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

[Twistinginthewind]

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.

Replying to my post to note I won't dredge up the summary from months ago of what was in MSM re what may be known of the victim's parents' opinions and repost, because it's already been covered and updated by others here since my post yesterday. And, IMO, it's more of an organic process than anything else, that the prosecution has well in hand, and they've made their decision with input from the parents. MOO

 

[jepop]

ICR 6.5

(a) Sufficiency of Evidence to Warrant Indictment. If the grand jury finds, after evidence has been presented to it, that an offense has been committed and that there is probable cause to believe that the accused committed it, the jury ought to find an indictment. Probable cause exists when the grand jury has before it evidence that would lead a reasonable person to believe an offense has been committed and that the accused party has probably committed the offense.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjyn9aRnLGAAxV5EGIAHVO0AiAQFnoECBIQAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fisc.idaho.gov%2Ficr6-5%23%3A~%3Atext%3DAn%2520indictment%2520may%2520be%2520found%2Cjury%2520to%2520a%2520district%2520judge.&usg=AOvVaw1tWYiJfsdjDn7tYgdCf9TG&opi=89978449

Combined with first rule that you posted just above this one with key words being, Imo, 1) taken together; 2) the absence of contraditions and other explanations -ie Imo in the absence of the defendant's case which will be presented at trial -Imo this rule shows that the standard is not BaRD but instead a standard of reasonableness of probable cause. Jmo - have no idea how the P will argue this, that's just how I read it. Moo

Re the Motion to Dismiss, It's interesting to me that the defense in the end has not put forward any argument re the P failing to lay known exculpatory evidence before GJ, contrary to their prior hints/bordering on assertions. Perhaps this is their B plan. Moo

 

[katydid23]

TITLE 19
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 11
POWERS AND DUTIES OF GRAND JURY
19-1107. SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE TO WARRANT INDICTMENT. The grand jury ought to find an indictment when all the evidence before them, taken together, if unexplained or uncontradicted, would, in their judgment, warrant a conviction by a trial jury.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwigitSVlLGAAxUCSDABHS5uBDsQFnoECBIQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Flegislature.idaho.gov%2Fstatutesrules%2Fidstat%2Ftitle19%2Ft19ch11%2Fsect19-1107%2F&usg=AOvVaw16jKUWZsAf9-45pQu_3Uxt&opi=89978449

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/072523-PUBLIC-Motion-to-Dismiss-Indictment-on-Grounds-of-Error-GJ-Inst-Alt-Remand.pdf

19-1107. SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE TO WARRANT INDICTMENT. The grand jury ought to find an indictment when all the evidence before them, taken together, if unexplained or uncontradicted, would, in their judgment, warrant a conviction by a trial jury.


Note the bolded portion above^^^^----that seems to be the key here. If the evidence shown to the grand jury by the prosecution, was uncontradicted, would it be likely to warrant a conviction? I'd say most likely, YES.

If the DNA on the sheath, and the Elantra videos and cell ping maps were uncontradicted, there would most likely be a conviction, IMO. That is where the trial comes in later, when the defense gets the chance to explain and contradict in order to be acquitted.

 

[jepop]

19-1107. SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE TO WARRANT INDICTMENT. The grand jury ought to find an indictment when all the evidence before them, taken together, if unexplained or uncontradicted, would, in their judgment, warrant a conviction by a trial jury.


Note the bolded portion above^^^^----that seems to be the key here. If the evidence shown to the grand jury by the prosecution, was uncontradicted, would it be likely to warrant a conviction? I'd say most likely, YES.

If the DNA on the sheath, and the Elantra videos and cell ping maps were uncontradicted, there would most likely be a conviction, IMO. That is where the trial comes in later, when the defense gets the chance to explain and contradict in order to be acquitted.

Are we reading each-other's minds? Precisely Im-non-lawyer-o.

 

[Nila Aella]

Combined with first rule that you posted just above this one with key words being, Imo, 1) taken together; 2) the absence of contraditions and other explanations -ie Imo in the absence of the defendant's case which will be presented at trial -Imo this rule shows that the standard is not BaRD but instead a standard of reasonableness of probable cause. Jmo - have no idea how the P will argue this, that's just how I read it. Moo

Re the Motion to Dismiss, It's interesting to me that the defense in the end has not put forward any argument re the P failing to lay known exculpatory evidence before GJ, contrary to their prior hints/bordering on assertions. Perhaps this is their B plan. Moo

I think the point they are making is title 19/ICR 6.5 do not say the same thing and that one supercedes the other because of Article 1 of the Idaho Constitution? I am still working through reading the entire argument to try and understand it so ICBW. JMO

Agree! They haven't put forth failing to lay down exculpatory evidence yet.

