4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #89

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
MOO, I suspect there is a whole lot of video we know nothing about. Just because something wasn’t included in the PCA doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, MOO, it just means we don’t know what we don’t know.
True.

There could be video of him being at King Rd that really isn't necessary to be put in the PCA and even though it gets reported that he went back to King Rd, I doubt anyone but LE/court/attorneys have that kind of video evidence.

Be interesting if video evidence shows him at King Rd at 9:00 or later before the public was informed about about the murders. Like why are you there?

Be even more interesting if computer evidence shows he was searching for the murders before the public was informed. Only the murderer would know.
 
Last edited:
Why do sex offenders snatch people from the street into darkened stairwells or passageways, when risk of alert is so high? Or gang members engage rivals in view of security cameras? Why do people hold up banks in broad daylight knowing a random patrol car might be less than 1 minute away?

In that moment, the desire/urge to commit the act is stronger than the deterrent or wondering what your family/friends might think should you be caught. Perpetrators are not always thinking logically. A more powerful impulse is driving them.

That's why "I would never be so stupid to commit the act I stand accused of, your honor" never works in court. Evidence reigns supreme.
This exactly.

The only thing I would add is that IMO, a part of the reason he chose the Pullman PhD program was to commit murders. He drove to WA with the murder weapon and some supplies in tow. I think he had a pool of potential locations and victims and probably began to narrow them downs centralizing on that neighborhood and eventually a house or two.

I believe that a confluence of issues and opportunities (academic career going down the drain, new car reg coming, chaos of football game, thanksgiving break) caused him to give into his desire/urges on that night without thinking things all the way through.

I wouldn’t be surprised if he got home shocked at what he had done. Took a shower, then tossed the shower curtain after out of paranoia, just to be sure. I can imagine him alternating stares between his door and the TV. Waiting for the police to come crashing in or for it to be reported on.

Going by the crime scene to see why neither of those things happened. Attempting to get back to normalcy with a visit to the grocery store. Then ultimately driving out of town for a bit out of fear for himself and the need for self preservation.

Sorry for my random ramblings. But I think the point I’m trying to make is that this is the explanation for the mishmash of sloppiness and well executed parts.

“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth” - Mike Tyson
 
MOO, I suspect there is a whole lot of video we know nothing about. Just because something wasn’t included in the PCA doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, MOO, it just means we don’t know what we don’t know.
I have a tidbit but can’t find the early early original reporting so will refrain from sharing.

But I will say that with the prevalence of DIY security/surveillance equipment on sale nowadays there’s probably a less than 0% chance (IMO) that they don’t have more…

BUT…I haven’t done one of these tech dives in awhile so bare with me

One interesting thing is that when I look at the devices that are most likely to be the ones officially cited in the PCA (neighbor camera that caught thumps) or that are most likely to have been cited (apt cam that Gray H reported on the leak) they are both prosumer cameras. I’m using prosumer lightly here. Essentially meaning they take some level of expertise as they typically require wiring runs and power over Ethernet. In the video that Gray reported on you can tell by the UI on screen. I actually found the official model but don’t have it handy. And the likely “thump” neighbor camera that shares the cited address can be seen in newspaper pictures and news clips in the early days.

People buy them for their reliability and its ability to record even when the internet is down or non existent. All of the videos they capture are first and foremost recorded to a local hard drive. And the viewer is usually a Windows App that runs on your desktop computer. Though they can be viewed live over the internet for free and in a pinch,there typically aren’t dedicated apps and you have to visit an IP address in your web browser and deal with a clunky UI. Cloud backup is a paid option if you want. But not required.

It’s a one time payment for the cameras and you are done. Forever if you’d like. They don’t get your credit card or even your email address if you don’t want them to. You never have to plug it into the internet if you don’t care for cloud backup or live viewing. You can run it 100% locally completely disconnected at all times on Mars if you want. They are extremely popular with commercial companies and while 10 years ago you would have seen them in the homes of the tech savvy and people with money…now they are largely relegated to people who don’t want their business (of the non monetary variety) in the cloud with the Googles of the world.

So those specific cameras being amongst the ones cited early and in the PCA makes sense. As they would be most easily accessible to LE. Assuming the owner is cooperative. They just give them access to the device and the hard drive and they can pull it directly off. Easy peazy.

