ArianeEmory
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 13, 2013
- Messages
- 5,741
- Reaction score
- 7,120
Spaghetti defense. Throw everything at the wall. Too bad for them that there’s so little that’s going to stick.
4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #84
- Thread starter ChatteringBirds
- Start date
- Status
Spaghetti defense. Throw everything at the wall. Too bad for them that there’s so little that’s going to stick.
10ofRods
Verified Anthropologist
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2019
- Messages
- 15,556
- Reaction score
- 194,859
There are "receipts" for this. At least a month before the murders, Kohberger, using his own instagram account - which I believe to be accurate reporting - appeared on MM's Instagram and basically did the same thing many other guys were doing, saying "Hi, how are you" or whatever it was he said.
This was well before his name was announced as a suspect and well before the murders, so it was not a hoax created by internet gremlins who did in fact (AFTER the arrest) attempt to impersonate him on various platforms. There are screenshots and for a long while, the post was actually visible and I saw it myself. It could still be there, for all I know.
IMO.
You can retroactively change the username, which I think had been determined to be the case for this one. An account called JohnSnow12 can comment “hi” in 2021 and then change the username to bryankohberger in November ‘22 after the story goes viral, other users wouldn’t know the difference.
It’s a pretty common tactic for spammers. They’ll leave comments on random profiles and wait for something relevant to stick. That’s why those messages all look so similar, they’re using bots to spam hundreds of accounts at once. I believe that account ended up trying to market some kind of product in the horror or weapon genre (very gross).
There’s a lot of Twitter accounts that seem to predict the future like, “an earthquake will happen on march 12.” In most cases it’s wrong and gets deleted, but when it gets lucky the account goes viral, usually changes their name and deletes older posts. It turns into a marketing or crypto money grab scheme.
10ofRods
Verified Anthropologist
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2019
- Messages
- 15,556
- Reaction score
- 194,859
So says the Defense. However, it seems to me that it's impossible for the Defense - who must surely have been given some reports and who knows the name of many, many people who have been interviewed - to know the full content that people might testify to. If an attorney, for example, interviews someone and jots down a few notes and heads back to the DA's office for verbal discussion, saying "put this person on the possible witness list," then there may not be anything beyond work product (excluded from discovery) to produce.
There are good reasons not to put things in writing during investigations but to have team meetings, with brief notes.
The Defense is trying to goad the State into revealing more by pointing out that (so far) there was no DNA found in the car or his apartment. That's how I take it. And I won't be surprised if that's true.
The Defense has not attempted to deal with the SM data, IMO. Do they have an expert to interpret the massive amount of cellular data and GPS data? They don't just automatically get the FBI's expert's full opinion - only what that person has put down in writing, probably on a map. The data will be transmitted to the Defense in exactly the form the State received it - the State does *not* have to share their in-house analysis and until their experts actually *complete* their reports, they are not necessary to produce.
Most prosecutors have a paralegal who manages the discovery production with a view to, well, being the prosecution. They still have lots of time to surprise the Defense with final reports nearer to trial - which is what they should be doing. Defense gets the same raw materials that LE and the State are using - but they don't get their expertise until closer to trial. There will then be hearing on "who is an expert for real" and the Judge will approve the experts.
All completed expert reports should be discoverable, although I'm not a lawyer in Idaho and I do not know what their rules are for reports that the State is not going to use (for whatever reason). The raw data is obviously still discoverable. But if two attorneys talk over what a witness said (and the witness was not tape recorded - which they are often not), that's not discoverable. This is one reason that LE and DA's and PD's hire people like me - I can go talk to potential witnesses and simply then convey (out loud) what I learned (while reading my notes, which remain entirely my own work produce and in my possession - unless needed, which has never happened, because basically I'm helping by doing deep background on some of the potential witnesses).
I have lots of ideas about how hiring a legal consultant could help the Defense - but they need to spend their money first on digital forensics experts and DNA experts of their own (neither of which are going to help them much, IMO). It also helps, when there are a lot of people who might be witnesses to a single fact or aspect of a case, to have a complete view of what all parties say - but only one of those might make a good witness on the stand. Attorneys evaluate that intensely, but they hire consultants to give a new and perhaps differing view, all based on observable and documented work with that witness.
The Defense is spending on private investigators, subpoenas that are out of state, etc. At some point, they will spend on digital forensic experts of their own (unless they decide that's useless - which might be the case).
IMO.
Twistinginthewind
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2014
- Messages
- 2,442
- Reaction score
- 19,089
MOO, maybe he did.
IIRC, so did Ted Bundy (stand over one of his family members while they were sleeping when he was young), well before he went on to murder coeds and college aged women, some in sororities.
