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

[ilovewings]

I personally am looking at this as a juror of the general public and I sincerely believe this is what will happen. This is my opinion only.

The way it works in the USA courts:

1.) A prosecution expert testifies
2.) A defense expert testifiies.
3.) THE JURY decides who to believe, who is more credible, what explanation is the most reasonable.
4.) Sy will testify (if judge allows him) about the cell tower evidence.
5.) The FBI CAST expert with 30 years experience will testify about the cell tower evidence - there is information about this in the PCA.

6.) The jury will decide which expert's explanation is the most reasonable.

Sy's and the prosecution's testimony and Motions on this subject are so confusing, convoluted and full of this:

A.) Possibilities
B.) Maybes
C.) Could be's
D.) If we had more information

.......Because of this......the jury will find that the CAST information from the FBI and other prosecution data experts is much more reasonable than Sy's evidence, and they will go with this.

Look, the number one most important piece of evidence for juries - I have posted links several times about this - is DNA evidence. DNA evidence alone with no alibi convicts defendants from 20 to 30 years ago.

BK's skin cell DNA evidence shows it is reasonable it is his DNA on the sheath under a victim in her bed. I believe the jury will see BK's DNA as being beyond reasonable doubt evidence that helps prove him guilty.

Unknown - at this time - evidence could come up via cell tower/phone evidence, but from what I know right now this post is my .....

2 Cents

You certainly possess an excellent analyitical mind--I enjoy reading your posts-- so well
Thought out.

 

[Betty P]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1826004721234227222

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article291216635.html

I suppose this is like an appeal for the defense motion? JMO, I don't think it will make any difference if the defense gets a change of venue. The evidence we've seen so far seems convincing enough for any jury to convict. DNA, video, GPS, phone records/CAST, eyewitness testimony, not to mention other circumstantial evidence from his activities, attempts to hide his DNA, etc.

 

[Balthazar]

Population of Boise (Ada County) is 235,216.
Population of Moscow is 26,677.
Chances of seating an unbiased jury are much better in Boise than Moscow AND the Ada County courthouse has just been remodeled, has plenty of parking, larger courtrooms, and there are many, many more hotels and restaurants in Boise than in Moscow.

 

[Boxer]

Population of Boise (Ada County) is 235,216.
Population of Moscow is 26,677.
Chances of seating an unbiased jury are much better in Boise than Moscow AND the Ada County courthouse has just been remodeled, has plenty of parking, larger courtrooms, and there are many, many more hotels and restaurants in Boise than in Moscow.

There are plenty of people in Moscow to seat an unbiased jury.

 

[SouthEnd]

I personally am looking at this as a juror of the general public and I sincerely believe this is what will happen. This is my opinion only.

The way it works in the USA courts:

1.) A prosecution expert testifies
2.) A defense expert testifiies.
3.) THE JURY decides who to believe, who is more credible, what explanation is the most reasonable.
4.) Sy will testify (if judge allows him) about the cell tower evidence.
5.) The FBI CAST expert with 30 years experience will testify about the cell tower evidence - there is information about this in the PCA.

6.) The jury will decide which expert's explanation is the most reasonable.

Sy's and the prosecution's testimony and Motions on this subject are so confusing, convoluted and full of this:

A.) Possibilities
B.) Maybes
C.) Could be's
D.) If we had more information

.......Because of this......the jury will find that the CAST information from the FBI and other prosecution data experts is much more reasonable than Sy's evidence, and they will go with this.

Look, the number one most important piece of evidence for juries - I have posted links several times about this - is DNA evidence. DNA evidence alone with no alibi convicts defendants from 20 to 30 years ago.

BK's skin cell DNA evidence shows it is reasonable it is his DNA on the sheath under a victim in her bed. I believe the jury will see BK's DNA as being beyond reasonable doubt evidence that helps prove him guilty.

Unknown - at this time - evidence could come up via cell tower/phone evidence, but from what I know right now this post is my .....

2 Cents

This is an excellent break down!

My personal opinion is that the best that Sy could do is present a map of locations in which BK *could* have been instead. As in, locations that we could not prove he was not in - that's the kind of language I'm expecting to see. Locations, most likely, close to Moscow or following the trajectory of the drive.

IMO, any juror would be able to see past the "plausibility theory". Given the wealth of evidence, imo.

 

[SouthEnd]

Population of Boise (Ada County) is 235,216.
Population of Moscow is 26,677.
Chances of seating an unbiased jury are much better in Boise than Moscow AND the Ada County courthouse has just been remodeled, has plenty of parking, larger courtrooms, and there are many, many more hotels and restaurants in Boise than in Moscow.

Since I don't live in the USA, this makes sense to me.

