4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #94

[Cool Cats]

But the civil suits the parents have talked about aren't against BK. They are against the City of Moscow, the University, and the State of Idaho. (Might be a few I forgot.)
MOO

None of those entities did anything negligent.

There is specific evidence against BK that could be used against him in civil court but I see no point other than to keep him from financially benefiting in some way. He is indigent meaning no money for a civil judgement.

2 Cents

 

[Cool Cats]

But the civil suits the parents have talked about aren't against BK. They are against the City of Moscow, the University, and the State of Idaho. (Might be a few I forgot.)
MOO

No one said they will sue BK but they have a right to do that. Remains to be seen.

 

[NCWatcher]

None of those entities did anything negligent.

There is specific evidence against BK that could be used against him in civil court but I see no point other than to keep him from financially benefiting in some way. He is indigent meaning no money for a civil judgement.

2 Cents

No one said they will sue BK but they have a right to do that. Remains to be seen.

I agree It makes no sense to sue the parties some family members have talked about bringing suits against. But that's not the point really. That's what they threatened to do and they've got a right to bring suit if they wish, I'm sure. They've never talked about sueing BK so far as I can find. (But a poster brought that idea up a few posts ago and several of us are responding to the idea, including you.) But they certainly have taken steps to reserve the right to sue other parties including Washington State University. (Forgot that one in my previous post.)

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/northwest/idaho/article275793511.html

Families of slain University of Idaho students prepare to sue college over murders

The notices protect the families’ rights to sue the University of Idaho, Washington State University – the university where accused killer Bryan Kohberger was a student – the city of Moscow and Idaho State Police

www.the-independent.com

MOO

 

[russoca]

Saw that there was a linked post about this just up thread before you posted and the octillions statistical match has been posted so many times from court docs all over the threads as well. Just to say you may have misread (or likely mis typed) the match as in 50 plus octillion range when it is actually in the 5 plus octillion range, typos happen so no biggie and 5 plus octillion range is a statistical match of huge proportions regardless. moo

Yikes!! Yes, 5+ Octillion, sorry about that.

And thanks to the others finding link (news or court) that back that up.

Maybe someone can refresh my memory about the Prosecution stating they shouldn't have to turn over the IGG evidence because it was not used to obtain any warrants and will NOT be presented at trial. That makes the last 3 pages here moot, IMO.

I've followed ALL 94 pages of this thing and sometimes (rarely, I know) I may, possibly misremember something.

 

[Cool Cats]

I agree It makes no sense to sue the parties some family members have talked about bringing suits against. But that's not the point really. That's what they threatened to do and they've got a right to bring suit if they wish, I'm sure. They've never talked about sueing BK so far as I can find. (But a poster brought that idea up a few posts ago and several of us are responding to the idea, including you.) But they certainly have taken steps to reserve the right to sue other parties including Washington State University. (Forgot that one in my previous post.)

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/northwest/idaho/article275793511.html

Families of slain University of Idaho students prepare to sue college over murders

The notices protect the families’ rights to sue the University of Idaho, Washington State University – the university where accused killer Bryan Kohberger was a student – the city of Moscow and Idaho State Police

www.the-independent.com

MOO

They only planned to sue if negligence was found.

The OP was wondering if a civil case could be filed before trial. I assumed they meant BK because there is specific evidence against him showing liability.

I think they will wait for a guilty verdict before suing BK, however, they may not sue him. Many victims do sue killers, but of course not all do.

Many defendants get sued for manslaughter, for negligent accidents, not just for first degree murder.

2 Cents

 

[russoca]

That's not a lab report. Considering all the wrong things in documents in this case, I don't think we can trust this without seeing the actual facts from the lab reports.

Do you have a court document that lists all the documents with errors? Would like that link please.

 

[ilovewings]

Not understanding why the judge allows this to continue? idk.

-- Enough is enough
-- This could go on and on - defense continue to claim they need certain things
-- The state doesnt give them all the information


-- The state says they can't turn over what they dont have

The defense is basically calling the state liars? idk.

Typical of defense strategy to cause delays, but why does the judge allow this?

Why does this continue to be acceptable?

Why doesnt the judge intervene?

moo

Good question!!!!

 

[Cool Cats]

How does Sy Ray know this when he can't see the footage?

Another witness brought by the defense, Sy Ray, said about 2-3% of the cell phone data in the case is missing.

When questioned about this by the defense, Ray said, “Some of the most significant locations in the case are missing data.”

