4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #95

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

maskedwoman said:
Excellent memory! :) It sounds like the alibi she'll be offering for him will try to establish a lack of something, rather than proving he was somewhere else or with someone else. It also reads as if she's reserving the right to say LE either failed to preserve something or withheld it. Just from my experience as a juror, I would imagine jurors won't appreciate accusations like that if they can't be documented in some way.
Click to expand...
Lack of proof he was in Moscow?
The Prosecution has to prove he was there.

Proof he was somewhere else:
During the hearing I heard differently when Sy was testifying about the Cast report and what he would do with it. The P took notice of that specific testimony IMO.

Preserve/withheld. If they do not provide the tower list used, that is withholding evidence. If they don't have one? Was a CAST report done without one (unlikely) or did they not preserve one? I suspect it has been handed over by now. It shouldn't have taken all that time and effort for the D to get it.
JMO

I'll add that in the Supplemental alibi response: Sy Ray was PARTIAL corroboration
So there is more.
JMO

PARTIAL CORROBORATION

Mr. Kohberger intends to offer testimony of Sy Ray, CSLI expert, (cell tower, cell phone and other radio frequency, curricula vitae is attached) to show that Bryan Kohberger’s mobile device was south of Pullman, Washington and west of Moscow, Idaho on November 13, 2022; that Bryan Kohberger’s mobile device did not travel east on the Moscow-Pullman Highway in the early morning hours of November 13th, and thus could not be the vehicle captured on video along the Moscow-Pullman highway near Floyd’s Cannabis shop.

Additional information as to Mr. Kohberger’s whereabouts as the early morning hours progressed, including additional analysis by Mr. Ray will be provided once the State provides discovery requested and now subject to an upcoming Motion to Compel . If not disclosed, Mr. Ray’s testimony will also reveal that critical exculpatory evidence, further corroborating Mr. Kohberger’s alibi, was either not preserved or has been withheld
 
Here's my projection on BK's "alibi"- Stretch the truth and supposition as far as you can.... take the maximum radius of cell phone tower data and use that as your defense.

Defense: "BK's cell phone pinged at 4:48 AM from a cell phone tower that serves Genesee ID (30 miles south of Blaine) which is way too far for anyone to drive there fast enough from Moscow therefore I have an alibi. BK was in fact in Genesee at that time when he noticed that his cell phone was off and then turned it on. How could anyone drive from the King Street address at 4:15 and be in Genesee 28 minutes later??. They'd have to drive 100 mph! BK is innocent."

Prosecution will absolutely destroy their defense of that.

IMO... Juries are not dumb. The cell phone turned off then back on will be considered a sign of deception. Timeline to me will be part of the secondary evidence. DNA being #1, eyewitness being #2, car and cell phone #3 IMHO
 
I'm thinking more along the lines that BK intentionally left his phone somewhere before the murders. Maybe he went to a lookout point or some other remote place that would back up his "star-gazing" alibi and tucked his phone behind a log or something so it would continue to ping in that location while he went on a killing spree. I don't think he turned it off. After the killings, he returned and retrieved his phone, planning all along to use it as his alibi that he wasn't anywhere near the murder house.

All wild speculation and MOO.
 
GRT said:
I'm thinking more along the lines that BK intentionally left his phone somewhere before the murders. Maybe he went to a lookout point or some other remote place that would back up his "star-gazing" alibi and tucked his phone behind a log or something so it would continue to ping in that location while he went on a killing spree. I don't think he turned it off. After the killings, he returned and retrieved his phone, planning all along to use it as his alibi that he wasn't anywhere near the murder house.

All wild speculation and MOO.
Click to expand...

Not wild speculation...that makes more sense than a PHD Criminology student teacher taking his phone to his murder scene.

Nila Aella said:
AT has an excellent ability to present information to the Court in a clear and concise manner.

Sy Ray stated everything he has seen so far is in favor of the D. He also delivered a clear picture to the Court of what was missing and why it mattered.

More than just a "piece of evidence" missing from discovery.
82% of the data from 2-6 AM not plotted.
No drive testing from the crime scene.
No drive testing on the entire stretch of 270.

LE used a draft CAST report to create a map.
5/30/2024 hearing - it was still a draft report. A report still being checked for accuracy per the P.

I noticed a 3rd and 4th supplemental response by the P after the last hearing.


Hopefully LE "found" the missing data, completed their report, and provided it to the D.

