Strong disagree in a murder case. With most murder stories, there is a murder and the person or persons who did are clearly and plainly on the wrong side of the human ledger. The truth may lie outside the courtroom, I suppose, but it's certainly in the hands of the jury - who are supposed to find for ONE side of the argument or refuse to return a verdict.
I don't know how many trials you've watched, but there's absolutely nothing weak about the State's case at this point in time. And so far, the Defense has gotten no evidence "thrown out." (An odd term, really). There will be LOTS of evidence that the State puts on its list for trial - and even if the Judge approves it, they may not bring all the evidence. They will judge that as the trial unfolds.
But the Defense has a bigger problem. That is, many of the angles suggested here on WS would require that Kohberger testify on his own behalf. Risky. But juries are human and they are selected because they showed up (as responsible people do) for jury duty (many people shirk it). They answered questions at voir dire (and behind the scenes, are being researched by paralegals, possibly on both sides - but certainly the Defense has an interest in doing this - may even hire a consultant). So the jury will be reasonable, adult humans who want to do their duty. They may end up in a draw, but I doubt it. They will decide for one side or the other.
The idea that the State needs rabbits is odd to me. It's the Defense that needs to pray for a miracle. Just the remaining latent prints (both kinds) alone are going to put another finger on the scale; if the size of those Van prints didn't match Kohberger's feet (and likely matched in some detail), or other similar forms of evidence do not match up to Kohberger, I doubt the GJ would have indicted. But even if you believe that the "truth is somewhere in the middle" (How does that look? Kohberger kind of halfway did it? Did it but was in a fugue state? Because "didn't do it at all" is not "in the middle" to me), the Judge is being given an opportunity, as always, to pore over the evidence as well.
There's a motion to dismiss, isn't there? Let's wait until the Judge ways in. Because, IME, what the Judge has actually heard (on the phone, in chambers) off the record PLUS what the GJ heard is going to take this case to trial. And Judges do not decide to spend State resources capriciously. There will be a fair trial.
But it's going to be an uphill battle for this defendant. I think there will be some real bombshells, as always in a murder trial. I also think the list of witnesses will be surprising to some, but the work done here by the document-reading WSers have convinced me that there are going to be several further layers to the evidence, of the type used long before DNA was ever heard of.
GPS was likely introduced to the GJ. There has to be GPS to go along with the cell tower data (and there are more cell towers and masts whose information could contribute at trial - but likely unneeded if the GPS is there). The Amazon subpoenas got specific enough to make anyone following this case realize there was some sort of trail from Ka-Bar.
At any rate, I am confident that the Judge will not dismiss this case. The fact that the State is going for the death penalty telegraphs something about what they think the strength of their case might be. The number of different kinds of evidence that I believe they have is very long (mostly due to Kohberger not leaving his phone at home - it left, in his car, at the same time he did, from Pullman; the phone will unit Kohberger, car and King Road on multiple occasions, including the night and hour of the murders, and including a return to the scene of the crime).
IMO: Truth is often absolute in a murder case. Four people are dead. That's as absolute as one can get.
And whoever did it is completely responsible for this heinous action. No middle ground for me, anyway. I have to be convinced by the kinds of evidence I"m mentioning but I do not believe that the evidence is absent. It's there. The Grand Jury saw it. Now the Judge will rule on it. I'm also keeping in mind that the GJ evidence presentation is not the same as a trial - there will be more facts put before a jury in a murder trial than for the GJ, IMO.
ICBW. Judge Judge could throw this out -when is that hearing? Can't recall. But it's standard procedure and I don't for a minute believe he will throw this out.
IMO.