BK studied Bundy during his Master's degree program at DeSales, IIRC per one of the MSM articles in the Media Discussion Only thread (about whom BK studied under and who they studied in a course he took at DeSales that covered serial killers).
If he did, I wonder if BK saw himself in Bundy and other killers like BTK.
MOO
Seattle1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 40,846
- Reaction score
- 424,791
I really don't understand what is feared contrary to the vehicle evidence per the probable cause affidavit (PCA) outlined below. BK owned a white, 2015 Hyundai Elantra which was recovered by police.
Knowing today the vehicle tip came from neighbors' video surveillance collected by MPD, I think it's evident images captured by surveillance were limited to the vehicle's side profile versus the front/back ends where tags are located. The MPD public request dated Dec 7-8, 2022 clearly stated the tag number of the white vehicle was not available.
Also, had the vehicle's front end been captured, I think it likely police would have included the 2015 model per the (revised) front grill.
As for the NYT reporting the vehicle as a Sentra, I'm paywalled and also can't determine if MSM date is post Dec 8, 2022 (MPD Bolo date) but it's obviously bogus reporting. It's also easily verifiable that MPD never put out a BOLO for a Nissan Sentra! MPD BOLO
Further to the vehicle registered to BK in police custody, sources told News Nation that an ID belonging to somebody who lived in the Moscow residence was found inside the vehicle (gag order on the trial has stopped police from confirming any details about the card). If true, this would certainly be difficult for the defense to discount, especially given their recent statement that BK had no connection to the victims. MOO
IMO, any vehicle discussion contrary to the white, 2015 Elantra owned by the defendant can safely be put to rest.
www.cbsnews.com
Jan 6, 2023
The affidavit in the case details more about how Kohberger was found after a wide search for a white sedan seen on surveillance videos multiple times near the students' rental home, a gray, three-story building on a dead-end street in Moscow, Idaho.
It was unusual behavior in the residential, hillside neighborhood in the quiet hours before dawn. And according to the affidavit, surveillance videos showing the vehicle that November night were key to unraveling the gruesome mystery of who killed four University of Idaho students inside the house.
With little else to go on as a panicked community demanded answers, investigators canvassed security footage from the neighborhood — including one recording of the car speeding away after the slayings — to get a sense of the killer's possible movements, the affidavit said.
Eventually, the document said, police were able to narrow down what was at first known only vaguely as a white sedan to a 2015 Hyundai Elantra registered to Kohberger, a 28-year-old doctoral student in criminology at Washington State University, just across the border in Pullman, Washington. Further investigation matched Kohberger to DNA at the crime scene, it said.
[..]
The car's first pass by the home was recorded at 3:29 a.m. on Nov. 13 — less than an hour before Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin were stabbed to death in their rooms, Moscow Police Cpl. Brett Payne wrote in the affidavit.
The vehicle drove by twice more and was recorded a fourth time at 4:04 a.m., Payne wrote. It wasn't seen on the footage again until it sped away 16 minutes later.
"This is a residential neighborhood with a very limited number of vehicles that travel in the area during the early morning hours," Payne wrote. "Upon review of the video there are only a few cars that enter and exit this area during this time frame."
A forensic examiner with the FBI determined the car to likely be a 2011-13 Hyundai Elantra, though subsequently said it could be a model as late as 2016, according to the affidavit.
Surveillance footage from the Washington State University campus offered further tantalizing information: A similar vehicle headed out of town just before 3 a.m. on the day of the killings and reappeared on cameras in Pullman just before 5:30 a.m., the affidavit said.
On Nov. 25, the Moscow Police Department asked regional law enforcement to look for a white Elantra. Three nights later, a WSU police officer ran a query for any white Elantras on campus.
One came back as having a Pennsylvania license plate and being registered to Kohberger. Within half an hour, another campus officer located the vehicle parked at Kohberger's apartment complex. It came back as having Washington state tags. Five days after the killings, Kohberger had switched the registration from Pennsylvania, his home state, to Washington, the affidavit said.
Knowing today the vehicle tip came from neighbors' video surveillance collected by MPD, I think it's evident images captured by surveillance were limited to the vehicle's side profile versus the front/back ends where tags are located. The MPD public request dated Dec 7-8, 2022 clearly stated the tag number of the white vehicle was not available.
Also, had the vehicle's front end been captured, I think it likely police would have included the 2015 model per the (revised) front grill.