I'm not entirely certain why the prosecution prefers the venue does not move in the cases that get so much publicity? I 100% understand that it makes if harder for the families of the victims to attend. Personally, I believe that since the cases are so expensive anyways, they might as well provide boarding for the families.

Because if the venue does not move, my concern is the following:
The DT would try to find jurors that have not heard of the case, or if they heard of it, they have no opinion on BK. I know it is usually "would you still be able to be impartial" but hear me out, I believe that occasionally the court would allow the DT to add extra questions to avoid any perception of impartiality.


Now, statistically. From the people of Moscow, the ones who have heard of the case but don't have an opinion on BK guilt are not the representation of the average citizen; I believe they would be the people who are more naturally inclined to vote not guilty. I believe this is a phenomenon that has taken place in other cases that had an enormous amount of publicity, like Casey Anthony.

So IMO if the venue stays in Moscow, via jury selection, they might end up with jurors that are more inclined to vote not guilty. I hope this makes sense?

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Since I don't live in the USA, this makes sense to me.

I'm not entirely certain why the prosecution prefers the venue does not move in the cases that get so much publicity? I 100% understand that it makes if harder for the families of the victims to attend. Personally, I believe that since the cases are so expensive anyways, they might as well provide boarding for the families.

Because if the venue does not move, my concern is the following:
The DT would try to find jurors that have not heard of the case, or if they heard of it, they have no opinion on BK. I know it is usually "would you still be able to be impartial" but hear me out, I believe that occasionally the court would allow the DT to add extra questions to avoid any perception of impartiality.


Now, statistically. From the people of Moscow, the ones who have heard of the case but don't have an opinion on BK guilt are not the representation of the average citizen; I believe they would be the people who are more naturally inclined to vote not guilty. I believe this is a phenomenon that has taken place in other cases that had an enormous amount of publicity, like Casey Anthony.

So IMO if the venue stays in Moscow, via jury selection, they might end up with jurors that are more inclined to vote not guilty. I hope this makes sense?

Speaking strictly from a human behavior standpoint, there is no possible way I see for there to be 12 unbiased jury members in the small town of Moscow, ID. Everyone thinks they're unbiased, but we ALL have biases and when you live in the town this happened in, experience not only the aftermath of the crime in terms of fear but also in media invasion, victim support, rumors and gossip, you're going to be biased. You can say you'll block out everything you've heard ever except what happens in court, but the human body doesn't function that way. If one could just shut off all emotions and thoughts any old time they wanted, then PTSD would not be a thing.

You may get a few objective people in Moscow, either people who are new to town or people who genuinely weren't touched by the event, but no way you seat a jury of 12. No way.

MOO.

 

[SouthEnd]

Speaking strictly from a human behavior standpoint, there is no possible way I see for there to be 12 unbiased jury members in the small town of Moscow, ID. Everyone thinks they're unbiased, but we ALL have biases and when you live in the town this happened in, experience not only the aftermath of the crime in terms of fear but also in media invasion, victim support, rumors and gossip, you're going to be biased. You can say you'll block out everything you've heard ever except what happens in court, but the human body doesn't function that way. If one could just shut off all emotions and thoughts any old time they wanted, then PTSD would not be a thing.

You may get a few objective people in Moscow, either people who are new to town or people who genuinely weren't touched by the event, but no way you seat a jury of 12. No way.

MOO.

Ooof you are making a good point. And it would be biased one way or another. The real question would be, are you capable of changing your mind if faced with evidence? And behaviourally, most people are pretty bad at changing their mind when it comes to deeply emotional matters.


I honestly don't know.

 

[GRT]

Speaking strictly from a human behavior standpoint, there is no possible way I see for there to be 12 unbiased jury members in the small town of Moscow, ID. Everyone thinks they're unbiased, but we ALL have biases and when you live in the town this happened in, experience not only the aftermath of the crime in terms of fear but also in media invasion, victim support, rumors and gossip, you're going to be biased. You can say you'll block out everything you've heard ever except what happens in court, but the human body doesn't function that way. If one could just shut off all emotions and thoughts any old time they wanted, then PTSD would not be a thing.

You may get a few objective people in Moscow, either people who are new to town or people who genuinely weren't touched by the event, but no way you seat a jury of 12. No way.

MOO.

This could be true.

These killings were a massive event for that small community. Moscow became ground zero in one of the most sensational murders of the century. There's no way to distance oneself from that sort of impact. I agree there are probably a few who were unaffected or who moved in later, but seating 12 is highly unlikely.

JMOO

 

[CKS]

I suppose this is like an appeal for the defense motion? JMO, I don't think it will make any difference if the defense gets a change of venue. The evidence we've seen so far seems convincing enough for any jury to convict. DNA, video, GPS, phone records/CAST, eyewitness testimony, not to mention other circumstantial evidence from his activities, attempts to hide his DNA, etc.

