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
 
The defense is saying they're gonna hang back and they'll draw an alibi at trial, on cross examination.

That's NOT how it works, but of course, AT does know that.

She doesn't have anything better or she'd be doing it.

JMO
 
Nila Aella said:
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
Click to expand...
SR soeakkng of BKs phone, not BK himself.
 
Nila Aella said:
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.
Click to expand...
RSBMFF
Well IMO his mobile phone didn’t travel that way- east on the Moscow-Pullman highway in the early morning hours of 11/13, because IMO BK availed himself of a/k/a hid his phone in the area of his “alibi” beforehand as in, before traveling to the 1122 King Road address to commit murder.

IOW, just because BK’s phone didn’t travel there, doesn’t mean he himself didn’t. I mean even moron Barry Morphew knew to not bring his phone with him to bury his wife, and I really have a hard time believing that the PHD criminology student BK would keep/take his phone with him to commit murder. Nah, IMO he planned ahead and ditched/hid his phone.

BK’s DT reminds me of Morphew’s DT a/k/a IE (Iris Eytan), and though I don’t find AT as over-the-top nauseating as IE, IMO they employ similar tactics/strategies trying to defend their IMO indefensible client/s.

IMHOO

ETA-punctuation
 
Last edited:
fcavanaugh said:
RSBMFF
Well IMO his mobile phone didn’t travel that way- east on the Moscow-Pullman highway in the early morning hours of 11/13, because IMO BK availed himself of a/k/a hid his phone in the area of his “alibi” beforehand as in, before traveling to the 1122 King Road address to commit murder.

IOW, just because BK’s phone didn’t travel there, doesn’t mean he himself didn’t. I mean even moron Barry Morphew knew to not bring his phone with him to bury his wife, and I really have a hard time believing that the PHD criminology student BK would keep/take his phone with him to commit murder. Nah, IMO he planned ahead and ditched/hid his phone.

BK’s DT reminds me of Morphew’s DT a/k/a IE (Iris Eytan), and though I don’t find AT as over-the-top nauseating as IE, IMO they employ similar tactics/strategies trying to defend their IMO indefensible client/s.

IMHOO

ETA-punctuation
Click to expand...
Yes, there are the time gaps on both sides of going to Moscow and leaving Moscow.
Sy can shed some light where BK might have stashed his phone.
The area Sy is saying BKs phone was, south and west of Moscow, is consistent with a location that BK could have accessed during the missing minutes on the way to Moscow and the parallel missing minutes on the way out.
 
Ct's Discretion re Alibi Testimony?
Sundog said:
Agree, but the Idaho code does give a judge some discretion in deciding about an alibi defense, so there's that.
Click to expand...
@Sundog :) Thx for your post w a very good point.

Specifically per ID statute,* if Def't or Prosecutor fails to meet disclosure obligations by alibi deadlines imposed in sub sec.s (1), (2), or (3), judge MAY -
(4) EXCLUDE testimony of undisclosed witness, as to alibi.
(5) Upon good cause, grant EXCEPTIONS to sub sec. (1)- (4).

================================
From ID. Criminal Procedure.
"19-519. Notice of defense of alibi.
....
"(4) Upon the failure of either party to comply with the requirements of this section, the court may exclude the testimony of any undisclosed witness offered by such party as to the defendant’s absence from or presence at, the scene of the alleged offense. This section shall not limit the right of the defendant to testify in his own behalf.
"(5) For good cause shown the court may grant an exception to any of the requirements of subsections (1) through (4) of this section."

Section 19-519 – Idaho State Legislature

legislature.idaho.gov legislature.idaho.gov
 
Cool Cats said:
Not wild speculation...that makes more sense than a PHD Criminology student teacher taking his phone to his murder scene.



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
Click to expand...
Boxer said:
SR soeakkng of BKs phone, not BK himself.
Click to expand...
fcavanaugh said:
RSBMFF
Well IMO his mobile phone didn’t travel that way- east on the Moscow-Pullman highway in the early morning hours of 11/13, because IMO BK availed himself of a/k/a hid his phone in the area of his “alibi” beforehand as in, before traveling to the 1122 King Road address to commit murder.

IOW, just because BK’s phone didn’t travel there, doesn’t mean he himself didn’t. I mean even moron Barry Morphew knew to not bring his phone with him to bury his wife, and I really have a hard time believing that the PHD criminology student BK would keep/take his phone with him to commit murder. Nah, IMO he planned ahead and ditched/hid his phone.

BK’s DT reminds me of Morphew’s DT a/k/a IE (Iris Eytan), and though I don’t find AT as over-the-top nauseating as IE, IMO they employ similar tactics/strategies trying to defend their IMO indefensible client/s.

IMHOO

ETA-punctuation
Click to expand...
The prosecution has tied BKs movements with his phone and his car. Time Stamps of mapping and movements of his car with video in Pullman and at least one capture on 270. Then South of Moscow and back to Pullman (more captures) BK/Car/Phone, all together. They even made it a point to state BK (alone) in his Car with his phone at the grocery store, during his traffic stop in Moscow, and in PA.
JMO
Boxer said:
Yes, there are the time gaps on both sides of going to Moscow and leaving Moscow.
Sy can shed some light where BK might have stashed his phone.
The area Sy is saying BKs phone was, south and west of Moscow, is consistent with a location that BK could have accessed during the missing minutes on the way to Moscow and the parallel missing minutes on the way out.
Click to expand...
Great point about the gaps!
The P did say the FBI was reevaluating the CAST in light of the new alibi information.
So, 7 minutes outside that would take him over to Indian Hills Drive 3:26 (not SW though). Going back after the crime then down to Blaine. Somewhere with no camera captures.
The P also has a capture on 270. Unknown time.
Definitely something to consider. Thx.
JMO
 
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...
The Judge has allowed it since April 2024.

Back in late 2023 AT mentioned BK was willing to provide the Judge with more information/details in an exparte hearing. Not sure if that ever occurred?

The last alibi documents included information about SR. SR has since testified in court to what he has seen so far in an attempt to get all the information from the P so he can complete his work.

A draft CAST report/ CAST mapping with missing information is not sufficient for a death penalty case - for either side.

JMO
 
Boxer said:
Yes, there are the time gaps on both sides of going to Moscow and leaving Moscow.
Sy can shed some light where BK might have stashed his phone.
The area Sy is saying BKs phone was, south and west of Moscow, is consistent with a location that BK could have accessed during the missing minutes on the way to Moscow and the parallel missing minutes on the way out.
Click to expand...

Great point!

But....hmmmmm... why would she WANT Sy to fish in those waters? AT isn't going to incriminate her own client with data from her expert so perhaps she has never intended for him to ANALYZE it. Mayve she put him before the judge now to bolster her position that the State is withholding discovery, in the hopes of getting a discovery violation levied against the State to get the data thrown out.

It would be a helluva coup for the State if the Defense's golden expert identified the location where BK stashed his phone and/or stopped to discard evidence of the crime (such as the murder weapon). Which is why I have to wonder if AT isn't angling a different strategy here.

JMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 85 more.
Total: 1,900 (members: 86, guests: 1,814)

Online statistics

Members online
86
Guests online
1,814
Total visitors
1,900
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,428
Messages
18,124,469
Members
231,049
Latest member
rythmico
Back
Top