4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #86

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I was only referencing this case, not murder cases in general. All of the families have been interviewed. The Chapin family's views are unknown. Xana's mother chose LWOP, her father opted for the death penalty, as did the Goncalves and Maddie's family. If he is convicted, the families' majority opinion, the death penalty, should prevail. It is they, not society, who lost the ultimate. I would hope that the prosecution honors their choice. So far, they have.
Can you please cite sources where Maddie’s dad & Xana’s dad have expressed their opinions on the capital punishment?

I’ve worked diligently to keep track & if I’ve missed something(s), I’d appreciate being directed. Thanks!
 
Families of Murder Victims. Opinions on Sentencing? ID. Victims' Rights?
If the jury finds BK guilty, then at the sentencing phase the family members may give impact statements, but according to Idaho Code, they are not allowed to discuss their views on whether or not BK should get the death penalty. If they do, the judge will advise the jury not to take their remarks into consideration.

@Sundog Thank you very much for clarifying my earlier somewhat murky point on issue of some victims' family members having differing opinions about approp. sentencing, which was open to interpretation that victims could express their opinions In COURT about approp. sentencing. Not true, altho as my post said, victims may express opinions about sentencing w MSM (and other places).

Actual jury instruction re VIS*** is below,
- describing it as a "statement concerning the victim’s personal characteristics and the emotional impact of the murder."
- noting "not made under oath and is not subject to cross-examination."
- and as your post (paraphrased), may NOT "make any statements that are characterizations or opinions about the crime, the defendant, or the appropriate sentence, and you should disregard any such comments."

Sources verifying your clarification and post:
ID Statute re Victims Rights.*
ID Criminal Jury Instructions, Victim Impact Statement **
ID Atty Gen. Manual of Crime Victims Rights.*** A few Q & A from manual.

FWIW, imo.
=================================
* ID Statute re Victims Rights
"19-5306. RIGHTS OF VICTIM DURING INVESTIGATION, PROSECUTION, AND DISPOSITION OF THE CRIME."
Section 19-5306 – Idaho State Legislature

** ID. Criminal Jury Instruction. 1710 VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENT
"Victims have the right to personally address you by making a victim impact statement, which is a statement concerning the victim’s personal characteristics and the emotional impact of the murder. A victim impact statement is not made under oath and is not subject to cross-examination. A victim may not make any statements that are characterizations or opinions about the crime, the defendant, or the appropriate sentence, and you should disregard any such comments."

*** ID. Attorney General. "Idaho Manual on the Rights of Victims of Crime, 2023"
"Question No. 11: Does the victim have the right to make a
statement to the court?
"Answer: Both art. 1, sec. 22 of the Idaho Constitution and Idaho
Code § 19-5306 guarantee a victim’s right to be “heard upon request” at
all criminal justice proceedings considering a plea of guilty, sentencing,
incarceration or release of the defendant. The right to be heard extends
only to these proceedings and does not apply to all proceedings or
hearings."

"Question No. 13: How can a victim influence the sentence given
the criminal defendant?
"Answer: The sentence given a criminal defendant is solely in the
judge’s discretion. However, the victim has the right to be consulted in
the presentence investigation and to have a statement of the impact the
crime had on the victim included in the pre-sentence report. As noted in
the answer to question 11, the victim also has the right to be heard at the
sentencing hearing."

"Question No. 16: What can a victim do if the offender does not
receive the sentence that the victim feels the offender deserved?
Answer: Nothing. The state employs judges, attorneys and
support staff to ensure that justice is delivered. At times, a victim may
argue that a criminal’s sentence was not severe enough; however, the
length of time a criminal spends in prison does not necessarily represent
the long-term effects the crime has on their life. Convicted criminals who
serve jail time, no matter how long, are permanently affected in the work
force and in society."
 
Last edited:
Can you please cite sources where Maddie’s dad & Xana’s dad have expressed their opinions on the capital punishment?

I’ve worked diligently to keep track & if I’ve missed something(s), I’d appreciate being directed. Thanks!
I posted a summary of the victim's parents opinions in MSM awhile back, and will go find it and link here with MSM links added, which I'm not sure I included for all.
 
