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

[Jurisprudence]

Agree. Not only can the public reread her innuendos - the MSM has eagerly broadcast them for her. With more impact, as it has originated from a court filing, than if it were from an anonymous source.

What an effective way she has found use to the very same platform (the media) that she has so vehemently tried to silence. What a piece of work.

I find some of the conspiracy theorist you tubers to be doing the most damage after analyzing every word she says and taking it as Gospel. Extraordinary damage imo
MOO

 

[maconrich]

I have no idea about this - it's pure speculation because none of us knows. But, for some reason I was thinking they were getting that info from PA LE. PA LE is not subject to the gag order. None of their warrant returns are sealed. They are all openly posted to the docket. WA too.

Speculation only

Yes. Speculation only. Supposed information given with no named sources. <modsnip - off topic> MOO

 

[Jurisprudence]

Yes. Speculation only. Supposed information given with no named sources.<modsnip - off topic> MOO

If her source is PA State Police or PA LE <modsnip - quoted post was snipped> They were not, and still are not, subject to any Idaho gag order.

 

[maconrich]

If her source is PA State Police or PA LE <modsnip - quoted post was snipped> They were not, and still are not, subject to any Idaho gag order.

If they were her source, she should have said so. Likewise if they were willing to talk to the media, they should have, at the very least, allowed her to state which agency, if any, they are connected to.
Edited to add MOO

 

[Balthazar]

That's interesting. Is your thought that he has an alibi that involves witness testimony or some form of direct evidence and his attorneys are deliberately keeping it from the Court and Prosecution? That seems like a big risk to take since they could lose the ability to present that evidence at all.

Or is your thought that his team has identified a fatal flaw in the state's case and will use that to raise reasonable doubt about him being "the guy"?

IMO, reading between the lines, the support for the alibi already exists in the prosecution's discovery and the prosecution's witnesses. As I researched this case, I had some idea many months ago that this was going to happen. However, I always try to remain objective and the only side I am really on is that of the victims, their families and friends, so I set my earlier thoughts about this aside, hoping I was wrong, but now, it appears to be true. Sigh.

 

[Idaho transplant]

Article in the Idaho Statesman today:

Was Bryan Kohberger alone during Idaho murders? New details may be released

Kohberger previously stood "silent" when the charges against him were read during his arraignment.

www.newsweek.com

I don't see it in this article but the Statesman opined that AT does not feel that Kohberger should be forced to present an alibi (unconstitutional) and intends to take up the issue with the Idaho Supreme Court.

 

[Balthazar]

They are throwing all of these technical legal Hail Mary's because they do not have the facts on their side. They do not have a viable alibi and there are many bad facts which go against the defense. They do not have a solid defense so it is all smoke and mirrors, which can be very effective if the judge buys into it. JMO

How do you know that the defense does not have the facts on their side? Do you have a copy of the prosecutions discovery? I thought it was still under a gag order. But if you have that discovery, please share it here!

 

[Cool Cats]

How do you know that the defense does not have the facts on their side? Do you have a copy of the prosecutions discovery? I thought it was still under a gag order. But if you have that discovery, please share it here!

They have "Bad Facts" the OP said.

 

[jepop]

This was what occurred last hearing I think. Most matters had been settled or items provided so by the time of court there were only a couple of matters remaining
The thing that strikes me is defence appear desperate, they are fighting over everything even the advisement to Grand jury at a constitutional level . Why? Because there are a plethora of facts stacked against their client that they know are enough to convict him
Not a lawyer , but I’m wondering if some of the items being raised by defence are the kinds of items that “coukd” get raised on appeal if he were convicted eg ( the training records of LE) and by doing this now it’s a favour in a way
IE leaves no avenue open for an appeal later

Also all this arguing about idaho rule strikes me as the kind of stuff Bryan would think of , sat there in jail developing his own little hypothesis thinking he can outsmart the legal system

IMO : he did it and he did it for this game of legal back n forth

Yes I think that's right - last hearing there was only one (or two?) items in the then current motions to compel that were left to provide. The D has been busy - motions three to six have come in the last 6 weeks or so, with numbers four to six within the last two weeks I think.

I definately think the D is using multiple tactics contemporaneously.INAL and have little experience with criminal trials but things like a motion to dismiss seem to be standard, Imo. Unsure how often GJ indictments would get challenged but in a DP case, most posters I've read seem to say that would be standard. I don't see why a defendant wouldn't be free to appeal based on legal team's failure to at least examine the GJ record and challenge if grounds were perceptively apparent. Moo

The basis of motion to dismiss seems very legalistic to me and challenging the interpretation of Court rules may not be so common? I really don't know but If I was to take a guess, the dismiss motion does to my mind smell of desparation. I thought the D was looking for non-disclosure of exculpatory evidence. I don't think they found what they were looking for (they've had some of the GJ record since 9th July and all of it plus extras since July 21). I think this is plan B in action now. Moo

The second motion to stay proceedings seems very particular and could be a 'shot in the dark'? Idk, but whatever it is substance wise, it isn't enough in the estimation of the D to use in their motion to dismiss Imo. I have a feeling it will be something so small or open to interpretation that it will not be sufficient grounds to stay proceedings. It's all under seal so this is just mwt (my wishful thinking). Moo

 

[jepop]

I believe that was indeed true. She did not withdraw until well after she started representing Kohberger. Just because she told you "someone else was handling it" doesn't make it so when she was the atty of record. She can tell you anything she wants, including that she's the attorney of record for every defendant in Kootenai County doesn't make it true. It's also not so far fetched she's banking on you never believing a <modsnip - mom> over her.

jmo

I really can't agree with that. She's on record in Court minutes and I don't believe she would lie about it. It would have been addressed internally at the very start of her representation. I don't believe the PD office of Idaho would deliberately abuse the legal code of ethics. I think the grieving parent was exploited by News Nation and I blame only the media for that. We can agree to disagree on this. Moo

ETA: And do you really think the PDO would risk an appeal based on the lead attorney having a COI and that Attorney lying about it in Court?