On the other hand…with few exceptions, the off the shelf smart home cameras like Arlo and Ring are all cloud recording only (Arlo offered a local option but discontinued it). They require an email address and an account to give you access to a free service that just barely covers basic functionality. And then try to upsell you and hook you into paying a monthly fee with more/longer storage and other services. Which is recurring revenue for them. They tend to be more popular in homes than the aforementioned prosumer local cameras because installation is plug and play (WiFi), the UI/UX is easy and you don’t have to maintain much hardware. They also offer a local like “feeling” with a snappy and responsive streaming experience. Utilizing buffering and cache tricks.

I know that in Ring and Arlo you’re able to download a copy of the video off the cloud, to your device and do whatever you want to do with it from there. But you don’t technically own it until you do that

One notable difference between the two that’s worth mentioning again, but in a slightly different way: the ‘prosumer’ local cameras will record as long as it has hard drive space. If you want to keep 10 years of recordings of your cat. You can do that. Just buy more hard drives so you don’t have to record over it. But with Ring and other solutions you’re going to pay extra $$$$$$$$$$ for the ability to maintain backups. And if you want 10 years of cat videos then it’s not the device for you.

My point is if LE would have found these videos from these plug and play smart home devices we should have seen subpoenas from LE to get access to the cloud recordings. Particularly the ones that go further back than what’s available via a customers account. As I believe most of these companies will keep 30 days worth of recordings as dictated by most data retention policies.

We haven’t seen any of those subpoenas surface so a few musings on that…
  • Did LE rely on these cameras first as they were most accessible? And anything more was gravy and not necessary? Is this why they were cited in the PCA?
  • If BK passed either of those cameras in the days/weeks/months proceeding then LE has those videos. Assuming that the customers data retention policy (set inside of the Windows App) allows for video to be stored that far back. From what I remember the most common out of the setting is record until you can record anymore and then start to record over the oldest video once we are out of space.
  • On the missing subpoenas….Google owns Nest. I’m too lazy to see if the Google subpoena is broad enough to include all cloud files associated with a customer/user.
  • Amazon owns Ring and Blink. So ditto on the above.
  • Ring has been known to cooperate with law enforcement given them free access to anyone’s video who’s opted into their LE sharing program.
  • While Amazon does own AWS and the S3 service that 90% of camera companies likely use for their cloud storage..I’m pretty sure the subpoena would still have to go through those companies first as they technically own the only keys to those storage buckets.
  • Maybe the subpoenas have been unreleased as of yet or held back for some reason.
MOO
 
Last edited:
This exactly.

The only thing I would add is that IMO, a part of the reason he chose the Pullman PhD program was to commit murders. He drove to WA with the murder weapon and some supplies in tow. I think he had a pool of potential locations and victims and probably began to narrow them downs centralizing on that neighborhood and eventually a house or two.

I believe that a confluence of issues and opportunities (academic career going down the drain, new car reg coming, chaos of football game, thanksgiving break) caused him to give into his desire/urges on that night without thinking things all the way through.

I wouldn’t be surprised if he got home shocked at what he had done. Took a shower, then tossed the shower curtain after out of paranoia, just to be sure. I can imagine him alternating stares between his door and the TV. Waiting for the police to come crashing in or for it to be reported on.

Going by the crime scene to see why neither of those things happened. Attempting to get back to normalcy with a visit to the grocery store. Then ultimately driving out of town for a bit out of fear for himself and the need for self preservation.

Sorry for my random ramblings. But I think the point I’m trying to make is that this is the explanation for the mishmash of sloppiness and well executed parts.

“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth” - Mike Tyson
Interesting.

That a reason to toss out his shower curtain could be to get rid of trace evidence after showering after he got home that night. Really makes sense.

I do not think he used the curtain to cover car seats, after all, he would likely need the curtain to take a super thorough shower.

I have wondered that too. If he specifically chose to go to WSU for his murder plans. It appears to be premeditated and the victims or victim, chosen. He could drive easily to a different State and different town plus be far from his home in Pennsylvania.

If he did message a victim on Instagram, I wonder if he did it before or after his move to Washington. I think it was close to November 2022, have to re-check.
 
I have a tidbit but can’t find the early early original reporting so will refrain from sharing.

