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

[Soulmagent]

Live and in person 'Jury views' of the body pre or post autopsy weren't that uncommon before the advent of cameras and pictures. And since the mid 1800s pictures of gruesome crime scenes and autopsies have been a staple of the court room.

I know that there's a fine line between prejudicial and probative. And the judge should use their discretion. But we can't rewrite the rules now, after 300+ years.

This is a very interesting statement .
" We cant rewrite the rules NOW after 300 yrs"
I do not know where you are ,but yes , you can rewrite rules after 300 years in some places they even call it democracy.

 

[Bogbacal2]

Kaylee Goncalves' father assumed suspect followed victims before Moscow murders

"I miss what she meant to the family," Steve Goncalves said about the loss of his daughter. "She knew how to make memories."

www.king5.com

The affidavit also said Kohberger’s phone pinged near the girls’ home on King Road in Moscow at least 12 times in the months leading up to the murders.

“He was close enough that he was touching their wi-fi," Goncalves said.

Thank you CC!

 

[jepop]

The judge will have to determine if the prejudicial impact of any photographs that the prosecution may want to show at trial will outweigh the probative value and make his decision accordingly.

Also, IIRC, among its requests for discovery, the defense asked the prosecution to provide them with notes that LE took while observing the autopsies of the victims, or something to this effect that involved LE observing the autopsies. This information may or may not be significant for the defense at trial.

RBBM:
This was resolved after the June 27th hearing. On 29th June, Court ordered the state to provide a few outstanding items requested by the Defense. I recall this being discussed on previous threads and believe that the state will rely on the Medical examiner's official report. There were no notes taken at autopsy by LE observers.

State filed this supplemental response to second motion to compel on 11th July. Item 8.

"STATE’S SUPPLEMENTAL
RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S
SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL
DISCOVERY...

8. Request 164. Bodycam, recordings, notes, photographs and all information
collected at the autopsies by Tolleson, Vargas, and Gunnerson.

The State responded that they do not have these items in its possession.
Clarification is needed on it they exist and are still in the possession of another
agency.

The State has been advised these items do not exist."

(my emphasis).

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/071123+States+Supplemental+Response+to+Defendants+Second+Motion+to+Compel+Discovery.pdf

 

[Soulmagent]

I have this in saved docs just don’t have time to quote-I remember KG father stating that BK was close enough to the victims’ house to connect to their Wi-Fi. Anyone remember that?

He did say that but it was before they had made any connection to BK . It was one of his first 3 interveiws ,I think. I wondered if it had to do with tower pings and cell numbers at the time.

 

[Soulmagent]

RBBM:
This was resolved after the June 27th hearing. On 29th June, Court ordered the state to provide a few outstanding items

The State has been advised these items do not exist."

(my emphasis).

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/071123+States+Supplemental+Response+to+Defendants+Second+Motion+to+Compel+Discovery.pdf

? Half empty I say.

 

[Sjöberg]

I suspect we will see a pre-trial motion by the defense to exclude any photos that they deem to be prejudicial to the defendant.

This is not aimed at you specifically, @Sundog.
So, sorry, this is a stupid question but as I am not a native English speaker nor do I live in the US, I feel like I lack some interpretation skills in this discussion. How can a photo of a victim (in a morgue or on the scene) and victims injuries be prejudicial to the defendant?

I can understand how some photos could be prejudicial, for example some random photo of a random Elantra in King Road being shown during timeline discussion - this would actually even be misleading. And I could probably understand how it could be prejudicial if there was anything on the photos that specifically could be made to look like it is connected to BK. But what is prejudicial about describing the injuries? That they hint that it was done by someone who was stronger than the girls and had upper body strength? Well, duh? We don't need the photos to conclude that and this does not really narrow down the suspect pool too much. Or am I interpreting the meaning of "prejudicial" wrong in this legal context?

 

[jepop]

In the PCA, LE brings BK into the narrative around 2:45 am on Nov. 13, in Pullman, on campus and turning off his phone before heading toward 270, which leads to Moscow. Based on that, I sort of had a picture of BK being in his apartment up until then, which made me question how he would know what was going on at the King Rd house, unless there was an online element we don't know about.