As for the NYT reporting the vehicle as a Sentra, I'm paywalled and also can't determine if MSM date is post Dec 8, 2022 (MPD Bolo date) but it's obviously bogus reporting. It's also easily verifiable that MPD never put out a BOLO for a Nissan Sentra! MPD BOLO
Further to the vehicle registered to BK in police custody, sources told News Nation that an ID belonging to somebody who lived in the Moscow residence was found inside the vehicle (gag order on the trial has stopped police from confirming any details about the card). If true, this would certainly be difficult for the defense to discount, especially given their recent statement that BK had no connection to the victims. MOO
IMO, any vehicle discussion contrary to the white, 2015 Elantra owned by the defendant can safely be put to rest.
Search for white Hyundai was key in Bryan Kohberger case
Police say cell phone records show Kohberger's phone near the murder scene at least 12 times before the night of the stabbings, starting in August.
www.cbsnews.com
Jan 6, 2023
The affidavit in the case details more about how Kohberger was found after a wide search for a white sedan seen on surveillance videos multiple times near the students' rental home, a gray, three-story building on a dead-end street in Moscow, Idaho.
It was unusual behavior in the residential, hillside neighborhood in the quiet hours before dawn. And according to the affidavit, surveillance videos showing the vehicle that November night were key to unraveling the gruesome mystery of who killed four University of Idaho students inside the house.
With little else to go on as a panicked community demanded answers, investigators canvassed security footage from the neighborhood — including one recording of the car speeding away after the slayings — to get a sense of the killer's possible movements, the affidavit said.
Eventually, the document said, police were able to narrow down what was at first known only vaguely as a white sedan to a 2015 Hyundai Elantra registered to Kohberger, a 28-year-old doctoral student in criminology at Washington State University, just across the border in Pullman, Washington. Further investigation matched Kohberger to DNA at the crime scene, it said.
[..]
The car's first pass by the home was recorded at 3:29 a.m. on Nov. 13 — less than an hour before Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin were stabbed to death in their rooms, Moscow Police Cpl. Brett Payne wrote in the affidavit.
The vehicle drove by twice more and was recorded a fourth time at 4:04 a.m., Payne wrote. It wasn't seen on the footage again until it sped away 16 minutes later.
"This is a residential neighborhood with a very limited number of vehicles that travel in the area during the early morning hours," Payne wrote. "Upon review of the video there are only a few cars that enter and exit this area during this time frame."
A forensic examiner with the FBI determined the car to likely be a 2011-13 Hyundai Elantra, though subsequently said it could be a model as late as 2016, according to the affidavit.
Surveillance footage from the Washington State University campus offered further tantalizing information: A similar vehicle headed out of town just before 3 a.m. on the day of the killings and reappeared on cameras in Pullman just before 5:30 a.m., the affidavit said.
On Nov. 25, the Moscow Police Department asked regional law enforcement to look for a white Elantra. Three nights later, a WSU police officer ran a query for any white Elantras on campus.
One came back as having a Pennsylvania license plate and being registered to Kohberger. Within half an hour, another campus officer located the vehicle parked at Kohberger's apartment complex. It came back as having Washington state tags. Five days after the killings, Kohberger had switched the registration from Pennsylvania, his home state, to Washington, the affidavit said.
10ofRods
Verified Anthropologist
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2019
- Messages
- 15,556
- Reaction score
- 194,859
I think you're missing my point. You can't retroactively change the DATE on the POST. Just the name. But this was observed by many BEFORE Kohberger was named as the defendant. People went in and screen captured as much of the victims' SM as possible - within 2-3 days of the murders.
Yes, I'm very aware it's common for spammers. It's also common for investigators and people like me to go look through social media before a suspect is ever named <modsnip: if you can’t link it you can’t discuss it>
So, you can tell me that you know it was debunked (and perhaps there's some way unknown to anyone at Instagram or published on the internet that a person can take an existing post and change the TIME on it, but I do not think so).
I'd like to see someone provide that information if it exists.
IMO. Respectfully disagree that this was like the many, many "Kohbergers" who suddenly showed up on victim instagrams *after* his arrest. I wouldn't continue to post that I believe (as several reporters do) that someone simply changed their name on an account.
I also want an explanation for how Insta pictures got onto Kohberger's phone if he didn't interact with her account. What a dummy he would be to have downloaded those after the murders, although I guess he could say that he was just a regular dude, interested in cute girls who have died. He probably isn't the only one.
I should add that MM had way more comments from what appeared to be random (and international) men than KG did - perhaps KG was curating her Insta a bit, due to boyfriend? She posted lots of pictures, and had comments on nearly all from her BF, and I interpreted a couple of his comments as poking a little fun at how much attention she was getting from guys for them - so perhaps she deleted some of the randos' comments. MM certainly appears not to have done that.