Can you please cite sources where Maddie’s dad & Xana’s dad have expressed their opinions on the capital punishment?

I’ve worked diligently to keep track & if I’ve missed something(s), I’d appreciate being directed. Thanks!

I've seen a few additional articles too that make claims that Maddie's family is in favor of the death penalty. Kaylee's dad has implied on a few occasions that he speaks for both families...so maybe thats where the reporting comes from? Because I can't find any quotes directly attributable to Maddie's family about this issue.

Also, Ive seen nothing about Xana's Dad but it's been reported that her Mom is against it (included in the article above).
 
I was only referencing this case, not murder cases in general. All of the families have been interviewed. The Chapin family's views are unknown. Xana's mother chose LWOP, her father opted for the death penalty, as did the Goncalves and Maddie's family. If he is convicted, the families' majority opinion, the death penalty, should prevail. It is they, not society, who lost the ultimate. I would hope that the prosecution honors their choice. So far, they have.
Jury decides. Period.
 

I've seen a few additional articles too that make claims that Maddie's family is in favor of the death penalty. Kaylee's dad has implied on a few occasions that he speaks for both families...so maybe thats where the reporting comes from? Because I can't find any quotes directly attributable to Maddie's family about this issue.

Also, Ive seen nothing about Xana's Dad but it's been reported that her Mom is against it (included in the article above).
Same as I’ve seen. A distinction to me is that while Maddie’s mom & stepdad may have one opinion, I’ve seen nothing published that Maddie’s dad Ben has expressed any opinion on punishment. Same with Xana’s dad.

The point has appropriately been made that a “tally” isn’t applicable, a position I firmly agree with, and I also find it inappropriate to “count” parents as having one position or another unless/until they have made a clear public statement about it. While some parents have made clear public statements, they don’t owe us anything, and to me, being victim friendly means respecting what they say and their silence equally.

As always, MOO.
 
Last edited:
Chapin Parents Opinion re Their Desired Sentencing if Jury Finds BK Guilty?

My fuzzy memory from an MSM article:
Something to this effect, from Ms Chapin:
We'll let the judicial system do its work.
Efforts we could make involving that would be wasted energy.
We'll do something positive.

Family established organization re Ethan's Smile (flower. tulip or iris?).

imo jmo omo
That's all I can dredge up from my leetle grey cells.
Not searching for link but thought this might help someone else nail it.
 
Chapin Parents Opinion re Their Desired Sentencing if Jury Finds BK Guity?

My fuzzy memory from an MSM article:
Something to the effect, from Ms Chapin:
We'll let the judicial system do its work.
Efforts we could make involving that would be wasted energy.
We'll do something positive.

Then family established organization re Ethan's Smile (flower. tulip or iris?).

imo jmo omo
That's all I can dredge up from my leetle grey cells.
Not searching for link, but thought this might help someone else nail it.
That’s my understanding of Ethan’s parents as well & they don’t plan on attending the trial:
University of Idaho murders update: Stacy Chapin, mom of Ethan Chapin, won't attend Bryan Kohberger trial | abc7chicago.com

Also, I think I previously mentioned I’ve already ordered my Ethan’s Smile tulip bulbs that will be delivered in the Fall. I’m very much looking forward to planting them.
 
Last edited:
I was only referencing this case, not murder cases in general. All of the families have been interviewed. The Chapin family's views are unknown. Xana's mother chose LWOP, her father opted for the death penalty, as did the Goncalves and Maddie's family. If he is convicted, the families' majority opinion, the death penalty, should prevail. It is they, not society, who lost the ultimate. I would hope that the prosecution honors their choice. So far, they have.
The crimes against these students were crimes against citizens of Idaho. That is why the state is investigating and prosecuting BK, and not the families chasing BK down and delivering their own justice.
 
Can you please cite sources where Maddie’s dad & Xana’s dad have expressed their opinions on the capital punishment?

