4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #87

[acutename]

i do not understand this theory that BK is so strongly influencing strategy. clients get to decide whether to plea or go to trial, whether to testify, and whether to appeal. that’s it. strategy is left to the lawyer. i suppose there’s a hail mary/nothing better to say aspect to this, but i think it’s a terrible decision MOO

what does defense counsel do if BK is proclaiming his innocense but has no other explanation? I see him as just "digging in his heels." IMO

 

[kittythehare]

what does defense counsel do if BK is proclaiming his innocense but has no other explanation? I see him as just "digging in his heels." IMO

he could have done better than that had he had more than 2 brain cells on charge at any one time.
'Knife stolen from him.. sometime..
phone stolen too, gone for months and someone left it back...
and that's the real killer.'

Truthfully I couldn't care less what his defense does ..
They will do what they will do...

I tend not to waste much time on them unless they're godawful and there has been a spate of that of late..

 

[mcmaffy]

This may already have been discussed - but does anyone know whether forensic examination of an iphone/smartphone is able to reveal whether on particular date/dates that the phone was 'powered off' and (importantly for this case) whether in such cases it was switched off or auto-shut down due to dead battery. There was some reference to this in the PC affidavit although I gleaned that the investigators, at least as at that point, werent sure whether BK turned off his phone or switched it to airplane mode.

Given a smart phone is essentially a computer it may well be possible for experts who know how to interrogate these devices to access very specific historical data, such as dates/times (and even locations) when the phone is powered off and how that occurs (user initiated shut-down, 0% battery etc).

Such information would be very helpful in testing BK alibi and in prosecuting the case generally.

 

[jepop]

Regarding the alibi issue I get the impression that the defense wants to see all the evidence and then mold BK's alibi to fit.

This may be a perfectly legitimate strategy because an alibi put up earlier might turn out to be weak or even impossible once the State has rolled out it's entire evidential case. But the defense's approach seems at odds with the rationale of requiring an accused to stump up with any alibi within a strict timeframe. An alibi presented before all (or especially any) evidence is revealed by the prosecution which turns out to be open on the evidence would have far more persuasive value than the same alibi disclosed only after the defendant has seen the State's cards.

I think that's a good point. Atm the alibi is essentially 'was driving around between late hours Nov 12th and and early hours Nov 13th". That is vague in itself but it indicates, along with the explanation that follows, that D is looking for supporting evidence to show BK was elsewhere at the time of the murders - that is what an alibi is. When they mention expert witnessess that may be called I think that's an option open tactic - looking for video footage of other white sedans that are anywhere but in King Road neighbourhood between 3.30 and 4.25pm. If footage like that is found, as long as it is not so far away that it makes it impossible for BK and his phone and car to be on Highway 95 at 4.50am,my feeling is defense will then call some expert to say that said white sedan could be an elantra and therefore that is support for BK's alibi, albeit weak and as you suggest also suspect in terms of cart before the horse. But D will try to hold off on the details until they find the 'support'. But the question is - will ICR rules/judge allow this much extending of the time while the D keeps looking. And if they do - time is going to have to be given to the P to counter - all prior to trial. Moo

 

[jepop]

This may already have been discussed - but does anyone know whether forensic examination of an iphone/smartphone is able to reveal whether on particular date/dates that the phone was 'powered off' and (importantly for this case) whether in such cases it was switched off or auto-shut down due to dead battery. There was some reference to this in the PC affidavit although I gleaned that the investigators, at least as at that point, werent sure whether BK turned off his phone or switched it to airplane mode.

Given a smart phone is essentially a computer it may well be possible for experts who know how to interrogate these devices to access very specific historical data, such as dates/times (and even locations) when the phone is powered off and how that occurs (user initiated shut-down, 0% battery etc).

Such information would be very helpful in testing BK alibi and in prosecuting the case generally.

At time of PCA all LE had was ping data from AT&T. Since arrest forensic exam of his phone would be able to tell what he did IMo from what I understand from Murdaugh trial, ie turned off, no network, battery died or switched to airplane mode. Imo it was powered off, though that's obviously Moo.

 

[Sozo]

Why would the defense fabricate an alibi if that is indeed what he was genuinely doing that night?
The truth doesn’t always sound as good as a lie but at least it’s true and has the possibility of being proven as such.
I would present the alibi information that exists even if it's a week alibi in some people's eyes, not some made up story so it sounds good.

<modsnip: no source link>

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I like the part of this video where he lays out what facts BK has committed himself to that are consistent with the theory of the prosecution's case. And, he rattles them off:

He was up
He was out
He was alone
He was in that Hyundai Elantra

This is what he's just committed himself to by that filing.

