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

[wendy44]

BT

2:19:35 Objection to the survey was that it violated the non dessemination order.

1:30 Representation you acknowledge was false that Mr K allegedly stalked one of the victims, thats false.
Not every fact specific question came from the probable cause affidavit. Among 9 fact specific questions, not all 9 came from the PCA.

2:20:35 Facts that include those that are not true.


The Judge:

143:49 Questions that were not true, those were not in the PCA
2:26:30 Two questions were not in the public record came out of the media somewhere, who knows where it came from. I don't think there is anything, not that I am aware of, in the public record that said anything about that. About your client.


The Defense:

1:24:42 Sources of most prejudicial: Media Items and PCA in the visual on powerpoint.
2:04:22 Stalking represented in affidavit
2:04:55 A lot of information in affidavit flat out false
2:10:45 State actors that put information out there
2:25:48 Facts/false facts info is based on the public record the way the State and State actors put information into the public record that has been dessiminated

Edelman
39.18 Media took document and then published the highlights and key findings in that document and added editorial commentary, debate, discussion, spin.

Law and Crime

JMO

Yes, agree with all this and it's exactly what I've said. The defense contends that the way the PCA was written led to the media and public going with the alleged stalking story. This story was already circulating due to KG's parents talking about their daughter believing she was being stalked. It's a valid point for the defense to question whether media coverage that characterized their client in a way that was not described in the PCA is prejudicial to him and warrants a change of venue.

But the original discussion of this arose from a post that contended the PCA accused BK of stalking and BT was forced to admit that was an error in the PCA. This is just not true. All the other discussion about what the media and public did after the release of the PCA is not relevant to that particular post.

The defense expert who created the survey, starting at about 1:34:50, himself says that these two questions regarding internet connections and stalking are false facts. By very definition, these are facts not found in the PCA. The post alleging BT admitted errors in the PCA is incorrect.

 

[Odeto BJ]

Something more fundamental: AT, in a very short time interval, complained that the Prosecution had not delivered all of the video and cell phone data that was available, essentially because the Prosecution had found that much of that data was not pertinent to the case. More to the point, the investigators in this case looked at many hours of video that did not show BK or his Hyundai and simply did not forward it. Similar for the cell phone data though there is probably more latitude with such dry records because something that seemed insignificant 14 months ago may very well be significant now, as in it may establish that BK did in fact spend time exploring large public spaces in the dark or driving around aimlessly late at night. So a cop, staring at video late in the night, decided what as pertinent, forwarded that, possibly with a roadmap, to the Prosecution, who reviews and decides if it is in fact pertinent to the case...and if so, includes that portion along with discovery. So what AT receives has already passed through at least 2 screens; and now AT is trying to speculate that something exonerating could be found in the bigger portion, that which was not forwarded.

Out of the other side of her mouth, she is claiming there are huge volumes of video, data and generally evidence already forwarded that has yet to be reviewed, it was delivered piecemeal and not catalogued and she needs a whole lot more time to organize, integrate and review it. She has received less than 20% of the video LE collected and reviewed; has not had opportunity to digest it all; but now wants 4 times as much on the basis that there might be something there; and finds it appropriate to claim that discovery had been delivered in a disorganized fashion. Um, yeah, could be. And this will make it better?
And of course, the expert witness basically claimed they could not do their job without all of the cellular data. Another couple terabytes to analyse and verify.
Considerable court time was consumed to go over the details of items the Defense believes were excluded from discovery. Much of the "missing" portion was the consequence of speculation by the Defense.

Surely JJJ recognizes the gamesmanship and deflection being employed and will find some means to mend the dam before it bursts and floods out the entire progress of the case.

 

[Cool Cats]

Why does AT need Sy to map out the route the State says BK took (the State does not know his entire path because of gaps of time/CCTV)? Ask BK where he says he was. Oh, that's right, he wasn't somewhere else. If he answers in the affirmative filling in the gaps, he only incriminate himself further. If he lies to her, it pony makes her job harder. SHE'S NOT ASKING HIM.