IMO.
Yes, because changing this kind of announcement takes time and teamwork (and usually a special team for new public announcements - there was a lot of other stuff going on at the time).
PR is not a priority when you finally know who you're going to arrest, IMO.
The expectation that LE would run differently than any other business is unrealistic. Timelines for things take more time than the public realizes, as there are so many moving parts. There's no way to rapidly change messaging (unless it's emergency to do so) because Police Chiefs and FBI investigators usually want a couple of group meetings and some plans for that activity - and it is not a priority activity in most cases.
IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
Cool Cats
I EXPECT DOUGHNUTS
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 12,349
- Reaction score
- 94,966
I didn't know about BK studying Bundy, very interesting. I know he studied BTK.
Add in the reddit questionnaire where he wants to understand criminals' thoughts and feelings as they commit crimes, and I get the creepy feeling that ....
BK was trying to understand himself
Observe_dont_Absorb
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2022
- Messages
- 3,208
- Reaction score
- 23,368
Do we know who BK sent the questionnaires to and if they responded? And if so, who responded?
What if he got into some kind of friendship or allegiance with a killer (who may well be behind bars) but that spurred him on?
Cool Cats
I EXPECT DOUGHNUTS
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 12,349
- Reaction score
- 94,966
Entirely possible BK could have had a more personal correspondence with a criminal, even an infamous one.
If this comes out at trial the defense has an easy answer, that it was for his criminal studies which are well documented.
Good point about ‘if one ever existed.’ I know there was a news report that mentioned a Sentra, but did we ever see it in a LE report?
ArianeEmory
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 13, 2013
- Messages
- 5,741
- Reaction score
- 7,120
I don’t have a direct source to back it up (mostly because I’m not wading through YouTube or TikTok to find it) but I’ve always assumed the survey/questionnaire was simply posted on Reddit for anyone to answer. They are very common from researchers/students across all fields. I couldn’t begin to tell you how many I’ve seen. Sometimes they’re obviously more market research, oftentimes it’s clear that someone really is writing a paper on (how followers of X Reddit topic feel about Y and Z issues, where X could be anything from true crime to anime to menopause).
I went back a few pages but not sure where we're up to with this discussion. I just watched a YouTube video yesterday detailing the legal filings. Defence claims they have not yet received all of the information they need from Idaho Police. Idaho police claim they are waiting to hear back from the FBI, as it was them who investigated early on. Idaho police claim that the FBI destroyed documents (the genetic genealogy) which is ... odd?? I believe the date to turn everything over has been set to 14th of July.
Idaho argued against turning over training records for 3 cops involved in interviewing "crucial witnesses" (I assume this means the housemates). Defence claim that as far as the documentation they have received, NO DNA from the victims was found in BKs car or house. I have to believe that this means the forensics aren't back yet or haven't been turned over... ?
I am very perplexed as to why FBI would destroy the family tree they made. They do not want to reveal what websites they used to run the DNA through. I have to say it doesn't feel right that it's been 7 months and still crucial info has not been turned over, especially when trial is set for Oct and this is death penalty case.
Idaho argued against turning over training records for 3 cops involved in interviewing "crucial witnesses" (I assume this means the housemates). Defence claim that as far as the documentation they have received, NO DNA from the victims was found in BKs car or house. I have to believe that this means the forensics aren't back yet or haven't been turned over... ?
I am very perplexed as to why FBI would destroy the family tree they made. They do not want to reveal what websites they used to run the DNA through. I have to say it doesn't feel right that it's been 7 months and still crucial info has not been turned over, especially when trial is set for Oct and this is death penalty case.
Observe_dont_Absorb
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2022
- Messages
- 3,208
- Reaction score
- 23,368
Ah I see. I was under the impression that he may have been able to access convicts who have perpetrated very serious crimes due to his academic studies.
Idaho transplant
Former Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2023
- Messages
- 107
- Reaction score
- 892
Something that struck me as odd about Kohberger's internet messages about VSS, supposedly when he was around 15 years of age, is that he appeared to be self-diagnosing using the internet. I don't recall him mentioning that his parents took him to see an eye specialist. I read somewhere that he ended up in the hospital due to his extreme dieting and weight loss when he was a senior in high school. And then his addiction to heroin. I just wondered if there was a mental/physical gulf between him and his parents.
Cool Cats
I EXPECT DOUGHNUTS
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2018
- Messages
- 12,349
- Reaction score
- 94,966
Nissan Sentras vs Hyundai Elantras
A week after the killings, records show, investigators were on the lookout for a certain type of vehicle: Nissan Sentras from the model years 2019 to 2023. Quietly, they ran down details on thousands of such vehicles, including the owners’ addresses, license plate numbers and the color of each sedan.