IMOO/MOO

I agree that if the defense has the evidence he's guilty it won't matter if it's moved. No matter what your opinion on the defendant, he deserves a fair trial. That’s the law. He won’t get one in Latah county. Fair trials matter because someone’s life is on the line and it has to be done once. So far I don't believe beyond a reasonable doubt that he's done this crime. This is vital for everyone involved in this case.

Also, I disagree about enough evidence to convict him. Not even sure that the DNA will actually be used in the trial the way it was collected/tested. There is not any video, there's no GPS evidence that links him to the scene, there is not eyewitness testimony other than bushy eyebrows. It's not like DM picked him out of a line up.

They don’t have a cast report yet. The prosecution admits to not even having it. What they showed at the grand jury has now been confirmed to be a screen shot of something quickly done up to obtain another search warrant that the cop didn’t even save his work on. It was not the cast report. They practically refuse to give the cast report until a full alibi because they wanna double check their work they claim.

For the record, I’m not saying they don’t have something solid on BK but what I am saying is they’re withholding stuff or simply guessing on the PCA with nothing solid to back it up. They’re missing videos and want the defense to find it when it’s the prosecutions duty to be the ones to do that. They’re coming up on their deadline and still have 16 supplemental requests to respond to. The defense isn’t stalling, it’s very clear to me that it’s the prosecution. The question we all have to ask is why?


This is all my opinion from what I have gathered. Also, I do believe BK had something to do with the crime most likely due to the sheath with his DNA. That is obviously a huge red flag but then again we don't even know for a fact that was the actual weapon used.

 

[Betty P]

Population of Boise (Ada County) is 235,216.
Population of Moscow is 26,677.
Chances of seating an unbiased jury are much better in Boise than Moscow AND the Ada County courthouse has just been remodeled, has plenty of parking, larger courtrooms, and there are many, many more hotels and restaurants in Boise than in Moscow.

One problem, though, is the cost to taxpayers. It's expensive to move a trial like this.

 

[MeadowMuffin]

Speaking strictly from a human behavior standpoint, there is no possible way I see for there to be 12 unbiased jury members in the small town of Moscow, ID. Everyone thinks they're unbiased, but we ALL have biases and when you live in the town this happened in, experience not only the aftermath of the crime in terms of fear but also in media invasion, victim support, rumors and gossip, you're going to be biased. You can say you'll block out everything you've heard ever except what happens in court, but the human body doesn't function that way. If one could just shut off all emotions and thoughts any old time they wanted, then PTSD would not be a thing.

You may get a few objective people in Moscow, either people who are new to town or people who genuinely weren't touched by the event, but no way you seat a jury of 12. No way.

MOO.

It will be interesting to see what happens in this case. From the families standpoint, it seems cruel to have them traveling the 300 miles to Boise, although depending on where they live it could be more or less. It's estimated to be a 6-8 week trial! Definitely an expensive burden to them. And the court will need 16 jurors, not 12, because of alternates. There are many moving pieces to this; staff, exhibits, witnesses, etc. But the most important thing of course is to protect the defendant's rights to a fair trial.
A couple things I'm thinking: bringing in jurors from a nearby county is one alternative. It's been said above that if they lived close to Moscow that they could be prejudiced against BK because of pretrial publicity. But in my 70 years I've seen how many people are ignorant of local and world wide news. It was shocking to me how the day after the deadly 35W bridge collapsed in MN, 70 miles from me, there were coworkers who didn't know! Also, having been a juror 4 times, it's a responsibility that is taken very seriously and discussed thoroughly in the jury room.
Secondly I just want to say I truly hope there is no sequestration of the jury. Jurors in the Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson case were sequestered and I feel that it seems to foster a camaraderie during a long trial, and perhaps creates a Pied Piper effect due to friendships forged.
IMO!

 

[Occam's Zebra]

I personally am looking at this as a juror of the general public and I sincerely believe this is what will happen. This is my opinion only.

The way it works in the USA courts:

1.) A prosecution expert testifies
2.) A defense expert testifiies.
3.) THE JURY decides who to believe, who is more credible, what explanation is the most reasonable.
4.) Sy will testify (if judge allows him) about the cell tower evidence.
5.) The FBI CAST expert with 30 years experience will testify about the cell tower evidence - there is information about this in the PCA.

6.) The jury will decide which expert's explanation is the most reasonable.

Sy's and the prosecution's testimony and Motions on this subject are so confusing, convoluted and full of this:

A.) Possibilities
B.) Maybes
C.) Could be's
D.) If we had more information

.......Because of this......the jury will find that the CAST information from the FBI and other prosecution data experts is much more reasonable than Sy's evidence, and they will go with this.