She needs Sy to finish what LE started with the extra 82% she claims is discoverable (we saw -- DOT screen shots as archived by windy.com, of zero evidentiary value) so that she can say that's a different Elantra and BK was magically on none of those places. She has to claim the Elantra coming from and leaving his apartment and then find a way to park him in Pullman while a mystery murderer in another Elantra pops up after that.

State doesn't have to show BK's entire route. They don't have it.

They do however have the Elantra on CCTV at certain points. Points are nice. Two points make a line. More points form a path. A path gives an impression. Ultimately it might not be a straight line, a full map but it will be compelling.

And AT's alibi defense probably won't even make it to trial, Sy might not make it to trial, she'll be left trying to confuse the jury by arguing there's CCTV that ought to show the Elantra -- "so, where is it?" -- to questioning LE whether they watched CCTV looking for other Elantras.

I'm sure she meets with BK periodically. I imagine she does all the talking. He can't help her, he's not going to help her outsmart the Prosecution, anything he might say will be incriminating. I'm sure she knows that the less he says to her the better.

JMO

AT has Sy I believe because BK keeps insisting he was at that park area and that if she could just get ahold of the right footage it would exhonorate him. I believe he is pressuring her to "please show I wasn't there, I know you can find something...etc...."

A court of law can and does all the time prosecute defendants without videos of their car every step of the way.

There are no murder trials I can think of that have more than a few views of a car, not 50 going all over the countryside. Rubbish.

I'm following a case where 4 defendants killed 8 people.
All were arrested and 1 is in prison the others in jail.

There is no DNA evidence, there is no definitive car video, just a blurry shot.
The case is strong so 2 confessed, one went to trial and was found guilty on 22 felony counts and one will go to trial in 2025.

For people unfamiliar....

1.) Prosecutors can and do prosecute successfully cases without DNA evidence
2.) Prosecutors can and do prosecute successfully cases without car video

THE STATE OF IDAHO HAS BOTH OF THESE

2 Cents

 

[Nila Aella]

Yes, agree with all this and it's exactly what I've said. The defense contends that the way the PCA was written led to the media and public going with the alleged stalking story. This story was already circulating due to KG's parents talking about their daughter believing she was being stalked. It's a valid point for the defense to question whether media coverage that characterized their client in a way that was not described in the PCA is prejudicial to him and warrants a change of venue.

But the original discussion of this arose from a post that contended the PCA accused BK of stalking and BT was forced to admit that was an error in the PCA. This is just not true. All the other discussion about what the media and public did after the release of the PCA is not relevant to that particular post.

The defense expert who created the survey, starting at about 1:34:50, himself says that these two questions regarding internet connections and stalking are false facts. By very definition, these are facts not found in the PCA. The post alleging BT admitted errors in the PCA is incorrect.

People interpret what is described in the PCA differently.
My post was to point out that more than just one media story was used to develop the survey question and where the survey questions originated from (over 200 stories were evaluated plus news coverage per E testimony). IMO it was relevant to the content of the post I reponded to.

I do not hear E talking about "false facts" at 1:34:50

BT Just to be clear. Not every fact specific question that your surveyors asked came from the PCA. Isn't that true?
E: Well to be clear they are not facts they are media items
AT objection
BT: They are representations of facts in the PCA.

But, it is interesting that BT uses the phrase "false facts" elsewhere in the hearing.

JMO

 

[maskedwoman]

Sy Ray doesn't have a "bad background," he has an excellent background and reputation. That judge who disallowed his testimony doesn't even know what an engineer is or the different ways in which software is tested and verified as accurate.

Did you notice the prosecution NEVER objected to anything Sy Ray said yesterday? That's because they KNOW he is right.

Also a little logic here...if AT thought there was a snowball's chance in hell that BK was guilty, she would not have hired Sy Ray. He's going to take all the data and find out exactly where BK really was. If Sy Ray finds out BK is guilty, he won't testify on his behalf, that's for certain.

I think it's bit far-fetched to suggest that Sy Ray would not testify for BK if he finds out he is guilty. First of all, how would he do that? Secondly, he testifies for both sides. In other words, whoever pays him. The only way to be sure he isn't testifying for guilty people is to only testify for the prosecution.