2 Cents

 

[al66pine]

Families of the Deceased. Notice? Civil Suit?

But the civil suits the parents have talked about aren't against BK. They are against the City of Moscow, the University, and the State of Idaho. (Might be a few I forgot.)
MOO.

@NCWatcher Thx for your post clarifying the target defendants.
Iirc families' NOTICES of (possible) claims were already provided w'in 180 days of deaths, under ID. statute "Idaho tort claims act."*
No petitions have been filed in ct, afaik.

*Section 6-901 – Idaho State Legislature

 

[Cool Cats]

Families of the Deceased. Notice? Civil Suit?

@NCWatcher Thx for your post clarifying the target defendants.
Iirc families' NOTICES of (possible) claims were already provided w'in 180 days of deaths, under ID. statute "Idaho tort claims act."*
No petitions have been filed in ct, afaik.


*Section 6-901 – Idaho State Legislature

I assume no negligence has been found or they would be suing right now.

2 Cents

 

[al66pine]

I assume no negligence has been found or they would be suing right now.
2 Cents

@Cool Cats
Personally I'm not assuming anything about the possible negligence or MERITS of any case against any ID gov't entity on which the families have given notice of claim.

And making no predictions about whether any of the families will file petitions for those claims in court.
Seems statute of limitation for filing petition is two years after the date the claim arose.*
Less than six mo. from now.
imo jmo moo icbw

________________________________
* ID. "TORT CLAIMS AGAINST GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES"
"6-911. LIMITATION OF ACTIONS."

Section 6-911 – Idaho State Legislature

legislature.idaho.gov

 

[Cool Cats]

@Cool Cats
Personally I'm not assuming anything about the possible negligence or MERITS of any case against any ID gov't entity on which the families have given notice of claim.

And making no predictions about whether any of the families will file petitions for those claims in court.
Seems statute of limitation for filing petition is two years after the date the claim arose.*
Less than six mo. from now.
imo jmo moo icbw

________________________________
* ID. "TORT CLAIMS AGAINST GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES"
"6-911. LIMITATION OF ACTIONS."

Section 6-911 – Idaho State Legislature

legislature.idaho.gov

Not clear.

I know they filed the civil notices right at the deadline but are you saying they cannot sue after September/October?

So that means that if any negligence were discovered during trial that they couldn't do anything about it.

 

[Balthazar]

Do you have a court document that lists all the documents with errors? Would like that link please.

I have something much better than that: there is a video recording of the Defense saying in court DURING A HEARING that the PCA is full of errors and the Prosecutor agreeing with her. It's the hearing in which BT admitted that BK never stalked any of the victims and that he never had any internet connection with him. This one:

AND, if you watched todays hearing you should know that Sy Ray discovered significant errors in the evidence including:
The CAST Report
Mowery's Map from CASTviz
Cell Tower data
Drive Report

And...it was clear that when MPD went to gather video and photos of where BK's car should have been according to the data they had BK's car was never anywhere it should have been. Logic dictates that if your suspect is never where they are expected to be according to the map you have extracted from cellular data, something is very wrong with the cellular data. The investigators should have been wondering if the data was input correctly. But instead of recognizing that there was something wrong and going back to the source, figuring out what was wrong and correcting it, MPD continued on with their investigation believing something that was never true in the first place and the mistakes in the investigation snowballed according to Sy Ray all stemming from the original error on Dec. 23, 2022.

It seems to me that the prosecution needs to have the cellular data re-investigated from the start by someone who actually understands cellular data and how to use CASTviz. A big step to solving this problem would be to complete the input of the 82% of data MPD didn't input from the critical timeframe. That should give them some idea if they have the right suspect or not. Sy Ray was very honest in the hearing and said the result could go either way and he had no way of knowing which way it would go. This needs to be done by someone who really understands CASTviz - so preferably someone from the FBI CAST Team who has never been involved in this case, knows CASTviz like the back of his/her hand and has an excellent reputation for honesty.

The prosecution really has no choice at this point, because, if this is not done, they won't be able to use the cellular data at all.