 

[Nila Aella]

19-1107. SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE TO WARRANT INDICTMENT. The grand jury ought to find an indictment when all the evidence before them, taken together, if unexplained or uncontradicted, would, in their judgment, warrant a conviction by a trial jury.


Note the bolded portion above^^^^----that seems to be the key here. If the evidence shown to the grand jury by the prosecution, was uncontradicted, would it be likely to warrant a conviction? I'd say most likely, YES.

If the DNA on the sheath, and the Elantra videos and cell ping maps were uncontradicted, there would most likely be a conviction, IMO. That is where the trial comes in later, when the defense gets the chance to explain and contradict in order to be acquitted.

Yes!
The only thing we don't know is what the actual grand jury in this case was instructed.
MOO

 

[katydid23]

Is this lawyer's channel still allowed to be linked ? It used to be, but I don't know if that has changed.
He just did a very thorough reading and legal summary of the 20 page document that came out yesterday.

He is very measured and unbiased and just deals with the legal interpretations in a very descriptive and simple way.

Interesting that the defense is basing this argument partially on laws from the 1600's dating back to England...

 

[katydid23]

Yes!
The only thing we don't know is what the actual grand jury in this case was instructed.
MOO

Well, we do know what the defense is stating and I do believe they are incorrect.

The defense is asserting that the Grand Jury should have instructed the grand jury that they need to decide the indictment based upon 'BARD'.....but that is not the legal criteria. It is based upon 'probable cause' not Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.

I think the defense is being misleading.

 

[maskedwoman]

duplicate of all the other opinions posted about grand jury, so jinx! LOL

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Yes!
The only thing we don't know is what the actual grand jury in this case was instructed.
MOO

I think the instructions to the GJ are standard, read out by the Judge verbatim from the Idaho Code of Rules (ICR)?

However, what the prosecution presented to the GJ -- a summary of their case against him, the evidence, the witnesses' testimony -- would be specific to the case. As well as closing statements, but not instructions, per se? Re reasonable doubt, etc.?

This is what I recall reading about the GJ in the ICR and I posted links to and excerpts of a few months ago, but ICBW and/or splitting hairs.

I think it's interesting to consider those words ""unexplained or uncontradicted" in the context of this case and the evidence LE gathered during their investigation.

Within the mountain of evidence which allowed LE to arrest him and bring the case before a GJ -- the thousands of photos and documents and 51 terabytes of video -- I would hazard a guess there was a veritable gold mine of evidence that was "the opposite of exculpatory" that was "uncontradicted" by other evidence in the mountain.

In addition to assuming they wouldn't have gotten the indictments without presenting plenty of evidence which was nonexculpatory, I assume it was "unexplained", as in, "no telling" how in the heck his DNA ended up on the knife sheath left on the bed where 2 of the victims were stabbed to death in the middle of the night.

MOO

 

[ArianeEmory]

Someone needs to tell the defense this isn't an episode of The Good Wife

 

[DizzyB]

Someone needs to tell the defense this isn't an episode of The Good Wife

Lawyers are gonna lawyer. I am struck by how cases are decided by technicalities, loopholes, effective counsel-by that I mean the ability for counsel to ensure that certain items are never presented to a jury. I get it, there would be anarchy if systems for investigations and collection of evidence were not in place. It’s just starting to feel like so many cases are determined by how great of an attorney you have. It’s the only system we’ve got. Sometimes I feel like I am watching a sporting event and rooting for a side.

 

[schooling]

My biggest unanswered question is how did he keep them quiet? Especially when there were two together in each room. I mean he only has two hands. If you stab once non-fatally, that person can wake up and scream. Yet no one was alerted on either floor above or below.

You promise them if they just comply that you’ll leave and let them live. Tidbits he picked up from that Reddit survey, I’m sure.

From there you can imagine it’s a devastating stab to one person, followed by quickly turning attention to the other person. Upstairs anyway…

Downstairs I suspect both of them fought like hell. My theory is he ran into Xana, mortally wounding her and chasing her down the hallway only to run into Ethan who was responding to the “there’s somebody here” and commotion. I think the “here to help” line is when he got back into Xanas room after dealing with Ethan.

IMO the coroners “killed in their sleeps” was BS from the get go. Bed, yes. For two of them. The other two retreated there. Again, IMO. Sleep, no.

MOO

 

[Boxer]

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

MOO I am speaking of the reason the state (all states) is the prosecutor of crimes. They have the responsibility to protect citizens, one of the major responsibilies.