But I will say that with the prevalence of DIY security/surveillance equipment on sale nowadays there’s probably a less than 0% chance (IMO) that they don’t have more…

BUT…

One interesting thing is that when I look at the devices that are most likely to be the ones officially cited in the PCA (neighbor camera that caught thumps) or that are most likely to have been cited (apt cam that Gray H reported on the leak) they are both prosumer cameras. I’m using prosumer lightly here. Essentially meaning they take some level of expertise as they typically require wiring runs and power over Ethernet. In the video that Gray reported on you can tell by the UI on screen. I actually found the official model but don’t have it handy. And the likely “thump” neighbor camera that shares the cited address can be seen in newspaper pictures and news clips in the early days.

People buy them for their reliability and its ability to record even when the internet is down or non existent. All of the videos they capture are first and foremost recorded to a local hard drive. And the viewer is usually a Windows App that runs on your desktop. Though they can be viewed live over the internet for free and in a pinch,there typically aren’t dedicated apps and you have to visit an IP address in your UI and deal with a clunky UI. Cloud backup tends to be a paid option. If you don’t want to view live over the internet or don’t need cloud backup you can run it 100% locally completely disconnected from the web. They are extremely popular with commercial companies and while 10 years ago you would have seen them in the homes of the tech savvy and people with money…now they are largely relegated to people who don’t want their business (of the non monetary variety) in the cloud with the Googles of the world.

So those specific cameras being amongst the ones cited early and in the PCA makes sense. As they would be most easily accessible to LE. Assuming the owner is cooperative. They just give them access to the device and the hard drive and they can pull it directly off. Easy peazy.

On the other hand…with few exceptions, the off the shelf smart home cameras like Arlo and Ring are all cloud recording only (Arlo offered a local option but discontinued it). They give you a free basic service that just barely covers basic functionality. And then try to upsell you and hook you into paying a monthly service. Which is recurring revenue for them. They tend to be more popular in homes the local devices (tend to be Ethernet wire driven) because installation is plug and play (WiFi), the UI/UX is easy and you don’t have to maintain much hardware.

I know that in Ring and Arlo you’re able to download a copy of the video off the cloud, to your device and do whatever you want to do with it from there. But you don’t technically own it until you do that.

My point is if LE would have found these videos from these plug and play smart home devices we should have seen subpoenas from LE to get access to the cloud recordings. Particularly the ones that go further back than what’s available via a customers account. As I believe most of these companies will keep 30 days worth of recordings as dictated by most data retention policies.

We haven’t seen any of those subpoenas surface so a few musings on that…
  • Did LE rely on these cameras first as they were most accessible? And anything more was gravy and not necessary? Is this why they were cited in the PCA?
  • On the missing subpoenas….Google owns Nest. I’m too lazy to see if the Google subpoena is broad enough to include all cloud files associated with a customer/user.
  • Amazon owns Ring and Blink. So ditto on the above.
  • Ring has been known to cooperate with law enforcement given them free access to anyone’s video who’s opted into their LE sharing program.
  • While Amazon does own AWS and the S3 service that 90% of camera companies likely use for their cloud storage..I’m pretty sure the subpoena would still have to go through those companies first as they technically own the only keys to those storage buckets.
  • Maybe the subpoenas have been unreleased as of yet or held back for some reason.
MOO
Would be Search Warrants.

They would not need Search Warrants for access to the cloud recordings from
private cameras (home and businesses) when owners voluntarily give them over to LE.

Courts consider consent valid if the police reasonably believed that the consenting person had the authority to consent.

 
Last edited:
I have a tidbit but can’t find the early early original reporting so will refrain from sharing.

But I will say that with the prevalence of DIY security/surveillance equipment on sale nowadays there’s probably a less than 0% chance (IMO) that they don’t have more…

BUT…I haven’t done one of these tech dives in awhile so bare with me

One interesting thing is that when I look at the devices that are most likely to be the ones officially cited in the PCA (neighbor camera that caught thumps) or that are most likely to have been cited (apt cam that Gray H reported on the leak) they are both prosumer cameras. I’m using prosumer lightly here. Essentially meaning they take some level of expertise as they typically require wiring runs and power over Ethernet. In the video that Gray reported on you can tell by the UI on screen. I actually found the official model but don’t have it handy. And the likely “thump” neighbor camera that shares the cited address can be seen in newspaper pictures and news clips in the early days.