But, then AT stated that BK was out driving around late on the 12th and early on the 13th. One could argue that if this is truly what BK was doing, it doesn't mean it was related to the murders, but I feel like AT inserting the part about him driving late on the 12th might suggest BK needed an alibi for something that occurred on the 12th, as well. JMO.

Since we don't know anything about camera or phone data from late on the 12th, we have no idea where he was, but that data would have likely been collected during the investigation and is well known to the State and the D by now. What we do know is that he was back in Pullman around 2:45 am on the 13th, turning off his phone, and heading in the direction of Moscow.

This is JMO, but it seems awfully suspicious to me that he was likely driving around during the hours that the victims were out and about on the 12th, then we have this void of 45 min to 1 hour between when the victims all got home around 1:45/2 am and when BK was in Pullman (after supposedly already being out driving), turning off his phone and heading in the direction of Moscow, out for another drive. Really? I mean, I can only take a guess, but the fact that AT includes late on the 12th in with early on the 13th for his driving around hints that there might be evidence regarding BK/his phone/his elantra/whatever in Moscow late on the 12th. JMO.

Wild speculation, but I think he was in Moscow late on the 12th, knew when they were all home (or heading home) and maybe saw an opportunity or otherwise made the decision about the time being right. He could have been back to Pullman by 2 or 2:15 (or earlier, depending on what he was doing) and still had a half hour (at least) to do whatever he needed to do and be where he was on campus by 2:45. Let's not forget the unaccounted for time between leaving Pullman and the first camera footage we know of just before 3:30 going west on Indian Hills and then Styner (and yes, I'm willing to assume for now these are all the same white elantra as the one in Pullman). I think when he went back to Pullman, he got some things, and then drove someplace remote somewhere east of Moscow to finish getting ready. IDK, he could have had other reasons he went east during that time gap. We have no way of knowing. Anyway, that's the picture I have now...

I agree. BK's historical CSL records for the 12th Nov (plus whatever other location data has been found since forensic analysis of Bk's actual device post arrest)must show that he was moving around/driving late hours of 12th, otherwise defense would not mention this in the so called alibi/non-alibi Imo.

 

[jepop]

It may be a way to try and “impeach” the cell phone records. “Yeah, it says that, but I was out driving around… so it’s wrong. And can we really believe all of the datapoints with that in mind?”

I don’t think such an argument would be anywhere near successful.

JMO

I think it's probably the opposite. I think his CSL records for late on the 12th, plus possible additional evidence relating to location discovered on his device post arrest, probably place him driving/moving around late hours of the 12th. I don't think the defense has a chance of really putting into question any general CSL data, though they may well attempt to counter evidence or reports related to very precise locations that may be in discovery. Strictly Moo.

One reason for the vagueness of the alibi/non-alibi at this point Imo,is because the D has seen that they will not have a lot to counter the strong evidence that Bk, car and device suddenly turn up 20 mins south of the crime scene at 4.48am and then Bk, his device and car ping their way back to Pullman where car is then caught on cameras beginning at c 5.25am. I don't think the defense will be able to counter that... Moo... therefore BK's alibi is appropriately vague at this point - that he was just driving around somewhere - so that it can be explained why he is on Highway 95, 20 mins south of the CS and heading south himself at 4.48am. Moo.

 

[TL4S]

I think it's probably the opposite. I think his CSL records for late on the 12th, plus possible additional evidence relating to location discovered on his device post arrest, probably place him driving/moving around late hours of the 12th. I don't think the defense has a chance of really putting into question any general CSL data, though they may well attempt to counter evidence or reports related to very precise locations that may be in discovery. Strictly Moo.

One reason for the vagueness of the alibi/non-alibi at this point Imo,is because the D has seen that they will not have a lot to counter the strong evidence that Bk, car and device suddenly turn up 20 mins south of the crime scene at 4.48am and then Bk, his device and car ping their way back to Pullman where car is then caught on cameras beginning at c 5.25am. I don't think the defense will be able to counter that... Moo... therefore BK's alibi is appropriately vague at this point - that he was just driving around somewhere - so that it can be explained why he is on Highway 95, 20 mins south of the CS and heading south himself at 4.48am. Moo.

I just can't help myself, but I always see it as if BK thought by turning off his phone and not having a readable license plate, that he would be invisible.