If BK gets off MOO with defense trickery, for instance this alibi footsie by AT, with the concrete evidence against him he will indeed have committed a perfect crime.

 

[Jurisprudence]

What do we know about this judge? I know nothing- is he experienced? I too am concerned he has so far given the defense everything they asked for- that is not good at all. My thinking is in part anyway, in a death penalty case a judge leans towards giving the defense what they want because the judge is worried about an appeal-

Apparently he is very well liked and well respected amongst his peers. He was a Magistrate first. A Magistrate is an atty from the community appointed to the court as a (Magistrate) judge to help the other judges in the district clear the docket (in this case, only one judge I believe bc Latah County is small) by assisting with housekeeping duties and clearing the docket of low level offenses and routine matters like probable cause hearings, signing off on warrants, presiding over initial appearances, misdemeanor offenses, that sort of stuff. Magistrates (currently Marshall) cannot sit over these types of felony cases so this case was always going to get moved over to him at some point.

He was appointed to the district court in 2018. I agree with you that he is bending over backwards bc of the nature of this case, and he should be cautious and provide the defense with great deference. But, to me he's going too far over and it's at a point where he looks to be getting walked all over and ceded control and power to her. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the latest motion. If it's denied, I'll have some hope for him. My personal opinion, I am not as impressed as his peers because of what I've been witnessing. I did not like the way he treated the attorneys for the Associated Press in that gag order hearing, the very first hearing he presided over in this case, which was aired and which AT and other defense team members were in attendance for, along with prosecution. I do not like the allegations he was leveling which imo he knew were not genuine. He picked a line out of their brief (one single line) - a line which is a common line of argument and thought, which is worded with common parlance for exactly these sorts of briefed arguments, and scolded them on camera, imo threatening them with sanctions by his "You'd better be careful, watch it" lines. Those sanctions were a farce. AT laughed, grabbed her colleague almost as if "we've got this guy, haha". I was appalled. The video of that hearing is on line. Court TV I think.

I reserved judgment hoping for the best. But, I've been following nearly every major (not minor) argument and ruling since. He's getting me to a point where I'm not even cautiously optimistic. I hope things turn around.

As always, the above is all jmo

Judge_John_2016.pdf

Latah Magistrate John Judge appointed to District Court bench

Formerly a magistrate, John Judge will take over the Latah County 2nd District court bench.

www.lmtribune.com

His DC profile is also on here but when I open it I see nothing. Well, except that they spelled his name wrong. Judge Jonh Judge

 

[Boxer]

Lawyers are gonna lawyer. I am struck by how cases are decided by technicalities, loopholes, effective counsel-by that I mean the ability for counsel to ensure that certain items are never presented to a jury. I get it, there would be anarchy if systems for investigations and collection of evidence were not in place. It’s just starting to feel like so many cases are determined by how great of an attorney you have. It’s the only system we’ve got. Sometimes I feel like I am watching a sporting event and rooting for a side.

Agree, this is why I don't think the DP is appropriate. Defenses are too uneven.
MOO box them up without parole and let nature fulfill the DP

 

[ilovewings]

Apparently he is very well liked and well respected amongst his peers. He was a Magistrate first. A Magistrate is an atty from the community appointed to the court as a (Magistrate) judge to help the other judges in the district clear the docket (in this case, only one judge I believe bc Latah County is small) by assisting with housekeeping duties and clearing the docket of low level offenses and routine matters like probable cause hearings, signing off on warrants, presiding over initial appearances, misdemeanor offenses, that sort of stuff. Magistrates (currently Marshall) cannot sit over these types of felony cases so this case was always going to get moved over to him at some point.

He was appointed to the district court in 2018. I agree with you that he is bending over backwards bc of the nature of this case, and he should be cautious and provide the defense with great deference. But, to me he's going too far over and it's at a point where he looks to be getting walked all over and ceded control and power to her. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the latest motion. If it's denied, I'll have some hope for him. My personal opinion, I am not as impressed as his peers because of what I've been witnessing. I did not like the way he treated the attorneys for the Associated Press in that gag order hearing, the very first hearing he presided over in this case, which was aired and which AT and other defense team members were in attendance for, along with prosecution. I do not like the allegations he was leveling which imo he knew were not genuine. He picked a line out of their brief (one single line) - a line which is a common line of argument and thought, which is worded with common parlance for exactly these sorts of briefed arguments, and scolded them on camera, imo threatening them with sanctions by his "You'd better be careful, watch it" lines. Those sanctions were a farce. AT laughed, grabbed her colleague almost as if "we've got this guy, haha". I was appalled. The video of that hearing is on line. Court TV I think.