Look, the number one most important piece of evidence for juries - I have posted links several times about this - is DNA evidence. DNA evidence alone with no alibi convicts defendants from 20 to 30 years ago.

BK's skin cell DNA evidence shows it is reasonable it is his DNA on the sheath under a victim in her bed. I believe the jury will see BK's DNA as being beyond reasonable doubt evidence that helps prove him guilty.

Unknown - at this time - evidence could come up via cell tower/phone evidence, but from what I know right now this post is my .....

2 Cents

BBM. The DNA evidence is a match. It is his DNA on the sheath. Not sure what you mean by "reasonable" here. It is not "reasonable" in that it might be his DNA - it is definitely his and no one else's.

 

[Boxer]

That is my understanding as well. From what SR has seen/been given is in favor of BK never being in Moscow that night. But there is missing data he admits that if he is shown it could change his opinion. AT has been asking for months for the missing data and LE and the FBI for some reason cannot provide it.

MOO. 2cents

He was driving east toward Moscow when his cell went off line, he was driving south and away from Moscow after the murders. His DNA on the sheath is equivalent to his fingerprints on the sheath. He has no alibi.

What SR is talking about, is finding some digital gaps where BK potentially "could" have been, and AT will say that is where he was.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Ooof you are making a good point. And it would be biased one way or another. The real question would be, are you capable of changing your mind if faced with evidence? And behaviourally, most people are pretty bad at changing their mind when it comes to deeply emotional matters.


I honestly don't know.

The bolded is 100% correct. Science proves this. They can logically want to block things out, but you can't just choose to shut off traumatic emotions. So I guess the question comes down to, do we believe this was a community trauma? And if so, then change of venue is not only appropriate but necessary.

MOO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

One problem, though, is the cost to taxpayers. It's expensive to move a trial like this.

It's more expensive to try someone without an objective jury. Cost shouldn't be a deterrent in a case like this. MOO.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

It will be interesting to see what happens in this case. From the families standpoint, it seems cruel to have them traveling the 300 miles to Boise, although depending on where they live it could be more or less. It's estimated to be a 6-8 week trial! Definitely an expensive burden to them.

I feel for the families, just as I do for the families of all victims. I really, really do. But as you say below, we have to remember that in the US trials are not for the victims' families. They are for the accused criminals. So while the burden to the families does matter (and I will gladly donate to a cause in that respect), I don't the decision should be made with that consideration in mind. They can also ensure the families can attend the trial virtually closed-circuit if the entire thing won't be broadcast.

And the court will need 16 jurors, not 12, because of alternates. There are many moving pieces to this; staff, exhibits, witnesses, etc. But the most important thing of course is to protect the defendant's rights to a fair trial.

Yes, 16. Thank you for the correction. And yes, we need to protect the defendant's rights to a fair trial.

A couple things I'm thinking: bringing in jurors from a nearby county is one alternative. It's been said above that if they lived close to Moscow that they could be prejudiced against BK because of pretrial publicity. But in my 70 years I've seen how many people are ignorant of local and world wide news. It was shocking to me how the day after the deadly 35W bridge collapsed in MN, 70 miles from me, there were coworkers who didn't know! Also, having been a juror 4 times, it's a responsibility that is taken very seriously and discussed thoroughly in the jury room.
Secondly I just want to say I truly hope there is no sequestration of the jury. Jurors in the Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson case were sequestered and I feel that it seems to foster a camaraderie during a long trial, and perhaps creates a Pied Piper effect due to friendships forged.
IMO!

I prefer change of venue, but don't necessarily have a problem with transporting the jury, but I do think they need to be sequestered if they come to Moscow for the same reasons I think a change of venue is necessary. I think it would be much easier on the jury if they could change do a change of venue which may not necessitate sequestration.

MOO.

 

[GRT]

He was driving east toward Moscow when his cell went off line, he was driving south and away from Moscow after the murders. His DNA on the sheath is equivalent to his fingerprints on the sheath. He has no alibi.

What SR is talking about, is finding some digital gaps where BK potentially "could" have been, and AT will say that is where he was.

My thoughts are that SR is going to show evidence of BK's cell phone pinging miles away during the killings. So, AT is asking if the State has any digital evidence to the contrary. So far, they haven't produced any.

Of course, that could be explained by BK leaving his phone somewhere else intentionally—for just that reason.

I think DNA is the State's best evidence, but we've already heard some of the problems with touch DNA and how it can transfer without the person having handled the object. I wish it were blood or bodily fluid DNA.

So, while I think BK is guilty--I don't think this will be a slam-dunk for the prosecution.

MOO