Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They will have to come up with a very good reason for the jury to believe they had it in for BK before they even knew it was him. I believe they found the dna way before they linked it to a suspect.I am a strong advocate for defendants being innocent until proven beyond a reasonable doubt. But "planted DNA evidence"?
Good grief.
One way someone "might" have evidence is if they picked up their phone at 2am after they got up to pee.
That movement (which is trackable in the phone) would be recorded and data minable.,
Yes. Iris Eytan in the Morphew case preliminary hearing ran this strategy.Looks like their strategy might be to muddy things up. And part of that is trying to present the technology and methods LE used as new, experimental, susceptible to mistakes/tamperingl and ultimately unreliable.
There's been a bunch of technology/forensic heavy cases that have gone in front of juries lately using this technique.
33% of the time they are asking leading and dismissing questions about the expert witness's education/experience/credentials. Planting the seed of doubt.
33% of the time they are quizzing them about vocabulary that sounds foreign to the typical juror. The goal here isn't to education them . But to confuse them and try to get the expert witness to trip up. The goal is to make this stuff sound foreign and unreliable (the pedometer in the YNW melly case is a perfect example of this). This is Watering the seed of doubt.
The last 33% is dedicated to asking questions carefully crafted to illicit the the desired response from the expert witness. Questions like "Is there a chance it could be wrong?" When the witness tries to answer with the caveat the attorney will ask for a yes or now. And even when the answer is 0.000000000001% the answer is yes. The answer is yes.
I keep pointing back at the rapper YNW Melly case as the archetype (ended in a mistrial) for how defense attorneys should attack experts, technology and dna. His attorney in the #1 seat was amazingly effective.
ALL MOO
I 100% agree that the class confrontation didn't cause what happened at King Road. However, I have begun to wonder if the problems he was having as a TA might have escalated his timeline. If he had any inkling he might lose his job, could it have caused him to take action earlier than he otherwise might have?The much maligned fitting squad of BK the TA vs the entire population of his class is IMO neither the start nor the trigger for what followed.
<snipped for focus>
For anyone shouldering guilt that they somehow pushed him over the edge, it only shows how caring they are, how capable of feeling remorse and taking responsibility, feelings most of can relate to, it's natural. You know who's probably not feeling any sense of remorse or responsibility? Yeah, the one who likely felt his outward life was a charade all along and decided one day to stop playing..
It was always just a matter of when.
JMO
While I totally agree IE ran this same strategy in the Morphew case, they also didn't have a body or any direct DNA tying BM to the scene.Yes. Iris Eytan in the Morphew case preliminary hearing ran this strategy.
They will have to come up with a very good reason for the jury to believe they had it in for BK before they even knew it was him. I believe they found the dna way before they linked it to a suspect.
While I totally agree IE ran this same strategy in the Morphew case, they also didn't have a body or any direct DNA tying BM to the scene.
Here they have BK on surveillance videos, odd cellular activity at the time of murders, and his DNA under a sheath left under the body of one of the victims and his odd behavior of dumping his trash in a neighbors can at 3 am. That is just what we know about at time of the PCA, I'm sure there's even more damaging info. tying BK to this crime.
AT isn't going to be able to spin the totality of evidence against BK here, it's too much.
MOO
It's possible he was stirred to murder because his future as a student was in jeopardy.... but I think it's actually the opposite. I think, as he became more obsessed with his thoughts (stalking, hating, plotting), the less he was able to concentrate on playing the game of fitting in and doing what he knew was expected of him. While his plan was gaining traction, in his outer life, he was decompressing.I 100% agree that the class confrontation didn't cause what happened at King Road. However, I have begun to wonder if the problems he was having as a TA might have escalated his timeline. If he had any inkling he might lose his job, could it have caused him to take action earlier than he otherwise might have?
I would be interested in hearing from our Sleuthers with experience with the academic environment, whether it's likely he might have realized he wasn't entirely in control of his timeline?
Thanks!
That's a very interesting hypothesis and quite reasonable. Thank you.It's possible he was stirred to murder because his future as a student was in jeopardy.... but I think it's actually the opposite. I think, as he became more obsessed with his thoughts (stalking, hating, plotting), the less he was able to concentrate on playing the game of fitting in and doing what he knew was expected of him. While his plan was gaining traction, in his outer life, he was decompressing.
IMO
I thought the Judge may rule against Expert Witness testimony in support of his alibi defense if they haven't notified that Prosecution.
They will have to come up with a very good reason for the jury to believe they had it in for BK before they even knew it was him. I believe they found the dna way before they linked it to a suspect.
Good point. I believe they will, especially since the Defense has been suggesting they focused 'solely' on BK from the beginning, ie the car model year and the IGG testing.The Douglas Garland trial was local and I knew one of the victims professionally so I watched it very closely. Like this, there was a bloody crime scene but no bodies and LE found no DNA other than victims and their family at the house.
One of the things I found interesting was that since the evidence very circumstantial, the prosecution had investigators walk through the process of the early investigation, early potential suspects and the processes they used to eliminate them.
I feel it had a strong impact on the jury to know how much effort went into conducting a very comprehensive investigation and following the trail of evidence rather than making it seem like the evidence was made to fit a specific suspect. Perhaps the prosecution will take a similar approach.
I am a strong advocate for defendants being innocent until proven beyond a reasonable doubt. But "planted DNA evidence"?
Good grief.