 

[arielilane]

Old news, however, I wanted to post for those who are unaware:

Update: In #Idaho4 case, on agreement from attorneys on both sides, the hearing to argue a change of venue is delayed from June 27 to Aug. 29.
Hearing was originally set for mid-May.

This undoubtedly delays scheduling a trial date further. #BryanKohbergerhttps://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/2024/053124-Order-Continue-Hearing-Defendants-Motion-CoV.pdf

x.com

x.com

 

[Megnut]

AT has Sy I believe because BK keeps insisting he was at that park area and that if she could just get ahold of the right footage it would exhonorate him. I believe he is pressuring her to "please show I wasn't there, I know you can find something...etc...."

A court of law can and does all the time prosecute defendants without videos of their car every step of the way.

There are no murder trials I can think of that have more than a few views of a car, not 50 going all over the countryside. Rubbish.

I'm following a case where 4 defendants killed 8 people.
All were arrested and 1 is in prison the others in jail.

There is no DNA evidence, there is no definitive car video, just a blurry shot.
The case is strong so 2 confessed, one went to trial and was found guilty on 22 felony counts and one will go to trial in 2025.

For people unfamiliar....

1.) Prosecutors can and do prosecute successfully cases without DNA evidence
2.) Prosecutors can and do prosecute successfully cases without car video

THE STATE OF IDAHO HAS BOTH OF THESE

2 Cents

I agree with all of this, but I don't think AT affords BK audience. Anything he says is a risk to her. IMO she KNOWS he's responsible (the only place he's innocent is at the corner of presumed and trial). If BK hammered out an alibi as part of his planning for the crime, he'd have offered it straight up. He didn't. There isn't one.

If he provided her a credible alibi, she'd seek to authenticate it. Driving around aimlessly and he just didn't know where isn't going to sail.

In any case, i suspect she only engages him off topic. Treats him like a peer. He likely responds in kind, to a degree. But mostly he probably thinks with the knife he wishes he still had. He knows how powerful he is/was. IMo he has rich dialoque. In his head.

Outsude of that, I would venture to bet they talk crime, politics, hypotheticals and NOTHING related to this crime.

JMO

 

[Justice101]

I agree with all of this, but I don't think AT affords BK audience. Anything he says is a risk to her. IMO she KNOWS he's responsible (the only place he's innocent is at the corner of presumed and trial). If BK hammered out an alibi as part of his planning for the crime, he'd have offered it straight up. He didn't. There isn't one.

If he provided her a credible alibi, she'd seek to authenticate it. Driving around aimlessly and he just didn't know where isn't going to sail.

In any case, i suspect she only engages him off topic. Treats him like a peer. He likely responds in kind, to a degree. But mostly he probably thinks with the knife he wishes he still had. He knows how powerful he is/was. IMo he has rich dialoque. In his head.

Outsude of that, I would venture to bet they talk crime, politics, hypotheticals and NOTHING related to this crime.

JMO

BK probably wearing gloves, mask, possibly cover-alls as well as wiping knife and sheath clean before he left.. NEVER thought he would ever been arrested and therefore didn't bother trying to created a credible alibi before hand.

 

[russoca]

The PCA is only meant to convince a judge that probable cause exists and to obtain an arrest warrant. It's not evidence. The lack of prosecution response to the defense saying what defense attorneys say about a document that is not evidence and only meant to obtain an arrest should not be taken as an agreement with the defense that there are things not true in the PCA. JMO

BINGO! !

Thanks Wendy44 for that reminder.

 

[Cool Cats]

So there are no documents?

I didn't though. I listened to the whole thing. What is the time stamp where the prosecutor agrees with the defense that the PCA is full of errors and what does he say exactly? I didn't find it.

I didn't hear any of that. Do you have links, time stamps and quotes?

You said there is video of the prosecutor agreeing with the defense that the PCA is full of errors. There is no video of that. It may be your opinion that BT tacitly agreed because he didn't object, but that's opinion only. BT never said or agreed with the defense on this.