But further scrutiny of the video footage produced more clarity,
and on Nov. 25 the police in Moscow asked law enforcement agencies to look for a different type of car with a similar shape: white Hyundai Elantras from the model years 2011 to 2013.
www.nytimes.com
A week after the killings, records show, investigators were on the lookout for a certain type of vehicle: Nissan Sentras from the model years 2019 to 2023. Quietly, they ran down details on thousands of such vehicles, including the owners’ addresses, license plate numbers and the color of each sedan.
But further scrutiny of the video footage produced more clarity,
and on Nov. 25 the police in Moscow asked law enforcement agencies to look for a different type of car with a similar shape: white Hyundai Elantras from the model years 2011 to 2013.
Inside the Hunt for the Idaho Killer (Published 2023)
After four students were stabbed to death in a house near a college campus, investigators scooped up data and forensic evidence, hoping for leads. A new DNA technique finally brought a breakthrough.
Twistinginthewind
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2014
- Messages
- 2,442
- Reaction score
- 19,089
IMO, it was all anecdotal re BK having VSS per his posting about how he felt online and saying IIRC "as of today, ___insert date___, I have VSS. Here's how it feels...." and there has been no comfirmation he had it or still has it, or ever saw a doctor for it or was diagnosed with it. Although it's possible he was diagnosed by a professional, no comfirmation of that, and he didn't say that in his posts. It sounded more like he read about and decided he had it.
At first, early on in this thread, it wasn't supposed to be discussed (for the reasons above, IMO) specific to him, but a bit later the Mod posted it (VSS) could be discussed in a general manner on this thread. But it's been awhile since that post, so maybe the discussion has drifted a bit and being spoken about specific to BK again.
OP who have been here since early on are careful about it, and newer OP should have read all the Mod posts from the start that are repeated at the beginning of each new thread, the one about what's allowed re VSS included.
I personally take all discussion of VSS re BK with a huge grain of salt due to, AFAIK, it was his own self-diagnosis after reading about it online in his teens, he said it happened on a given day which doesn't sound right to me, and when the judge at his first court appearance after his arrest asked him if he had any medical or mental health conditions that would prevent him from understanding the charges against him (paraphrasing since I don't have access to the transcript right now), he said no.
So although he could have suffered through some symptoms of VSS at some point around a dozen or more years ago, and VSS itself can be discussed here, it's a big nothingburger re something like that being a factor in any issues he had at the time of their murders, IMO. Likewise with mental health (MH) issues related to VSS, no comfirmed diagnosis, no discussion allowed on that potential facet of BK.
MOO
Last edited:
He did mention going to a doctor (specifically a Neurologist) and having an MRI and what medications he was put on.
JMO.
Seattle1
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2013
- Messages
- 40,846
- Reaction score
- 424,791
^^RSBBM
@10ofRods, while I couldn't disagree more with OP's statements above, more importantly, I know that you know better here!
I think it's fair to say the spirit of Criminal Rules and Procedures, Rule-16 -Discovery & Inspection is universally understood to ensure a defendant can not and will not face a trial by ambush.
We also know Idaho is not exempt from Statutory Rule-16 Discovery & Inspection which provides for the prosecution to deliver evidence and material in the prosecutor's possession or control as soon as practicable after the filing of charges (filed 12/29/2022) against the accused.
And given BK's defense filed his notice requesting discovery on Jan 10, 2022 -- there's been no waiver of right of discovery by the defense.
In other words, there's no holding out of information and/or reports to "surprise the defense."
We know too well (i.e., Morphew) how failing to timely turn over even a cover page with a revised address to the defense is subject to Court sanctions for Discovery Violation pursuant to Rule 16, and how said sanctions can cripple the State's case from being prosecuted.
To be clear, very little is exempt from timely disclosure pursuant to Rule 16 which essentially amounts to Work Product by the prosecution and identifying information on Informants. (Please see I.C.R. 16 (g)- Prosecution Information not Subject to Disclosure).
I.C.R. 16. Discovery and Inspection | Supreme Court
Idaho Criminal Rule 16. Discovery and Inspection
(a) Mandatory Disclosure of Evidence and Material by the Prosecution. As soon as practicable after the filing of charges against the accused, the prosecuting attorney must disclose to defendant or defendant’s counsel any material or information in the prosecuting attorney's possession or control, or that later comes into the prosecuting attorney's possession or control, that tends to negate the guilt of the accused as to the offense charged or that would tend to reduce the punishment for the offense. The prosecuting attorney's obligations under this paragraph extend to material and information in the possession or control of members of the prosecuting attorney's staff and of any others who have participated in the investigation or evaluation of the case who either regularly report, or have reported in that case, to the office of the prosecuting attorney. The prosecuting attorney must also disclose the general nature of evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts, it intends to introduce at trial as required by Rule 404(b) of the Idaho Rules of Evidence.