People buy them for their reliability and its ability to record even when the internet is down or non existent. All of the videos they capture are first and foremost recorded to a local hard drive. And the viewer is usually a Windows App that runs on your desktop computer. Though they can be viewed live over the internet for free and in a pinch,there typically aren’t dedicated apps and you have to visit an IP address in your web browser and deal with a clunky UI. Cloud backup is a paid option if you want. But not required.

It’s a one time payment for the cameras and you are done. Forever if you’d like. They don’t get your credit card or even your email address if you don’t want them to. You never have to plug it into the internet if you don’t care for cloud backup or live viewing. You can run it 100% locally completely disconnected at all times on Mars if you want. They are extremely popular with commercial companies and while 10 years ago you would have seen them in the homes of the tech savvy and people with money…now they are largely relegated to people who don’t want their business (of the non monetary variety) in the cloud with the Googles of the world.

So those specific cameras being amongst the ones cited early and in the PCA makes sense. As they would be most easily accessible to LE. Assuming the owner is cooperative. They just give them access to the device and the hard drive and they can pull it directly off. Easy peazy.

On the other hand…with few exceptions, the off the shelf smart home cameras like Arlo and Ring are all cloud recording only (Arlo offered a local option but discontinued it). They require an email address and an account to give you access to a free service that just barely covers basic functionality. And then try to upsell you and hook you into paying a monthly fee with more/longer storage and other services. Which is recurring revenue for them. They tend to be more popular in homes than the aforementioned prosumer local cameras because installation is plug and play (WiFi), the UI/UX is easy and you don’t have to maintain much hardware. They also offer a local like “feeling” with a snappy and responsive streaming experience. Utilizing buffering and cache tricks.

I know that in Ring and Arlo you’re able to download a copy of the video off the cloud, to your device and do whatever you want to do with it from there. But you don’t technically own it until you do that

One notable difference between the two that’s worth mentioning again, but in a slightly different way: the ‘prosumer’ local cameras will record as long as it has hard drive space. If you want to keep 10 years of recordings of your cat. You can do that. Just buy more hard drives so you don’t have to record over it. But with Ring and other solutions you’re going to pay extra $$$$$$$$$$ for the ability to maintain backups. And if you want 10 years of cat videos then it’s not the device for you.

My point is if LE would have found these videos from these plug and play smart home devices we should have seen subpoenas from LE to get access to the cloud recordings. Particularly the ones that go further back than what’s available via a customers account. As I believe most of these companies will keep 30 days worth of recordings as dictated by most data retention policies.

We haven’t seen any of those subpoenas surface so a few musings on that…
  • Did LE rely on these cameras first as they were most accessible? And anything more was gravy and not necessary? Is this why they were cited in the PCA?
  • If BK passed either of those cameras in the days/weeks/months proceeding then LE has those videos. Assuming that the customers data retention policy (set inside of the Windows App) allows for video to be stored that far back. From what I remember the most common out of the setting is record until you can record anymore and then start to record over the oldest video once we are out of space.
  • On the missing subpoenas….Google owns Nest. I’m too lazy to see if the Google subpoena is broad enough to include all cloud files associated with a customer/user.
  • Amazon owns Ring and Blink. So ditto on the above.
  • Ring has been known to cooperate with law enforcement given them free access to anyone’s video who’s opted into their LE sharing program.
  • While Amazon does own AWS and the S3 service that 90% of camera companies likely use for their cloud storage..I’m pretty sure the subpoena would still have to go through those companies first as they technically own the only keys to those storage buckets.
  • Maybe the subpoenas have been unreleased as of yet or held back for some reason.
MOO

While I’m here…

Let’s talk about how many days a typical hard drive might get you for recordings…this is only related to the two cameras that we know about. The one covered in Gray’s video and the other one on the neighbors house pointed at the King Road house and photographed by newspapers. The likely source of the “thump” capture from the PCA.