And, again, you are inadvertently supporting the defense's argument for the necessity of the false facts in the survey. The PCA does not make a claim of stalking. The judge stated this in court. The survey question of stalking was a false fact. The expert testified that it was. The defense is trying to prove that potential jurors may believe the PCA alleges stalking when it in fact does not, and this is prejudicial to their client. You are proving her point.

So now the PCA is mostly not true? I think most people who spend a lot of time on websleuths know defense attorneys spend a lot of time saying the police are wrong, the prosecution is wrong, they have evidence to prove their client's innocence, etc. That's what defense attorneys do. The PCA is only meant to convince a judge that probable cause exists and to obtain an arrest warrant. It's not evidence. The lack of prosecution response to the defense saying what defense attorneys say about a document that is not evidence and only meant to obtain an arrest should not be taken as an agreement with the defense that there are things not true in the PCA. JMO

I agree. It is absolute nonsense to say the PCA is full of errors, if that were the case BK would legally have to have his charges dropped.

You cannot arrest someone on an arrest warrant that is not true and Anne Taylor wouldn't allow it.

The arrest warrant does not even matter now because only the actual evidence matters. Even the defense understands these basic concepts.

2 Cents

 

[schooling]

BK probably wearing gloves, mask, possibly cover-alls as well as wiping knife and sheath clean before he left.. NEVER thought he would ever been arrested and therefore didn't bother trying to created a credible alibi before hand.

There's also a good chance, IMO, that he had gone on other rides like that before. In that, he was fully prepared to take advantage of whatever he perceived as an opportunity in that moment.

I can see alibi's becoming less and less important every time he made such a trip and it results in nothing.

The crime has always come off to me as a spontaneous execution of a plan. Which in my opinion explains the dichotomy of the seemingly haphazard drive to the house in full view of cameras but the stealth backroad exit and disposal of evidence.

MOO

 

[Cool Cats]

There's also a good chance, IMO, that he had gone on other rides like that before. In that, he was fully prepared to take advantage of whatever he perceived as an opportunity in that moment.

I can see alibi's becoming less and less important every time he made such a trip and it results in nothing.

The crime has always come off to me as a spontaneous execution of a plan.

MOO

Never heard that theory before....interesting

 

[Megnut]

There's also a good chance, IMO, that he had gone on other rides like that before. In that, he was fully prepared to take advantage of whatever he perceived as an opportunity in that moment.

I can see alibi's becoming less and less important every time he made such a trip and it results in nothing.

The crime has always come off to me as a spontaneous execution of a plan. Which in my opinion explains the dichotomy of the seemingly haphazard drive to the house in full view of cameras but the stealth backroad exit and disposal of evidence.

MOO

I believe it's cellular evidence linking him to twelve prior trips into the neighborhood of 1122 (and one more the morning of). We can ask -- did he make that trip without his phone as well? Not just that one night but other nights. He may have become quite familiar with the slider, the step, the layout, the GOODVIBES sign....

I incinerator he liked to think of himself as near invisible, like a Special Ops Marine on mission. With a stealth vehicle that was about as generic as they come. Unremarkable is its own kind of camouflage.

JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

I believe it's cellular evidence linking him to twelve prior trips into the neighborhood of 1122 (and one more the morning of). We can ask -- did he make that trip without his phone as well? Not just that one night but other nights. He may have become quite familiar with the slider, the step, the layout, the GOODVIBES sign....

I incinerator he liked to think of himself as near invisible, like a Special Ops Marine on mission. With a stealth vehicle that was about as generic as they come. Unremarkable is its own of of camouflage.

JMO

His cell phone pinged 12 times on the same cell tower that the residents of 1122 King Rd used. He had to have his phone with him unless someone else was running around Mosciw using his phone.

2 Cents

 

[Megnut]

His cell phone pinged 12 times on the same cell tower that the residents of 1122 King Rd used. He had to have his phone with him unless someone else was running around Mosciw using his phone.

2 Cents

Agreed. I'm suggesting he may have made additional trips where he left his phone behind.

Jmo

 

[snooptroop88]

I agree. It is absolute nonsense to say the PCA is full of errors, if that were the case BK would legally have to have his charges dropped.