And him driving somewhere to the east of Moscow before starting to circle King Rd is still troubling to me. Why did he do that?

 

[schooling]

This is a very interesting statement .
" We cant rewrite the rules NOW after 300 yrs"
I do not know where you are ,but yes , you can rewrite rules after 300 years in some places they even call it democracy.

Great reveal at the end. Probably sounds even better with a trumpet quietly playing the national anthem and then crescendo at the end.

I’ll be sure to spend time researching this concept. Thank you.

 

[schooling]

I agree. BK's historical CSL records for the 12th Nov (plus whatever other location data has been found since forensic analysis of Bk's actual device post arrest)must show that he was moving around/driving late hours of 12th, otherwise defense would not mention this in the so called alibi/non-alibi Imo.

It seems like they might be content picking and choosing which Elantras on video are BK.

The ones with corroborating cell tower data, BK. The ones without….maybe BK, maybe not.

Jury shouldn’t let that fly.

 

[schooling]

And him driving somewhere to the east of Moscow before starting to circle King Rd is still troubling to me. Why did he do that?

<snip by me>

He had been to the area of the house a dozen or so times prior. Whatever he was doing east of it was likely planned out in way advance. If it was someone else’s house or a place of business or a specific location then LE has likely cleared long ago.

Id have to imagine if quadruple murderer frequently visited my house to pick me up to hang out or hit a bar….LE would know about it. Solely based off of all the other evidence they have in and around Moscow.

Off the top of my head 1) he could have been nervous and having doubts. Or 2) He could have known he was still too early and the circling is another indication of that. He saw something he didn’t expect. 3) he was changing his clothing and/or preparing his car. Or any other last second preparations.

MOO

 

[jepop]

I just can't help myself, but I always see it as if BK thought by turning off his phone and not having a readable license plate, that he would be invisible.

And him driving somewhere to the east of Moscow before starting to circle King Rd is still troubling to me. Why did he do that?

Imo, most likely prepping. Planned to approach from the east. For whatever reasons he may have thought that preferable to approaching from the west. Moo

 

[maskedwoman]

I just can't help myself, but I always see it as if BK thought by turning off his phone and not having a readable license plate, that he would be invisible.

And him driving somewhere to the east of Moscow before starting to circle King Rd is still troubling to me. Why did he do that?

I agree with you. I love the saying that no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy. In the case of war, both sides understand military tactics, etc., the success or failure comes from execution but also from how well you can anticipate what the other guy might do. Who might break which "rule" and do something unexpected. Officers and analysts in our armed forces study the men they may one day fight. Keep up with what tools those men have available to them and how they tend to use them. In this situation, BK had book learning only, and no real world experience.

He is apparently a good "book learner" but he lacked real world experience with crime scene forensics, cell phone forensics, DNA, etc. These are not topics to be mastered (no pun intended) with a course or two in a more generalized degree.

I guess we'll never know whether he really thinks he's the smartest guy in the room, or whether he needs to be the smartest guy because he thinks that's all he has going for him. Either he thought his book learning and planning alone would be sufficient or he didn't realize the challenge of not having a partner to point out any mistakes in his plan. I'm hoping his lack of real world knowledge will catch up with him in a huge way. MOOooo

 

[Megnut]

I just can't help myself, but I always see it as if BK thought by turning off his phone and not having a readable license plate, that he would be invisible.

And him driving somewhere to the east of Moscow before starting to circle King Rd is still troubling to me. Why did he do that?

Why? Because he had... time...to kill.

Perhaps he thought he was just too early. Drove around to eat up time, let everyone fall asleep.

Jmo

 

[jepop]

Imo, most likely prepping. Planned to approach from the east. For whatever reasons he may have thought that preferable to approaching from the west. Moo

Or maybe he took a back route to Indian Hills Drive that took all the time up between approx 2.50am and 3.26am. Trying to avoid main roads and camera capture on his aproach. For eg. I mapped out this possible route that google maps says would take 33 mins a little while back.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I agree with you. I love the saying that no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy. In the case of war, both sides understand military tactics, etc., the success or failure comes from execution but also from how well you can anticipate what the other guy might do. Who might break which "rule" and do something unexpected. Officers and analysts in our armed forces study the men they may one day fight. Keep up with what tools those men have available to them and how they tend to use them. In this situation, BK had book learning only, and no real world experience.