This answer is not straight forward as there are a bunch of factors
  1. Hard drive count: some systems support more than one. The camera on the apartments from Gray’s video is in continuous shooting mode (see #6) and likely contained multiple hard drives that are probably constantly rotated and/or backed up. Or it’s #3 in this list.
  2. Hard drive space: The larger the hard drive the more you’re going to capture.
  3. Network recording or External: some systems are capable of recording to network attached storage or drives plugged in via USB.
  4. Number of cameras: if you have 10 cameras recording to 1 hard drive it’s obviously going to fill up much quicker than just 1. These systems are typically sold in packs of 4 or more. All of the factors below should be multiplied by the number of cameras.
  5. Data Retention settings: a default setting on most of these cameras that say ‘ record over oldest video when full’ which will record continuously. You can set that and forget it. It might get you mad more than 30 days. Or you can choose for it to only record 30 days no matter what and immediately start overwriting the first video 31 days ago. Or have it alert you when almost full and pop in a new hard drive or backup to a CD or cloud.
  6. There’s usually a setting for continuous recording. So 24 hours a day 7 days a week. To me the apartment video that Gray reported on looks to be on this setting. This typically requires an array of drives.
  7. Motion Sensitivity settings: the more sensitive the more you’re going to trigger the camera to start recording. The difference between a shadow at its most sensitive and a human. This will give you a lot more days than continuous recordings obviously. But the more cameras you have in active areas. The more that will be captured and stored.
  8. Sound Triggers: camera will trigger off of sounds regardless of whether there’s motion or not. This also has a sensitivity level. Which might explain the “thump” from the PCA being captured.
  9. Recording length: this is how long it records after motion or sound is triggered. It can be 10 seconds or as long as 5 minutes or until motion stop.
  10. Cool down: this is the amount of time the camera stops capturing motion or listening to sounds after it’s done recording. If your dog is playing in the yard this setting prevents the camera from constantly being triggered by it and wasting recordings and hard drive space.
  11. Video quality: a lot of companies/people choose to put this at the lowest quality settings as it will allow for the most seconds/minutes/days etc worth of recordings. Especially since most of the time no one is expecting to have to use this video for anything meaningful. 720/1080 and 4k video eat a lot of hard drive space. The tradeoff is you’re less likely to capture smaller details like license plates or clear facial features.
Choose the minimum/minimal and you can likely store months worth of recordings. Choose the ‘optimized’ or “maximum” settings and you’re probably down to a month or even less.

I know this is probably TMI for the vast majority of you. But just thought I’d give you a better understanding of how the 2 cameras that we know about so far differ from your typical garden variety “smart” camera and what they are capable of.

The questions I have is:
  • If the video Gray reported on is authentic. I believe it is as it lines up with the PCA literally minute by minute. That means that camera is in continuous recording mode. This could be good in that the camera likely caught past BK visits. Or bad it the owner had only one hard drive and the camera was continuously recording over itself. So how much backup did this guy have?
  • What the data retention policy was on the neighbors cameras. Is that the first time that a sound(s) like that was captured?
  • And to the above. Those cameras are typically sold in packages of 4 and can usually go up to 8-20 channels (each camera is 1 channel). How many other cameras do they have and where are they pointed?

If there were any reactions to my last post I’ll see them tomorrow. It’s taking me an hour or so to compose this because I keep having to put my phone down to deal with off the clock work server emergencies.

MOO
 
Last edited:
In my life I have known the occasional person whom I would describe as "so intelligent that they're a bit weird". They have all gone on to be university professors, etc, with the "sheltered" life obviously suiting them. This is what I would have expected to be BK's path in life, but maybe (probably) he has other issues as well. Plus his drug use when younger may have altered his mind. It will be interesting, to say the least, if/when we discover more about the workings of his mind.
 
This exactly.

The only thing I would add is that IMO, a part of the reason he chose the Pullman PhD program was to commit murders.

@schooling , this is yet another BK mistake that I can't wrap my head around.
If we assume BK wanted to commit an act like this in general and not really targeting those four victims specifically, why on earth go do it in Idaho where there is the death penalty ? I'm sure there are plenty of pretty sorority girls that were out of his league at WSU too. If the goal was merely to get revenge on random "Stacys" (to use Elliott Rodgers' terminology) and it was planned that far ahead, then why not commit this act in Washington? This is another aspect that makes no sense to me. In my mind, only rage directed at those particular victims could have led him to go to Moscow instead of trying something like that in Pullman, where he wouldn't face a firing squad if he screwed up.