 

[Cool Cats]

I have something much better than that: there is a video recording of the Defense saying in court DURING A HEARING that the PCA is full of errors and the Prosecutor agreeing with her. It's the hearing in which BT admitted that BK never stalked any of the victims and that he never had any internet connection with him. This one:

AND, if you watched todays hearing you should know that Sy Ray discovered significant errors in the evidence including:
The CAST Report
Mowery's Map from CASTviz
Cell Tower data
Drive Report

And...it was clear that when MPD went to gather video and photos of where BK's car should have been according to the data they had BK's car was never anywhere it should have been. Logic dictates that if your suspect is never where they are expected to be according to the map you have extracted from cellular data, something is very wrong with the cellular data. The investigators should have been wondering if the data was input correctly. But instead of recognizing that there was something wrong and going back to the source, figuring out what was wrong and correcting it, MPD continued on with their investigation believing something that was never true in the first place and the mistakes in the investigation snowballed according to Sy Ray all stemming from the original error on Dec. 23, 2022.

It seems to me that the prosecution needs to have the cellular data re-investigated from the start by someone who actually understands cellular data and how to use CASTviz. A big step to solving this problem would be to complete the input of the 82% of data MPD didn't input from the critical timeframe. That should give them some idea if they have the right suspect or not. Sy Ray was very honest in the hearing and said the result could go either way and he had no way of knowing which way it would go. This needs to be done by someone who really understands CASTviz - so preferably someone from the FBI CAST Team who has never been involved in this case, knows CASTviz like the back of his/her hand and has an excellent reputation for honesty.

The prosecution really has no choice at this point, because, if this is not done, they won't be able to use the cellular data at all.

Just because one witness with a bad background - who is getting paid - says there are errors does not make it true.

Most defense witnesses will say there are problems with the evidence.

2 Cents

 

[grannygates]

Just because one witness with a bad background - who is getting paid - says there are errors does not make it true.

Most defense witnesses will say there are problems with the evidence.

2 Cents

Both sides employ experts that support their own arguments. Everyone is being paid, including the law enforcement, lawyers, judge, all the experts on both sides. Everyone has to earn a living. It doesn’t make anyone inheriantly bad to be paid to be an expert in court.

That’s why we have an impartial jury to make the ultimate decision.

 

[jepop]

Considering all the wrong things in documents in this case, I don't think we can trust this without seeing the actual facts from the lab reports.

That first half of your last sentence there reads as a statement of fact to me IMO. ICBW ofcourse, but would you mind clarifying it is just your opinion? Or alternately could you please link to all the wrong things in the documents in the case, which you appear to be claiming are wrong as a matter of fact?

 

[Boxer]

It's also a way of asking who would be responsible for overseeing that evidence and having those names recorded on the court record for future use.

MOO she knows who is responsible.

It's also a way of asking who would be responsible for overseeing that evidence and having those names recorded on the court record for future use.

MOO pure attempt to confuse snd conflate.

 

[jepop]

Yikes!! Yes, 5+ Octillion, sorry about that.

And thanks to the others finding link (news or court) that back that up.

Maybe someone can refresh my memory about the Prosecution stating they shouldn't have to turn over the IGG evidence because it was not used to obtain any warrants and will NOT be presented at trial. That makes the last 3 pages here moot, IMO.

I've followed ALL 94 pages of this thing and sometimes (rarely, I know) I may, possibly misremember something.

Motion for Protective Order is probably what you mean. The motion was challenged by defense and IGG info was turned over to defense in Jan this year. But yes P lays out in that doc and others following how there are no plans to use at trial for the reasons you give. Defense is hoping to find faults in IGG procedures in order to try have dna evidence suppressed or excluded imo.

Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/061623+States+Motion+for+Protective+Order.pdf

 

[jepop]

Just because one witness with a bad background - who is getting paid - says there are errors does not make it true.

Most defense witnesses will say there are problems with the evidence.

2 Cents

Trial by media lol just like the defense wants imo

eta it's all AT can do to bypass the non diss order when it suits her client's case to do so and try to impact the jury pool.IMO that is

 

[Cool Cats]

Trial by media lol just like the defense wants imo

Maybe they should make up their minds.

Bryan Kohberger gag order and other key developments from investigation

Details of items seized at the home of Kohberger's parents and information about his time as a fish cutter have emerged in recent days.

www.newsweek.com

Defense attorneys for Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of murdering four University of Idaho students, asked the Idaho Supreme Court this week to keep a gag order in place.

"What the media really seeks here is a procedural victory, knowing full well it cannot win on the merits of any test, given the pervasive and grotesquely twisted nature of media coverage that has occurred thus far," Jay Weston Logsdon, with the Kootenai County Public Defender's office, wrote in the court document.

He did not cite any examples of what he believed to be "twisted"coverage.