(b) Disclosure of Evidence and Materials by the Prosecution on Written Request. Except as otherwise provided in this rule, the prosecuting attorney must, at any time following the filing of charges, on written request by the defendant, disclose the following information, evidence and material to the defendant:
(1) Statement of Defendant. On written request of a defendant, the prosecuting attorney must permit the defendant to inspect and copy or photograph:
(A) any relevant written or recorded statements made by the defendant in the possession, custody or control of the state, the existence of which is known or is available to the prosecuting attorney by the exercise of due diligence;
(B) the substance of any relevant, oral statement made by the defendant, whether before or after arrest, to a peace officer, prosecuting attorney or agent of the prosecuting attorney; and
(C) the recorded testimony of the defendant before a grand jury that relates to the offense charged.
(2) Statement of a Co-Defendant. On written request of a defendant, the prosecuting attorney must permit the defendant to inspect and copy or photograph:
(A) any written or recorded statements of a co-defendant; and
(B) the substance of any relevant oral statement made by a co-defendant, whether before or after arrest, in response to interrogation by any person known by the co-defendant to be a peace officer or agent of the prosecuting attorney.
(3) Defendant's Prior Record. On written request of the defendant, the prosecuting attorney must furnish the defendant copy of the defendant's prior criminal record, if any, if it is then or may become available to the prosecuting attorney.
(4) Documents and Tangible Objects. On written request of the defendant, the prosecuting attorney must permit the defendant to inspect and copy or photograph:
(A) books,
(B) papers,
(C) documents,
(D) photographs,
(E) tangible objects,
(F) buildings or places,
or copies or portions of them, that are in the possession, custody or control of the prosecuting attorney and that:
(A) are material to the preparation of the defense,
(B) are intended for use by the prosecutor as evidence at trial, or
(C) were obtained from the defendant or belong to the defendant.
(5) Reports of Examinations and Tests. On written request of the defendant, the prosecuting attorney must permit the defendant to inspect and copy any results or reports of physical or mental examinations, and of scientific tests or experiments, made in connection with the particular case, that are in the possession, custody or control of the prosecuting attorney or the existence of which is known or is available to the prosecuting attorney by the exercise of due diligence.
(6) State Witnesses. On written request of the defendant, the prosecuting attorney must furnish to the defendant a written list of the names and addresses of all persons having knowledge of relevant facts who may be called by the state as witnesses at the trial, together with any record of prior felony convictions of any of them, that is within the knowledge of the prosecuting attorney. The prosecuting attorney must also furnish, on written request, the statements made by the prosecution witnesses or prospective prosecution witnesses to the prosecuting attorney or the prosecuting attorney's agents or to any official involved in the investigation of the case unless a protective order is issued as provided in subsection (l) of this rule.
(7) Expert Witnesses. On written request of the defendant, the prosecutor must provide a written summary or report of any testimony that the state intends to introduce at trial or at a hearing pursuant to Rules 702, 703 or 705 of the Idaho Rules of Evidence. The summary provided must describe the witness’s opinions, the facts and data for those opinions, and the witness's qualifications. Disclosure of expert opinions regarding mental health must also comply with the requirements of Idaho Code § 18-207. The prosecution is not required to produce any materials not subject to disclosure under subsection (g) of this Rule. This subsection does not require disclosure of expert witnesses, their opinions, the facts and data for those opinions, or the witness's qualifications, intended only to rebut evidence or theories that have not been disclosed under this Rule prior to trial.
(8) Police Reports. On written request of the defendant, the prosecuting attorney must furnish to the defendant reports and memoranda in possession of the prosecuting attorney that were made by a police officer or investigator in connection with the investigation or prosecution of the case.
(9) Digital Media Recordings (Audio and Video Files). On request, the prosecuting attorney must release to defendant digital media that may or may not contain protected information as defined by this Rule. The prosecuting attorney must state whether the disclosure contains protected information.
(A) Unredacted Digital Media. The prosecuting attorney may release unredacted digital media to defense counsel for the purpose of expediting a resolution in a case prior to trial or hearing. The obligation of defense counsel is as follows:
(i) Defense counsel, including agents of defense counsel, may review the unredacted digital media and discuss the content of the recording with the defendant but must not share the unredacted digital media in any manner with the defendant without prior consent of the prosecuting attorney or an order of the court.