Speaking of cameras. BK was a night owl so he very well could have known about the grub truck as a place that's open late, even though he may not have been a customer. We know the grub truck streamed live footage publicly on Twitch, anyone can watch. BK may have known this too.
Here's a theory: If this was targeted towards those specific victims, especially M&K. If BK had been watching that grub truck stream, he could have seen them on the stream. He would know they were without their boyfriends. He would know exactly when they were on their way home that night. M&K leave the grub truck at 1:44am. He gathers his stuff (kit?) while giving them time to get home and pass out. One hour later at 2:46 BK's phone is off and he's on the move.
I don't know how proficient BK may have been with computers, but I do know that he knows how to install a security camera. Too many people don't properly secure access to their security cameras. Even Ring has had a slew of hackings. I have wondered if he could have been watching their comings and goings via a neighbor's camera, and would therefore have known exactly when they got home.
Of course, any digital surveillance he may have been doing of them would show up and incriminate him when they review his phones and computers, which again doesn't match up with someone who has even a basic understanding of digital forensics, right?
Pure speculation and MOO.
 
No confirmation that he went to King Rd after he left King Rd the first time.

Yes he went to back to Moscow but if he went back to King Rd there would be video evidence of his car, there is none.

There is video of his car at King Rd at 4:00 am so there should be video to show he went back later.

Could be seen either way.

Lucid to turn off phone for murders then turn back on, then to drive multiple dark country Rds with likely poor visibility, then shopping normally and wearing a "disguise" and keeping blood out of his car.

Or a drug-fueled mistake-laden murder spree - not lucid.

Maybe he was 'driven' to do this crime and propelled his urge or built false confidence with some form of substance.

I wonder if he used drugs on his late night drives out and about and it was a recreational pass time for him, getting a bit high and driving around.
 
Yes, that's a good point about the location of the murders. You would have to think that to kill in Idaho, which has the death penalty, those young people were specifically targeted.
Or he doesn't value his own life all that much.

If he was on a mission of his own making on that awful day, he might not care deeply about whatever followed. Ultimate twisted bucket list.

He has a different moral code than we do. But I'll bet the house he has one. Rigid as hell too.

IMO most of his measures were to ensure he could complete the mission. Everything else, shoddy.

I think he suffers/enjoys a profound sense of numbness. Easily irritated, otherwise numb.

JMO
 
This is why I need to see articles. To state that the sisters' think he is not guilty because they are cooperating with LE is total bull now that I can consider the source.

Thank you!!!!

And I don't believe anything the aunt says because she is only speculating, no real facts. Like saying being vegan with cookwear means he has OCD.
I agree about the sisters. I don't think Sun knows if they are cooperating or just hunkered down trying to survive, much less whether they think he's innocent or guilty. The only thing I took at face value from this article is that part of the family hasn't seen him for 5 years, that they brought BK and some of his family out to visit and he never left the house.

It sounds like she last saw him when he was either in the throes of his efforts to lose weight, or had just reached where he wanted to be. People are commons very picky about how they eat during both those phases of dieting. Ask me how I know. ;) She probabl would have called it OCF if he'd dropped carbs, or dairy, or just red meat.
 
Does anyone here think there is not enough evidence to convict BK? I just find the discussion here vs Delphi to be so different. There seems to be more people on the Delphi case who think there isn't sufficient evidence despite multiple witnesses place RA at the scene, RA admitting to being at the scene, RA confessing to his wife and mother multiple times, etc. But I don't see that same doubt of guilt here. While I think BK is guilty, I don't think the evidence is as strong as in Delphi but see less discussion about that.
 
I agree about the sisters. I don't think Sun knows if they are cooperating or just hunkered down trying to survive, much less whether they think he's innocent or guilty. The only thing I took at face value from this article is that part of the family hasn't seen him for 5 years, that they brought BK and some of his family out to visit and he never left the house.

It sounds like she last saw him when he was either in the throes of his efforts to lose weight, or had just reached where he wanted to be. People are commons very picky about how they eat during both those phases of dieting. Ask me how I know. ;) She probabl would have called it OCF if he'd dropped carbs, or dairy, or just red meat.

I think she used the phrase because of his insistence that she use different pots and pans to fix his food. Now that I think about it, a person who has such a strong desire to never touch animal products - to the point that even just cleaning a pan before cooking a vegan meal is unacceptable - has really gone one bridge further than most people do. Why would it not be okay just to thoroughly wash the pan? Ought not the person making the special request (as a guest) at least offer to wash their own pan? I know I would. Anyone I know would offer to wash their own pan at my house, if they were that concerned. I have many vegan friends, no one asks for special dishes or pans.