I’ve worked diligently to keep track & if I’ve missed something(s), I’d appreciate being directed. Thanks!
I remember seeing Goncalves on NewsNation. They definitely did, and with some specificity. Our daughter doesn't get to be on a tablet all day or reading books, get 3 square meals a day, roof over her head, watch TV, we can't call her, write her, visit her etc. About 3 or so weeks ago Banfield reported that Mogen family was in favor as was Jeff, Xana's dad.

Starts at 6:55

NewsNation Goncalves
 
Jury decides. Period.

Well, ... yes and no.

If the DP is sought it is true that the jury has to make this decision (unanimously) during the penalty phase of the trial.

I agree with @Idaho transplant The decision first rests with the state. The prosecution in this case did in fact consult with the family members (they have told us this more than once on NewsNation).

So to your response, it's MOO that the jury does not decide "period". Rather,

The jury decides if the DP will be handed down only *if* the state has (timely) filed a notice of intent to seek it (w/in 60 days of arraignment).

The jury does *not* decide if the state has not elected to (or withdraws its notice to) seek it (which may still happen in this case btw, moo)

jmo

Idaho Pattern Jury Instructions Death Penalty
§ 18-404A
§ 19-215(3)(a) and (5)(a)
 
The crimes against these students were crimes against citizens of Idaho. That is why the state is investigating and prosecuting BK, and not the families chasing BK down and delivering their own justice.
What? The crimes were committed in the State of Idaho. That is (the only reason) why it is being investigated and tried in the State of Idaho. Speaking to the families is the 100% right thing to do imo. Following through with the DP can mean these families live with the endless appeals and this crime for the rest of their lives. I think it would be wrong for the prosecution to not consult with them.

MOO
 
Last edited:
IMO, this is an interesting piece of the puzzle on whether BK has or doesn't have an alibi for the time of their murders. Even though his defense team has recently alluded to him not being in Moscow at the time, per MSM articles linked above, which would seem like an important component of an alibi if you ask me.

(BBM):

"Accused University of Idaho killer Bryan Kohberger’s legal team has suggested they have evidence showing he was elsewhere at the time of four college students were murdered in their off-campus home last November, court records show.

Kohberger, through attorneys, has doubled down on his decision not to provide prosecutors with an alibi, despite their demands he do so, according to court papers released Tuesday."


Bryan Kohberger’s defense hints he was elsewhere at time of University of Idaho slayings
So, the “I have an alibi but I’m not telling you what it is” defense? That’s what he’s going with?

No, their plan is to discredit the eyewitnesses. Totally NOT an alibi... just badger the "witnesses" who can't identify him anyway.

The defense has absolutely nothing. They are grasping at straws.
I was referring to the bold section in the quote above where BK has stated he has an alibi but is refusing to provide it, despite demands that he comply.
 

So.....in the motion to dismiss....if I'm reading this right...

Anne Taylor is saying the standard is supposed to be "beyond a reasonable doubt" for a grand jury according to the original intent of a statute that was in place before the Idaho constitution was created and accepted. And that even though since then the standard for grand jury has always been treated as "reasonable doubt" not beyond reasonable doubt, that is incorrect and all of the history of Idaho law in regards to grand jury standards is wrong and should be disregarded and her client's grand jury indictment dismissed and him set free or his case brought in front of a probable cause hearing.

Dang. That's some cajones.

"The Defense does not, by all this, intend to bury the lede, but merely show that under the usual approach to statutory interpretation, there is no reasonable doubt as to what grand jury should be instructed. That said- the Defense recognizes that the whole of modern jurisprudence on this issue is against it, as well as at least one founding father of this state."
 

I am really spacey today, so help me out. That 7/27 motion to compel implies that the Defense failed to comply with the requirement that they state which witnesses or evidence is going to supply the alibi. Is that right so far?

And, the alibi document merely said something like "Kohberger has an alibi" and "Kohberger reserves the right to testify at trial." (Of course he does, that's just standard throughout the US, right?)

SO, was that their oblique way of saying that he is the witness? Why didn't they just say that? It sounds to me as if it's required if the alibi is going to be used at trial.

Am I missing something or misconstruing?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
63
Guests online
1,919
Total visitors
1,982

Forum statistics

Threads
600,392
Messages
18,108,015
Members
230,992
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top