(ii) With prior consent of the prosecuting attorney or an order of the court, defense counsel may allow the defendant to view the unredacted digital media in the presence of defense counsel or defense counsel’s agent, but defense counsel must not allow the defendant to retain a copy of the digital media in any version, to take photographs, or to otherwise duplicate the digital media in any form.
(iii) Defense counsel must take reasonable steps to ensure that the unredacted digital media is safely stored and cannot be accessed by anyone other than defense counsel or defense counsel’s agents.
(B) Redacted Digital Media. If the prosecuting attorney determines that the digital media contains protected information that requires redaction prior to disclosure, the prosecuting attorney must provide a redacted version of the digital media, along with a written explanation of the information that was redacted. Defense counsel may allow the defendant to view and retain a copy of any media that is redacted by the prosecuting attorney. If defense counsel disagrees with any of the prosecuting attorney’s redactions, before allowing the defendant to review any unredacted media, a Motion to Compel must be filed and argued in accordance with these Rules.
(C) Self-Represented Defendants. When a defendant chooses to proceed without counsel, the prosecuting attorney may release unredacted digital media to the defendant but, if the prosecuting attorney determines that digital media should not be disclosed because it contains protected information, the prosecuting attorney must seek a Protective Order pursuant to subsection (d)(2)(B) of this Rule.
(10) Disclosure by Order of the Court. On motion of the defendant showing substantial need in the preparation of the defendant's case for additional material or information not otherwise covered by this Rule, and that the defendant is unable without undue hardship to obtain the substantial equivalent by other means, the court may order the additional material or information to be made available to the defendant. The court may, on the request of any person affected by the order, vacate or modify the order if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.
(c) Disclosure of Evidence by the Defendant on Written Request. Except as otherwise provided in this rule, the defendant must, at any time following the filing of charges against the defendant, on written request by the prosecuting attorney, disclose the following information, evidence and material to the prosecuting attorney:
(1) Documents and Tangible Objects. On written request of the prosecuting attorney, the defendant must permit the prosecuting attorney to inspect and copy or photograph:
(A) books,
(B) papers,
(C) documents,
(D) photographs, and
(E) tangible objects,
or copies or portions of them, that are in the possession, custody or control of the defendant, and that the defendant intends to introduce in evidence at the trial.
(2) Reports of Examinations and Tests. On written request of the prosecuting attorney, the defendant must permit the prosecuting attorney to inspect and copy or photograph any results or reports of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests or experiments made in connection with the particular case if they are within the possession or control of the defendant, that the defendant intends to introduce in evidence at the trial, or that were prepared by a witness whom the defendant intends to call at the trial when the results or reports relate to testimony of the witness.
(3) Defense Witness. On written request of the prosecuting attorney, the defendant must furnish the prosecuting attorney a list of names and addresses of witnesses the defendant intends to call at trial.
(4) Expert Witnesses. On written request of the prosecuting attorney, the defendant must provide a written summary or report of any testimony that the defense intends to introduce pursuant to Rules 702, 703 or 705 of the Idaho Rules of Evidence at trial or hearing. The summary provided must describe the witness’s opinions, the facts and data for those opinions and the witness’s qualifications. Disclosure of expert opinions regarding mental health must also comply with the requirements of Idaho Code § 18-207. The defense is not required to produce any materials not subject to disclosure under subsection (h) of this Rule, or any material otherwise protected from disclosure by defendant’s constitutional rights.
(d) Redacting Protected Information from Responses to Discovery. The party providing discovery may redact protected information from the information or material provided.
(1) Protected information means:
(A) Contact Information. The home addresses, business addresses, telephone numbers (including cell phones), and email addresses of an alleged victim, or of a witness, or of the spouse, children, or other close family members of the alleged victim or witness, and the places where any of those persons regularly go, such as schools and places of employment and worship.
(B) Personal Identifying Information. The dates of birth and social security numbers of any persons other than the defendant.
(C) Private Information. Personal identification numbers (PINs), passwords, financial account numbers, information relating to financial transaction cards, and medical information protected by federal law that is not directly related to the crime charged.
(2) A prosecuting attorney who redacts protected information must follow the following procedure:
(A) If the defendant is represented by counsel, the prosecuting attorney must serve defendant's counsel with a redacted copy of the discovery printed on white paper at the same time as an unredacted copy of the discovery printed on paper of a color that is clearly distinguishable from white. The defendant's attorney, including appellate counsel, must not disclose the protected information to the defendant or to a member of the defendant's family without the consent of the prosecuting attorney or an order of the court on a showing of need.