He is apparently a good "book learner" but he lacked real world experience with crime scene forensics, cell phone forensics, DNA, etc. These are not topics to be mastered (no pun intended) with a course or two in a more generalized degree.

I guess we'll never know whether he really thinks he's the smartest guy in the room, or whether he needs to be the smartest guy because he thinks that's all he has going for him. Either he thought his book learning and planning alone would be sufficient or he didn't realize the challenge of not having a partner to point out any mistakes in his plan. I'm hoping his lack of real world knowledge will catch up with him in a huge way. MOOooo

We've heard from many fellow students and former classmates that BK definitely thought/knew he was smart and made sure everyone else knew it also.

Not smart enough to keep him from getting caught and sitting in jail awaiting trial though.

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Why? Because he had... time...to kill.

Perhaps he thought he was just too early. Drove around to eat up time, let everyone fall asleep.

Jmo

Especially if he had seen Maddie and Kaylee on the Food Truck live stream at 1:30 ish.

 

[10ofRods]

Or maybe he took a back route to Indian Hills Drive that took all the time up between approx 2.50am and 3.26am. Trying to avoid main roads and camera capture on his aproach. For eg. I mapped out this possible route that google maps says would take 33 mins a little while back.View attachment 446273

This is fascinating. It's as if he really didn't want to be seen coming directly from his own place. I have an opinion about this (naturally).

There is no evidence he ever studied in the digital forensic track at DeSales (there is a certificate - none was announced for him at his graduation there, IMO). I believe he's really weak in that area and his attempt to snow the Pullman PD into thinking he was some kind of expert in this...failed. It's obvious that he's not able to keep all the ways in which he could be caught...digitally...operating fully in his mind.

Or he'd have made some attempt not to have the phone plainly registered to himself in the car that night, turning it off and on at critical moments. But yes, I bet he was worried about cameras (or, perhaps, being stopped by LE if he knew that could happen so late at night - in a college town, it's not uncommon to stop and check sobriety with late night drivers and as we know, BK has a tendency to tailgate and push through red lights, etc).

IMO.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I suspect we will see a pre-trial motion by the defense to exclude any photos that they deem to be prejudicial to the defendant. And if the judge allows these photos into evidence, this may be grounds for appeal by the defense.

Here is a case of a state Supreme Court ruling against a judge who allowed graphic photos of a murdered victim to be introduced as evidence before a jury in South Carolina, in spite of the objections of the defense. A new trial was ordered as the state Supreme Court determined that the photos were more prejudicial than probative.

Gruesome autopsy photos leads to reversal of Summerville woman's murder conviction

A 57-year-old former Army nurse was serving a life sentence for the grisly murder of her roommate when the state's Supreme Court on Aug. 9 overturned her conviction.

www.postandcourier.com

I am sure that Judge Judge will take this matter quite seriously and weigh the issues carefully, also with the goal of avoiding an appeal that could result in a new trial being ordered by a higher court.

Absolutely the Defense will argue like crazy to keep as many gruesome photos out of the jury's eyes, but it's going to be hard to present a case of a quadruple murder without seeing some evidence of the scene and the position of the bodies.

There will be be some that will have to presented in order to argue the State's theory of the murder. This was a very gruesome crime and the killer left a gruesome scene. Let's not forget what was done to 4 innocent people here.

State v. King, 424 S.C. 188 (2018) “Rule 403, SCRE, is sometimes misstated. See, e.g., State v. Wallace (incorrectly noting that for evidence to be admissible under a Rule 403 analysis, ‘[t]he probative value of evidence falling within one of the Rule 404(b) exceptions must substantially outweigh the danger of unfair prejudice to the defendant’). The correct test is the opposite: whether the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. The test described in Wallace incorrectly places the burden on the proponent of the evidence to establish admissibility, while the proper test places the burden on the opponent of the evidence to establish inadmissibility.”

State v. Hopkins, 431 S.C. 560 (Ct. App. 2020) “All evidence is meant to be prejudicial; it is only unfair prejudice which must be avoided. [1]29 Am. Jur. 2d Evidence § 326.

I believe they may shield those from any camera or the people in the gallery, as they did in the Alex Murdaugh trial recently.


MOO