You cannot arrest someone on an arrest warrant that is not true and Anne Taylor wouldn't allow it.

The arrest warrant does not even matter now because only the actual evidence matters. Even the defense understands these basic concepts.

2 Cents

It's nonsense all right, but it's also a necessity for BK not to be guilty as sin months to years before his trial even happens. So the PCA's going to be "full of errors" even if to any logical person the PCA does not appear to be "full of errors" empirically. We're working with a defense trying to construct an alibi from information provided by the prosecution. When that's going to become "okay," it makes total sense to me that now, the PCA is "full of errors."

You know, if you were somewhere else, BK, you would know where that "Somewhere Else" was. So I don't really know why this is happening. The more "elbow grease" that goes into any alibi, the less reliable the alibi actually IS, jmo.

I really do wonder if BK didn't have other victims prior, but in outdoor CSs. An outdoor CS wouldn't pose the same risks and challenges that an indoor CS would.

 

[Cool Cats]

It's nonsense all right, but it's also a necessity for BK not to be guilty as sin months to years before his trial even happens. So the PCA's going to be "full of errors" even if to any logical person the PCA does not appear to be "full of errors" empirically. We're working with a defense trying to construct an alibi from information provided by the prosecution. When that's going to become "okay," it makes total sense to me that now, the PCA is "full of errors."

You know, if you were somewhere else, BK, you would know where that "Somewhere Else" was. So I don't really know why this is happening. The more "elbow grease" that goes into any alibi, the less reliable the alibi actually IS, jmo.

I really do wonder if BK didn't have other victims prior, but in outdoor CSs. An outdoor CS wouldn't pose the same risks and challenges that an indoor CS would.

Right. The defense says he is innocent so of course he was arrested under a questionable investigation. Naturally the FBI agent with 30 years experience is mistaken in his information gathering and
doesn't know as much as Sy. Sy makes zero mistakes, any mistakes are from something faulty, certainty no mistakes come from his genius mind.

And yes, it has been discussed if BK killed before.

Quite frankly I find it odd that no history of violence has come up, however, he was a bully after he lost weight in HS.

What he did strikes me as a crime of escalation....That he would have done criminal acts building up to that night.

I suspect "creeping" into houses when people were asleep or at least a peeping tom.
I think his parents have a key into this but will never talk.

Anything he says on the phone, on video chat, through email or letters, can be used against him. Be great if he incriminated himself.

2 Cents

 

[jepop]

Gannon Stauch investigation success greatly aided by the next door home owner security cam as is it showed where Gannon was not. He did not leave the house on his own to go to a neighbors.

Similarly footage from all access routes to Pullman can show a whether or not a white Elantra left the city by that route.

So far the white Elantra BK was in was in east Pullman when the phone went out of communication.
The next time it appears is on a home security cam 700 Indian Hills Rd. block in southeast Moscow.

Apparently there is some video from Floyds Cannabis, which is set back from the highway a bit that AT plans to challenge. Fine.
Maybe he went south or north to dig a hole for evidence on the way to Moscow.
There are similar 15 minute-ish gaps between leaving Pullman and arriving in Moscow and leaving
Moscow and driving by the Blaine cell tower area.

I mapped a speculative alternate route at one point last year between east Pullman (where BK's phone stops connecting until phone pings 20 mins south of crime scene) and the 700 Block on Indian Hills. Will try to dig up the post as I didn't save my map.

 

[jepop]

It's nonsense all right, but it's also a necessity for BK not to be guilty as sin months to years before his trial even happens. So the PCA's going to be "full of errors" even if to any logical person the PCA does not appear to be "full of errors" empirically.

RSBMFF
Agree, but the insinuation of errors will be an opinion and/or speculation and/or interpretation Imo. Not a matter of fact as, for example, is communicated Imoo by a sentence which begins 'given all the wrong things in the documents in this case...'. Moo

 

[Justice101]

Ours is not a perfect world.

Any "errors" in the PCA are a moot point.. .he was legally arrested. End of story. Now he has been indicted by a grand jury and is facing a trial now.

Also, I do not believe it is the prosecution's job to provide an alibi for the defendant if the prosecution did not find it themselves.