At 1:50

Local prosecutor reacts to Bryan Kohberger's 'curious alibi'

We're learning more about how a Monroe County native plans to defend himself in a high-profile murder case in Idaho.

www.wnep.com

I guess he must have wrestled with the other versions of his night - one of which would surely be:

Someone stole my car with my phone inside it. I found it dumped back near my home a few hours later and therefore didn't report it stolen...

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I've always found it interesting and hard to explain, that someone took a "last picture" of the four that very weekend, Kaylee's last time visiting before heading off to Texas. I believe it was on instagram (which is how MSM got hold of it so quickly). They look joyous and beautiful.

Did this picture provoke him? Make him feel left out? Had he approached more than one of them (without them really even realizing he had)? Was he the stalker that Kaylee sensed was out there?

So many questions. I so want there to be answers, but I"m not sure there truly are answers here. DM and BF had been "first floor" roommates when they first joined the house (the sixth roommate had vacated the room that DM was in, I believe). I suppose it's possible he thought there were two people sleeping on the first floor (if he had been watching for a while).

Your scenario makes a lot of sense, in terms of explaining the bloody footprint. And what he said to Xana.

imo

<modsnip - off limits>

I don't think ER actually knew any of the women in person, hadn't identified any of them or interacted with them, he targeted that location as being the peak definition of women he hated. Fortunately, he was unable to enter the house, unfortunately he still did what he did anyhow. His plan was always to go to a few locations slaughtering people and then take his own life when he heard sirens coming, which he did.

I wonder if BK, if guilty, had such a plan and maybe had a couple more places he was intending to visit or 'jobs' he wanted to do and then take his own life?

My suspicion is he had targeted M and K already and maybe was time pressured due to somehow knowing it was K's last weekend -or- was unaware she was back for the weekend and was only targeting M, and that he was originally intending to be 'in and out', remain undetected, play around with LE and the online forums which he might have done on FB, reddit, and 4chan, and perpetrate some more but surely this was all going nowhere and he was already decided his own life wasn't viable (on his terms) and must end?

JMO MOO

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I've debated this often in my mind. Why not trust the roommate to recognize the voice and location of who said it? But I also see no need for LE to suggest it could have been X unless they saw reason to question it.

Here's my thinking now. DM heard noises upstairs. She naturally thought it was dog playing, but if K said "there's someone here," that means she was attacked after she said it. Why didn't DM hear anything then? She could have, and it wasn't included in the PCA, but I'm sure phone texts between roommates will verify this.

How do you kill two people, in one upstairs bed that's likely up against a wall, and directly overhead of DM, and not have DM hear it if she's able to hear dog playing? I just can't help but associate the noises DM heard with the attacks, not Murphy. Jmo

And the way LE chose to describe the narrative in the PCA, is that the noises preceded the "there's someone here" statement. The next noise DM heard, per the PCA, was crying in X's room.

.

Maybe he used that liquid gas that can overpower people and make them sleepy?

Maybe he had already ended the life of M by the time K said 'there's someone here' and then instantly took K's life? There has to be some explanation of why anyone could be awake but there was no screaming or struggle that went over an above what DM considered playing with the dog, albeit it seems that noise was the struggle and was not playing with the dog.

 

[arielilane]

According to Correspondent Kayla Whitworth (KW) of The King Rd Killings podcast ep 3 "The Investigation” she notes BK signed (timestamp @25:20) the waiver of extradition (KW in PA courtroom at that time) document w/his left hand.

The King Road Killings: An Idaho Murder Mystery Podcast - ABC Audio

abcaudio.com

 

[Sozo]

According to Correspondent Kayla Whitworth (KW) of The King Rd Killings podcast ep 3 "The Investigation” she notes BK signed (timestamp @25:20) the waiver of extradition (KW in PA courtroom at that time) document w/his left hand.

The King Road Killings: An Idaho Murder Mystery Podcast - ABC Audio

abcaudio.com

The extradition sketches shows him writing with his right hand.
And here is a picture also showing he is right handed.

 

[arielilane]

The extradition sketches shows him writing with his right hand.
And here is a picture also showing he is right handed.

Appreciate your response. Only have the audio linked above to provide, no images. I will say that camera photos/images do flip and will leave it at that. We shall see. Not trying to be right, only reporting what a reporter advised who was actually in the courtroom at the time. moo

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Appreciate your response. Only have the audio linked above to provide, no images. I will say that camera photos/images do flip and will leave it at that. We shall see. Not trying to be right, only reporting what a reporter advised who was actually in the courtroom at the time. moo

If he is right handed, then I wouldn't be surprised if he flipped hands for any behaviour or signing etc in front of LE or in public after the murders because he'll be trying to imply he doesn't use his right hand (which might have been the one that did the murders). His video footage from the car stop might give some clues.

 

[10ofRods]

Why would the defense fabricate an alibi if that is indeed what he was genuinely doing that night?
The truth doesn’t always sound as good as a lie but at least it’s true and has the possibility of being proven as such.
I would present the alibi information that exists even if it's a week alibi in some people's eyes, not some made up story so it sounds good.