 

[jepop]

IMO, reading between the lines, the support for the alibi already exists in the prosecution's discovery and the prosecution's witnesses. As I researched this case, I had some idea many months ago that this was going to happen. However, I always try to remain objective and the only side I am really on is that of the victims, their families and friends, so I set my earlier thoughts about this aside, hoping I was wrong, but now, it appears to be true. Sigh.

What is it exactly that you think this alibi is that exists in the prosecutions evidence if you don't mind sharing it here?

 

[Balthazar]

No SANE person would stay silent and refuse to give an alibi. No sane person would sit in jail if they had a solid alibi.
If his albi was "I was at home sleeping." and he couldn't prove it I'd ask my attorney if it was me to help me prove it ASAP!!!

He had 13 alibi witnesses but he still spent 20 years in prison

A man walked free after 20 years in prison Wednesday, released from a Bronx courtroom after prosecutors conceded that long-ignored murder alibi evidence needs to be reinvestigated. Richard Rosario …

nypost.com

 

[Balthazar]

They have "Bad Facts" the OP said.

Again, without actually having and reading the discovery, how does the poster know that?

 

[jepop]

Again, without actually having and reading the discovery, how does the poster know that?

Why does it "appear to be true" that there is an alibi in the discovery? None of us have read it.

 

[kittythehare]

I was talking about talking to police about an alibi immediately after someone has been arrested. This is now a matter for the court. It will be interesting to see how the defense works this situation out as I believe BK does actually have an alibi.

Not being pedantic but would you mind outlining your rationale for your belief he had an alibi?

Can you clarify that you mean he had an alibi for the night the 4 kids were butchered or are you referring to something else entirely/
Trying to keep up.
Thanks.

 

[kittythehare]

I agree! Always ask for a lawyer.
Your post reminded me of this case:

“I was in Florida, and I have 13 alibi witnesses to prove it,” Rosario told me. “When I heard police were looking for me, I turned myself in, gave them the names and contact information for all 13 people -- and no one ever contacted them.”

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiuxoW_wrKAAxVUE1kFHehMDDMQxfQBKAB6BAgIEAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Fdateline%2Fjury-awards-new-york-man-13-alibi-witnesses-5-million-n1297878&usg=AOvVaw3dnb16ApMNRRSRNTqs_nZb&opi=89978449

Sample size is a little small here, don't you think?

 

[Chloegirl]

Article in the Idaho Statesman today:

Was Bryan Kohberger alone during Idaho murders? New details may be released

Kohberger previously stood "silent" when the charges against him were read during his arraignment.

www.newsweek.com

I don't see it in this article but the Statesman opined that AT does not feel that Kohberger should be forced to present an alibi (unconstitutional) and intends to take up the issue with the Idaho Supreme Court.

Media once again (being used) spinning things. Are they alluding to a co-conspirator or him elsewhere (rolling my eyes)? BS, prove it. Cite an alibi. Do not just make innuendos. Here, the defense team is damaging the states case. JMOO. Put up or shut up. Instead, all spin and manlipulation. Ugh!

 

[kittythehare]

Like the exploitive interview of one of the victims' parents regarding a non-existent conflict of interest. Moo

That horrified me and i lost all respect for NN at that time, well, truthfully the only one I ever really liked in it was Brian Entin..
it's at the comedy/fringe level now, Fantastical . Can't. can NOT and will not with them any more.
That poor woman was so ill at the time.. She was broken, they crushed her.

 

[Balthazar]

What is it exactly that you think this alibi is that exists in the prosecutions evidence if you don't mind sharing it here?

I don't have a copy of the discovery, so I have nothing to quote to show you what I think it is and why. You would be better off researching the idea that an alibi exists within the prosecutions discovery for yourself and see what conclusion you come to.

All JMO.

 

[Sundog]

She probably does take this case as her 15 minutes of fame that she could get all the way to US Supreme Court and get granted certiorari (unless this law has been challenged already and it might have been).

MOO, anyone watching the docket knows that her appointment papers were later backdated to cover her motion dates. She had a conflict of interest, ditched the client, and was at the scene of the crime with a team all before she was even formally appointed counsel. So, she's all about the stardom, and the bucks. She's getting paid a lot by Latah County. So are all of her private practice dream team co-counsel.

Private lawyers for a supposedly indigent defendant paid by the Idaho taxpayers. I wonder how many indigent defendants currently in jail in Latah have a team of private lawyers headlined by their "public defender so that the County of Latah picks up the tab? I wonder how angry they'd be to know they aren't getting that special treatment. They should be, and rightfully so. Same for the people of Idaho IMO. The guy, who went to school in the state of Washington, purchased groceries in the state of Idaho a few times over an 8 week period. That's his sole contribution to Idaho's tax base. That and his $10 seatbelt ticket. MOO

jmo

I suspect that AT could make a lot more money as a private attorney if that was her goal. Also, she was assigned the BK case, IIRC, because she is one of a very few death-penalty qualified attorneys in that part of the state.

And with regard to BK not having paid taxes in the state of Idaho, I don't think that matters. He is facing death by firing squad in the state, and thus, IMO, deserving of qualified counsel.

All IMO