JJJ has access to all the evidence. He makes his decisions knowing a lot more than what is publicly available.

JMO
Click to expand...

One of the most ridiculous defenses I have ever heard with a phone...

Mr. Kohberger intends to offer testimony of Sy Ray to show that Bryan Kohberger’s mobile device was south of Pullman, Washington and west of Moscow, Idaho on November 13, 2022; that Bryan Kohberger’s mobile device did not travel east on the Moscow-Pullman Highway in the early morning hours of November 13th, and thus could not be the vehicle captured on video along the Moscow-Pullman highway near Floyd’s Cannabis shop.

Bryan's phone is not Bryan...Bryan is not disguised as a phone....murderers leave their phones all over the place to create alibis....I have seen cases where this happens.

So because Bryan's phone was not in this white car this cannot be Bryan's white car. Bryan cannot leave his phone west of Moscow and drive without it. Bryan's phone is duct taped to his body and he can't take it off. Or maybe his phone was super glued to his car seat so he could not drive his car without his phone being in the car with him.

Prosecution will rip Sy apart piece by piece....utter word salad that will probably offend the jurors because they are smart unbiased people looking for facts not absurd notions.

2 Cents
 
Last edited:
Nila Aella said:
The alibi documents state this:

Evidence corroborating Mr. Kohberger being at a location other than the King Road address will be disclosed pursuant to discovery and evidentiary rules as well as statutory requirements. It is anticipated this evidence may be offered by way of cross-examination of witnesses produced by the State as well as calling expert witnesses.


The phone data includes numerous photographs taken on several different late evenings and early mornings, including in November, depicting the night sky. Mr. Kohberger was out driving in the early morning hours of November 13, 2022; as he often did to hike and run and/or see the moon and stars. He drove throughout the area south of Pullman, Washington, west of Moscow, Idaho including Wawawai Park.

Mr. Kohberger intends to offer testimony of Sy Ray, CSLI expert, (cell tower, cell phone and other radio frequency, curricula vitae is attached) to show that Bryan Kohberger’s mobile device was south of Pullman, Washington and west of Moscow, Idaho on November 13, 2022; that Bryan Kohberger’s mobile device did not travel east on the Moscow-Pullman Highway in the early morning hours of November 13th, and thus could not be the vehicle captured on video along the Moscow-Pullman highway near Floyd’s Cannabis shop.

Additional information as to Mr. Kohberger’s whereabouts as the early morning hours progressed, including additional analysis by Mr. Ray will be provided once the State provides discovery requested and now subject to an upcoming Motion to Compel . If not disclosed, Mr. Ray’s testimony will also reveal that critical exculpatory evidence, further corroborating Mr. Kohberger’s alibi, was either not preserved or has been withheld.


In addition to the court documents, Sy Rays testimony about how he would go about looking at the CAST report and what he would compare it to for corroboration was interesting.

Click to expand...
Yes, they do say that, but the alibi response filed by the defense doesn't meet the specificity required by Idaho code for an alibi defense.


The code says that the specific place or places the defendant claims to have been and names and addresses of witnesses the defendant intends to rely on to establish an alibi. The state notes that the defendant has been given more time than legally entitled to provide an alibi and is asking the judge to deny any further opportunity to add any purported claim of an alibi and preclude testimony by anyone other than the defendant regarding the absence or presence at the scene.

The previous poster said:

Sy Ray said the CAST data he has seen, to date, is exculpatory to BK. That means what he's looked at tells him BK was never at the murder scene the night of the atrocities. That's what exculpatory means. 2cents

If this is true, that he has seen actual data that is exculpatory and tells him BK was never at the scene of the murder, why would the defense not use that in the alibi response? Why would they gamble on the judge not allowing further alibi testimony? This is exactly the type of data that would be used in an alibi response to meet the requirements of the statute. It's a very strange gamble to not use it if it exists.
IMO
 
Curiousobserver said:
Bryan's defense really hinges on the DNA evidence-

If his DNA is introduced at trial and the jury accepts it then all of the other circumstantial evidence will be counted against him by the jury.

If the DNA is excluded, or his defense can cast significant doubt on it's analysis or origin, then there isn't enough circumstantial evidence to convict. This is a person who has no criminal history and no connection to the victims who happens to own a white car, like hundreds of other people in that area.