<modsnip: no source link>

Pretty sure everyone thinks he was indeed out driving around that night.

Makes sense, doesn't it? It's the truth. It's just not an actual alibi, as instead of placing him away from the scene, it moves him out of his apartment and allows of him being in Moscow.

That's my problem with it. It's not exonerating and it's not an alibi. But I agree that it's the truth.

IMO.

 

[arielilane]

If he is right handed, then I wouldn't be surprised if he flipped hands for any behaviour or signing etc in front of LE or in public after the murders because he'll be trying to imply he doesn't use his right hand (which might have been the one that did the murders). His video footage from the car stop might give some clues.

Or he is ambidextrous - the ability to use both right and left hands. moo

 

[Jurisprudence]

i do not understand this theory that BK is so strongly influencing strategy. clients get to decide whether to plea or go to trial, whether to testify, and whether to appeal. that’s it. strategy is left to the lawyer. i suppose there’s a hail mary/nothing better to say aspect to this, but i think it’s a terrible decision MOO

I think it was a terrible decision too but we don't know what kind of evidence she's been confronted with in discovery. Doesn't seem like she had a lot of good options.

jmo

 

[Jurisprudence]

I've debated this often in my mind. Why not trust the roommate to recognize the voice and location of who said it? But I also see no need for LE to suggest it could have been X unless they saw reason to question it.

Here's my thinking now. DM heard noises upstairs. She naturally thought it was dog playing, but if K said "there's someone here," that means she was attacked after she said it. Why didn't DM hear anything then? She could have, and it wasn't included in the PCA, but I'm sure phone texts between roommates will verify this.

How do you kill two people, in one upstairs bed that's likely up against a wall, and directly overhead of DM, and not have DM hear it if she's able to hear dog playing? I just can't help but associate the noises DM heard with the attacks, not Murphy. Jmo

And the way LE chose to describe the narrative in the PCA, is that the noises preceded the "there's someone here" statement. The next noise DM heard, per the PCA, was crying in X's room.

.

This is why I think we might learn the order was different. Especially if X and E were up; if E was maybe coming out of or going to the bathroom, they would have been aware first and K&M would have heard some commotion.

jmo

 

[10ofRods]

Hot Prowl

Welcome @foreverlennon I hadn't heard of "hot prowl" either until reading it here. It means somebody is home when the prowler enters. What it's called depends on where you live, in what jurisdiction.
My state's statutes still lists it as a "home invasion" when someone is home at the time of entry.


JMO

Wikipedia: A home invasion, also called a hot prowl burglary, is a sub-type of burglary.

According to the Escondido Police Department
"A "Hot Prowl" is a burglary when a subject enters, or attempts to enter your home while someone is home. A hot prowl burglary is dangerous because of the possible confrontation between the subject and victim."

TL;DR: The difference between a 'hot prowl' and 'home invasion' is not usually in the law. Both are breaking and entering where I live, AKA burglary.

The "hot prowl" was made famous here in California by GSK (Joe DeAngelo, finally caught decades after his rapes and murders via genetic genealogy). Even before he was caught, it was clear that the Visalia Ransacker had started with cold prowling, then moved on to "ransacking" (in which he mostly disturbed contents of the house, but also took certain things - coin collections, Green and Blue stamp collections).

A cold prowl is when someone comes in and cases your home while you're not there. That has personally happened to me and has also happened to other women I know. In one case, the guy actually ate food from the fridge, watched TV and used the shower/restroom (this happened to a friend of mine, at first she thought she was going crazy, then she was truly terrified and of course moved - to a new job and to a new apartment). I have interviewed cold prowlers (they were in jail ultimately for burglary/theft of some kind).

I believe that DeAngelo started with cold prowling (probably in his teens, many teens do it). When I was 8, two teen age girls took me on a cold prowl. They made it seem like it was "okay" with the little old lady whose house it was. They looked in her refrigerator, took a sip of something (I think it might have been beer) and giggled a lot. We were there for about 5 minutes. They lived just up the street from this lady and knew her and her habits. Neither of these girls went on to become a criminal.

Hot prowling is when the person breaks and enters when people are asleep and just stares at them (often an escalation of peeping tom-ness). It's the next step in their criminal practice. DeAngelo probably hot prowled 10X the people that he actually raped or murdered. He may or may not have taken tokens from some of those houses, he was not made to confess during his plea bargain, so we'll never know. At any rate, hot prowling is psychologically an escalation from peeping tom-ness and from cold prowling).