(B) If the defendant is not represented by counsel, the prosecuting attorney must serve the defendant with a redacted copy of the discovery and, within seven days of doing so, even if the disclosure was not in response to a discovery request, must file with the court and serve on the defendant a motion for a protective order with respect to the redacted information.
(3) A defense attorney or defendant who redacts protected information must serve the prosecuting attorney with a redacted copy of the discovery printed on white paper at the same time as an unredacted copy of the discovery printed on paper of a color that is clearly distinguishable from white. The State's attorney, including appellate counsel, must not disclose the protected information to the alleged victim or to a member of the alleged victim’s family without the consent of the defendant or an order of the court on a showing of need.
(4) Print on Colored Paper. In any case where the prosecuting attorney provides discovery to defense counsel in an electronic format, if the attorney receiving the electronic discovery desires to print the discovery, the attorney must print the unredacted discovery on colored paper as required by subsection (d)(3) of this rule.
(e) Failure to Make Written Request, Waiver.
(1) Any request by a party for information, evidence or material under subsections (b) and (c) of this rule must be in writing with the original request filed with the court and a copy served on the prosecuting attorney or the defense attorney or self-represented defendant. Failure to file and serve the request constitutes a waiver of the right to discovery under subsections (b) and (c) of this rule. If no written request for discovery is filed and served by the defendant, the defendant will not be permitted to raise as error in any subsequent proceeding the failure of the prosecution to disclose the information described in subsection (b) of this rule.
(2) Form of Request. A request for the information, evidence and material under subsection (b) of this rule must be in substantially the form found in Appendix A.
(f) Response to Request, Failure to File a Response.
(1) Response to Request. The attorney or defendant on whom a request has been served must file and serve a written response within 14 days of service of the request by filing the original copy with the court and serving a copy on the opposing party, which must state one or more of the following:
(A) that the response has already been complied with and that the inquiring party has been furnished the information, evidence and material listed in the request;
(B) that there is no objection to the discovery of the information, evidence and materials sought by the request and that the opposing party will be permitted discovery at a time and place certain;
(C) that the responding party objects to part or all of the information, evidence and materials sought to be discovered, which objection must be specific and state all grounds for the objection.
(2) Failure to Comply. Unless otherwise ordered by the court on a showing of good cause or excusable neglect, the failure to file and serve a response within the time required by this rule constitutes a waiver of any objections to the request and is grounds for the imposition of sanctions by the court.
(3) A response to a request must be in the form found in Appendix A.
[..]
10ofRods
Verified Anthropologist
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2019
- Messages
- 15,556
- Reaction score
- 194,859
Agree. I believe that the grip used with this knife (regardless of who did it) was not the one shown in Psycho, but the one shown in training videos for this very knife (of which there are many on youtube).
The weapon is designed for careful placement, rapid death, and silence. If this killing had been frenzied, there'd have been more bloody footprints. The killer planned to kill people who were lying down (and with himself positioned in a manner so as to avoid as much arterial blood spurt as possible - which was also aided by some of the victims still being in bed or under covers).
I can easily imagine a killer who had taken criminal forensics (even at the basic level) to use a method in which the initial wound (designed to silence but lethal in and of itself) was placed in one manner, and then the body pushed into a position where it would not bleed out on the perp. Sure, the murderer got victim blood on himself, but didn't cut himself and leave a trail of blood nor even leave blood glove prints or foot prints everywhere. Just a few footprints that we know of.
IMO.
It's also a place where frustration biters bite themselves.
I now feel officially weird for having known this and for having actually seen it (in mental hospitals). I'm sure it must happen in jails as well. NIMH calls it "anger biting," I think.
Anger biting. The hidden impulse - PubMed
Based upon the paralogical reasoning of the anger-impulsive biter, this paper addresses the overload of emotional catharsis which can block a full memory of the biting event and suspend the logical infrastructure of rational behavior. In an effort to overcome these types of investigative...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Biting behaviors aren't well-studied (people self-bite; other-bite and it often starts in childhood).
One of the treatments for it is to advise the biter to "self-talk" and calm themselves down. There are ton of experiments on non-human primates (and on some rodents). Turns out being locked up in a small cage with little to do increases the amount of self-biting in those species.
Hmmm. Apparently seen in adolescent in-patient wards as well. In the animal studies, they were able to take samples of spinal and brain fluid (too invasive for humans) and found that the biting did reset and improve the dopamine processes (calming processes) in the brain.
IMO. Though there are links above, I'm obviously speculating.
- Status