The only reasons that the white car is important are that he owned one and his DNA was found at the scene. That it wasn't at his house at the time the crime was committed, and a similar one was captured on a camera nearby at about the right time is only connected with his DNA.

White is the most common car color and Elantras are a common model. Other than timing, there is nothing linking the car to the crime, or him to the car captured on camera.
Click to expand...

Perfect.

Jurors believe this is Bryan's DNA up to BARD standards and then the circumstantial evidence all falls into place and 100% supports the DNA.

Jurors do not see the DNA or do not believe the DNA is Bryan's DNA and then it casts doubt on all the circumstantial evidence, all of it.

You are a "genious"... LOL

This case hinges on the DNA and not highly winnable without it. Reasonable doubt without it.

2 Cents
 
wendy44 said:
Yes, they do say that, but the alibi response filed by the defense doesn't meet the specificity required by Idaho code for an alibi defense.


The code says that the specific place or places the defendant claims to have been and names and addresses of witnesses the defendant intends to rely on to establish an alibi. The state notes that the defendant has been given more time than legally entitled to provide an alibi and is asking the judge to deny any further opportunity to add any purported claim of an alibi and preclude testimony by anyone other than the defendant regarding the absence or presence at the scene.

The previous poster said:

Sy Ray said the CAST data he has seen, to date, is exculpatory to BK. That means what he's looked at tells him BK was never at the murder scene the night of the atrocities. That's what exculpatory means. 2cents

If this is true, that he has seen actual data that is exculpatory and tells him BK was never at the scene of the murder, why would the defense not use that in the alibi response? Why would they gamble on the judge not allowing further alibi testimony? This is exactly the type of data that would be used in an alibi response to meet the requirements of the statute. It's a very strange gamble to not use it if it exists.
IMO
Click to expand...

Agree, but the Idaho code does give a judge some discretion in deciding about an alibi defense, so there's that.
 
wendy44 said:
Yes, they do say that, but the alibi response filed by the defense doesn't meet the specificity required by Idaho code for an alibi defense.


The code says that the specific place or places the defendant claims to have been and names and addresses of witnesses the defendant intends to rely on to establish an alibi. The state notes that the defendant has been given more time than legally entitled to provide an alibi and is asking the judge to deny any further opportunity to add any purported claim of an alibi and preclude testimony by anyone other than the defendant regarding the absence or presence at the scene.

The previous poster said:

Sy Ray said the CAST data he has seen, to date, is exculpatory to BK. That means what he's looked at tells him BK was never at the murder scene the night of the atrocities. That's what exculpatory means. 2cents

If this is true, that he has seen actual data that is exculpatory and tells him BK was never at the scene of the murder, why would the defense not use that in the alibi response? Why would they gamble on the judge not allowing further alibi testimony? This is exactly the type of data that would be used in an alibi response to meet the requirements of the statute. It's a very strange gamble to not use it if it exists.
IMO
Click to expand...

QUOTE
Sy Ray said the CAST data he has seen, to date, is exculpatory to BK. That means what he's looked at tells him BK was never at the murder scene the night of the atrocities. That's what exculpatory means. 2cents

OK great Sy, great defense, good work. File your late alibi Motion to show the proof that this CAST is evidence showing BK was not on King Rd at 4 to 5 am.

Wow, he wasn't there, must be some other guy did it.

Wait, what?

No new amended alibi Motion? BUT....court and trials do not work this way....you have to present the proof, the evidence, with your assertions....with your claims of "my client is unequivocally not guilty."

Tick Tock

2 Cents
 
As far as I know/remember/understand, the DNA from the knife sheath has never been in question. (Except for the fairly predictable defense attacks on any and all evidence because their client has no alibi or other exculpatory evidence.)

As far as I know/remember/understand, the use of that DNA in the investigative genealogy was not in question. (Please see exception above.)

However, the investigative genealogy process is what has been in question, as far as I know/remember/understand. (Again, please see exception above.)
I keep reading concern that the DNA evidence is at risk of being thrown out.

It truly stretches belief and common sense that LE would have, in any way, NOT followed evidence gathering and testing protocols to the T in a quadruple homicide case.

LE followed the evidence and it led them to BK.

IMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 182 more.
Total: 1,809 (members: 183, guests: 1,626)

Online statistics

Members online
183
Guests online
1,626
Total visitors
1,809
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,373
Messages
18,123,777
Members
231,033
Latest member
BentDove
Back
Top