A home invasion is bent on awakening the people within and terrorizing them, either to give up all their valuables and the cash in the house OR their ATM pin, etc. Home invasion can be by one person, but it is often more than one person. The person is armed, almost always guns are involved. There's been a spate of them near my work recently, two men with guns - they think they've caught one of them and the other has a warrant for his arrest. Home invasions are not usually preceded by any sort of prowling (although I'm sure somewhere, there are people who have escalated from prowling to invading).

The home invader literature and research suggests that houses are chosen by "perceived value," (so big McMansions are targeted as are country club homes, large houses on larger properties, and here in L.A., the most important variable is: proximity to freeway. ALL of the home invasions in my own hometown (we had a series about 5 years ago not far from my house) were right next to the freeway, as in, get off, take first right into neighborhood, see big houses at night with lights out, kick down the door, come in with guns, etc. The three in my area were off three different off ramps, but all of them were the first neighborhood one came to, after getting off the freeway. It is believed they were all the same two guys - no one was ever arrested.

We got a metal framed door, built a (cute) fence/gate for the front yard. There were also some burglaries going on (daytime, cold prowling and burglary), same M/O though - kick in the front door. We had had a security system and cameras already - none of the houses that were burgled OR invaded had either of those. I even know one homeowner who put a trip wire around the edge of his property, which set off lights and an alarm inside his house. They had the most expensive remodeled house in our neighborhood, even though we are not right off the freeway, they were scared.

In my own view, almost every serious criminal starts out "small." Peeping, then cold prowling are common. Going on to hot prowling is major, though. It's fairly rare, and it is usually related to fantasies in the criminal's mind about rape or other horrific crimes. That's the reason that many of us here have commented, in these 80+ threads, about the vulnerability of a "Party House" or a house with windows that are not covered, where the interior is generally somewhat lit at night. A house with people possibly coming and going in the night, anyway (so that everyone is used to various footfalls around the house). The police referred to 1122 King Road as a "fish bowl," IIRC. For the people who are just creepers/peepers, that's an inviting house (and it's possible that some of these creeps actually do interact with each other online - it has happened).

Once a person has broken the creeping/stalking/peeping tabu, I believe that person is at risk for developing even more antisocial behaviors. In a case I was involved with here in my town, a cold prowler/burglar is now in prison for life - because he panicked and stabbed to death a 13 year old boy who happened to surprise him by being in the house, during the day, when he had just broken in. The boy was home sick from school, heard the door open, got up and went toward the kitchen. The killer came out of the kitchen with a knife.

The police were able to link this criminal to several other burglaries (cold prowl style) in which cash and credit cards were stolen. Police believe the killing was unplanned (but not un-thought of).

While creeping and peeping, criminals like DeAngelo collect a lot of information about who is home, who comes home when, etc. DeAngelo even used the phones inside the houses on occasion, drew maps, and preferred tracts of homes where he could know the home lay-outs (he would attend real estate open houses, developer open houses, and of course, he also got to go inside houses to investigate crime, as he was a policeman throughout most of his criminal career).

IMO. IME.

 

[Sozo]

Pretty sure everyone thinks he was indeed out driving around that night.

Makes sense, doesn't it? It's the truth. It's just not an actual alibi, as instead of placing him away from the scene, it moves him out of his apartment and allows of him being in Moscow.

That's my problem with it. It's not exonerating and it's not an alibi. But I agree that it's the truth.

IMO.

It is an alibi if the defense can prove that he was not at the king road house, that he was driving somewhere else.

 

[Jurisprudence]

Yes, great points.

Also, the portion of the alibi that's been revealed makes me think the defense is conceding the ping/location data and video evidence for 13th Nov before BK turns off his phone and after he turns it back on. I'm assuming the phone was deliberately turned off - a case of dead battery will be proveable forensically? Moo

What I think is that defense concedes the evidence shows BK was in his car with his phone switched on in Pullman 2.40 to 2.55 (if not earlier). That was BK, that was his car, that was his phone. And that from 4.48am to 5.30am - that was also BK in his car with his phone south of Moscow near Blaine on 95. And that is him driving back to Pullman - the pings moving at car travel speed between 95 near Blaine and 1300 Johnston Rd. Pullman - where his car is first captured on video at c 5.25. (per PCA).

Imo the albi will have to show him being somewhere else - either driving or at standstill or a combo of both - between 4am and 4.20am - and then show how he ended up on Highway 95 near Blaine at 4.50am. If the D is saying there is no "connection" between BK and victims then it seems unlikley to me that the alibi will involve either BK or DM having knowledge of BK being elsewhere and unless he says he had a second device in his car which he has since disposed of and there is evidence for that - there isn't going to be any digital/electronic evidence to support his alibi.Moo

Speculation only

Your post just made me think of something I hadn't considered before. If they have video of the car parked at that time you mention (between 4am and 4.20am) that would be quite bad imo. But, I'd think she would have this by now. It's also possible though that the defense hasn't gotten to it yet and they don't know that it exists.

jmo