com

 

[10ofRods]

I'm confused. Are there now TWO PD's claiming they have no evidence about Kohberger being connected to DS?

Stroud and Monroe? This is not making a lot of sense. Anything related to evidence in the Idaho case would not be related to DS. Anything related to DS, however, could be through direct communication with a prosecutor (as opposed to police; it's not necessary to take tips or evidence or information to police first). But...is that what happened?

Is Entin mistaken in some respects? I thought he only mentioned one PD.

IMO. I have a link where Stroud authorities deny any evidence re BK, but I do not have one for Monroe County yet. TIA.