I reserved judgement hoping for the best. But, I've been following nearly every major (not minor) argument and ruling since. He's getting me to a point where I'm not even cautiously optimistic. I hope things turn around.

As always, the above is all jmo

Judge_John_2016.pdf

Latah Magistrate John Judge appointed to District Court bench

Formerly a magistrate, John Judge will take over the Latah County 2nd District court bench.

www.lmtribune.com

His DC profile is also on here but when I open it I see nothing. Well, except that they spelled his name wrong. Judge Jonh Judge

Thank you so much for your comments and insight into this judge. As we know the judge really has all the power in cases before him/her- I guess we shall have to see how it goes from this point forward. If the judge is biased against the prosecution, there is nothing much that can be done- if the prosecution tries to get the judge recused that would anger the judge and he would probably not recuse himself so I think they are stuck with him.

 

[Boxer]

Apparently he is very well liked and well respected amongst his peers. He was a Magistrate first. A Magistrate is an atty from the community appointed to the court as a (Magistrate) judge to help the other judges in the district clear the docket (in this case, only one judge I believe bc Latah County is small) by assisting with housekeeping duties and clearing the docket of low level offenses and routine matters like probable cause hearings, signing off on warrants, presiding over initial appearances, misdemeanor offenses, that sort of stuff. Magistrates (currently Marshall) cannot sit over these types of felony cases so this case was always going to get moved over to him at some point.

He was appointed to the district court in 2018. I agree with you that he is bending over backwards bc of the nature of this case, and he should be cautious and provide the defense with great deference. But, to me he's going too far over and it's at a point where he looks to be getting walked all over and ceded control and power to her. It'll be interesting to see what happens with the latest motion. If it's denied, I'll have some hope for him. My personal opinion, I am not as impressed as his peers because of what I've been witnessing. I did not like the way he treated the attorneys for the Associated Press in that gag order hearing, the very first hearing he presided over in this case, which was aired and which AT and other defense team members were in attendance for, along with prosecution. I do not like the allegations he was leveling which imo he knew were not genuine. He picked a line out of their brief (one single line) - a line which is a common line of argument and thought, which is worded with common parlance for exactly these sorts of briefed arguments, and scolded them on camera, imo threatening them with sanctions by his "You'd better be careful, watch it" lines. Those sanctions were a farce. AT laughed, grabbed her colleague almost as if "we've got this guy, haha". I was appalled. The video of that hearing is on line. Court TV I think.

I reserved judgement hoping for the best. But, I've been following nearly every major (not minor) argument and ruling since. He's getting me to a point where I'm not even cautiously optimistic. I hope things turn around.

As always, the above is all jmo

Judge_John_2016.pdf

Latah Magistrate John Judge appointed to District Court bench

Formerly a magistrate, John Judge will take over the Latah County 2nd District court bench.

www.lmtribune.com

His DC profile is also on here but when I open it I see nothing. Well, except that they spelled his name wrong. Judge Jonh Judge

MOO his affect was too affable to BKs defense team. No like.

 

[MassGuy]

Thank you so much for your comments and insight into this judge. As we know the judge really has all the power in cases before him/her- I guess we shall have to see how it goes from this point forward. If the judge is biased against the prosecution, there is nothing much that can be done- if the prosecution tries to get the judge recused that would anger the judge and he would probably not recuse himself so I think they are stuck with him.

It’s fine. Yes a judge has a ton of power, but the jury will see right through this defendant.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Thank you so much for your comments and insight into this judge. As we know the judge really has all the power in cases before him/her- I guess we shall have to see how it goes from this point forward. If the judge is biased against the prosecution, there is nothing much that can be done- if the prosecution tries to get the judge recused that would anger the judge and he would probably not recuse himself so I think they are stuck with him.

BBM part, this is the issue imo. The state doesn't have recourse while the defense has sometimes seemingly endless appeals. So, what he does really matters imo.I don't think he is biased against the state though. I think he was showing off for the cameras in the one hearing (I bet they rarely if ever have had a camera in that court), flexing his muscles to send them and us the viewing public a silly message. And since that time, I think he's been afraid quite frankly. She's not from his county. He knows she's an experienced certified DP atty who is the head of the dept in her county. I think he's afraid of making a wrong step and having the case appealed, and that's a problem. Fact is, MOO, if BK gets convicted, this is getting appealed no matter what. He's certainly smart enough to know this so make your rulings - the right rulings, and let the chips fall where they may.

On your last point, I believe Judge Judge is the only game in town but I could be wrong. I looked that up a long time ago so, moo. If this is the case, there is no one to step in on any recusal.

MOO