In fact, if I had this need myself, I'd bring a small mess kit, for preparation of my own food and I'd handle the sanitation of said kit myself.

She could have called him "a spoiled brat" instead of OCD. But either way, she's pointing to a character trait that is either obsessive OR obnoxious. I can go with "obnoxious." And then he never leaves the house! What a difficult person he's been, for his family, all this time.

Do we know approximately when this visit to family was? They were in California, right? For at least a decade, it's been possible to get plant-based meals from camping stores, making it very easy for a person on a one-person regimen to have their own meals. Creative problem-solving in the service of courtesy doesn't seem to be Bryan Kohberger's forté,

IMO
 
Does anyone here think there is not enough evidence to convict BK? I just find the discussion here vs Delphi to be so different. There seems to be more people on the Delphi case who think there isn't sufficient evidence despite multiple witnesses place RA at the scene, RA admitting to being at the scene, RA confessing to his wife and mother multiple times, etc. But I don't see that same doubt of guilt here. While I think BK is guilty, I don't think the evidence is as strong as in Delphi but see less discussion about that.

I think there's plenty to convict him. Historically, people have been convicted on (far) less. The Delphi case has its problems, too. We don't know which of those confessions that RA made will be allowed into evidence (his wife can decline to testify; it might be just his mom, and she might not be the strongest witness against RA - and let's hope she's well enough to testify).

There are going to be witnesses at BK's trial, we just have no clue who they might be. I predict we're going to be blown away by various people testifying (who are not experts).

But even without witness testimony, the GPS (about wHhich we know zilch), FBI analysis of the cell phone tower data, surveillance cameras showing the white Elantra circling, and the sheath DNA are enough. But I believe there's way more.

I believe there's evidence of a KaBar knife purchase. And a tag for dark coveralls was found (in his apartment, I believe). His shoe size fits the shoe print (as does the overall shape of his foot). He admits to being out driving around that night.

He returns to the scene of the crime.

That last thing is a clincher for me. The only way he won't be convicted is if there is one juror who is highly sympathetic to the defendant.

Don't be so sure that the confessions in the Delphi case are going to play a huge role. One strong defense to the confessions is that people confess to things (having not done them) all the time. Almost every case has false confessions and the defense will surely produce an expert witness to testify to that. And the mother (when asked if she truly believed her son) could throw a huge monkey wrench if she says, "No, I didn't believe him - he's prone to depression and often felt guilty over things he didn't do" (a common enough symptom of depression - and wouldn't a mother know?)

Neither case is open and shut, but in my book, the evidence in this case is very strong indeed. And I have not listed all the things I think will come in at the Kohberger trial. The DNA is foundational; the cell phone analysis will back up the surveillance camera video; the return of the car and phone the next morning will show that it is indeed Kohberger's car (and that he once again went round to the Clarkston area - where his phone, car and his own person are there (with his own person being caught on video).

He has admitted he is the one driving that white Elantra on the night of the murders. It comes back again the next morning. No one else knows it's a crime scene at that point. But there's way more.

IMO.
 
Does anyone here think there is not enough evidence to convict BK? I just find the discussion here vs Delphi to be so different. There seems to be more people on the Delphi case who think there isn't sufficient evidence despite multiple witnesses place RA at the scene, RA admitting to being at the scene, RA confessing to his wife and mother multiple times, etc. But I don't see that same doubt of guilt here. While I think BK is guilty, I don't think the evidence is as strong as in Delphi but see less discussion about that.

I think BK (Moscow murders arrestee) has the grand slam evidence of his DNA on the knife sheath where the strongest evidence against RA (Delphi murders) is him placing himself on the trail in the clothing of "Bridge Guy" that day and his confessions to his wife and another person (recorded phone calls).

I think at this point, BOTH individuals have a 90% chance of conviction based on what I know and what other evidence is likely to be submitted at trial (if they ever make it that far and don't end with a plea agreements).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
68
Guests online
1,761
Total visitors
1,829

Forum statistics

Threads
605,255
Messages
18,184,737
Members
233,285
Latest member
Slowcrow
Back
Top