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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I agree with you and SR has stated that it is indeed missing. The question is why won't LE turn over the data?

Cellphone expert testifies missing data benefits University of Idaho murder suspect

He further testified that it's crucial that he receive all of the AT&T source data and related information for him to verify, given that prosecutors in Latah County are pinning Kohberger to the location of the killings, in part, by his cellphone use and cell tower records.

"It is a terrible practice to justify probable cause with these very detailed call detail records that give breadcrumb-like trails for individuals and then not map it," Ray said.

"Because of the piecemealing of the data, because of the missing data, because of the data I'm reviewing that is incredibly inaccurate, everything that is missing is absolutely in benefit of the defense right now," Ray testified, adding, "There are other reports that are missing that I can't tell you are benefiting of Mr. Kohberger or the state."

He added that it's unclear why certain data is unavailable: "Is this human error? Is it accidental? Is it intentional?"

Sometimes its just games D and P play with each other in the pre-trial phase. Sometimes there are legitimate reasons, sometimes not.

Maybe P is still recovering and analyzing new data/video, etc. or analyzing a different way and they're not finished yet. Maybe they've decided to add a new expert or two to analyze evidence and aren't ready. In this case they may be dragging their feet to make D give them the alibi evidence, while D is withholding the alibi evidence because they want to see what else the P has.

When the deadlines come, when it gets down to the trial, both sides will have met their obligations and will have enough time to analyze the discovery.
 
Last edited:
Except they actually are withholding evidence in this case. In regards to the cell phone data as well as their DNA work just to name a couple.

MOO

What are you saying that they are holding back on DNA information at this point?

Judge Judge already went through all the IGG stuff and determined what was appropriate to be turned over back in January.
He then proceeded to authorize/expand which experts on the defense side could look at the information in June.

I do not remember hearing or seeing anything in the last few months that indicated that the defense team felt like they hadn't gotten all the DNA info that Judge Judge allowed the to receive.
 
Re: June Motion to compel hearing orders:

Part of the 5th Motion to Compel hearing regarding IGG was sealed.

1724888809217.png

The order from the open part of the hearing is public: investigators to review IGG materials.


The order from the closed hearing - 5th Motion to compel (IGG) - was never made public.

D 5th Motion to compel:


Order listed on Case summary page:
1724888169963.png


jmo
 
Nope. BK has no Alibi you can link. Zero.

If you can link that yes for 100% for sure the defense says he has an Alibi that meets the Idaho statue then please link.

Look. Let me make this crystal clear. If BK has an Alibi then I will entertain the possibility he has been sitting in jail 30 months or whatever for nothing.

But understand this. I have never seen an innocent defendant NOT try to get bail/bond.

Why on earth would an innocent person not demand a Bond Hearing? I have never heard of this.

2 Cents


What is the criteria for an alibi that meets the Idaho statute? I've tried to research it but haven't had much luck. Not trying to disagree I just don't understand what you are talking about.


Thanks
 
What is the criteria for an alibi that meets the Idaho statute? I've tried to research it but haven't had much luck. Not trying to disagree I just don't understand what you are talking about.


Thanks


"...to offer a defense of alibi. Such notice by the defendant shall state the specific place or places at which the defendant claims to have been at the time of the alleged offense and the names and addresses of the witnesses upon whom he intends to rely to establish such alibi..."
 
Nope. BK has no Alibi you can link. Zero.

If you can link that yes for 100% for sure the defense says he has an Alibi that meets the Idaho statue then please link.

Look. Let me make this crystal clear. If BK has an Alibi then I will entertain the possibility he has been sitting in jail 30 months or whatever for nothing.

But understand this. I have never seen an innocent defendant NOT try to get bail/bond.

Why on earth would an innocent person not demand a Bond Hearing? I have never heard of this.

2 Cents
He was arrested on a fugitive warrant.
5:48

Chapter 45:

19-4516. BAIL-- IN WHAT CASES-- CONDITIONS OF BOND. Unless the offense with which the prisoner is charged is shown to be an offense punishable by death or life imprisonment under the laws of the state in which it was committed, a judge or magistrate in this state may admit the person arrested to bail by bond with sufficient sureties, and in such sum as he deems proper, conditioned for his appearance before him at a time specified in such bond, and for his surrender, to be arrested upon the warrant of the governor of this state.


jmo
 
He was arrested on a fugitive warrant.
5:48

Chapter 45:

19-4516. BAIL-- IN WHAT CASES-- CONDITIONS OF BOND. Unless the offense with which the prisoner is charged is shown to be an offense punishable by death or life imprisonment under the laws of the state in which it was committed, a judge or magistrate in this state may admit the person arrested to bail by bond with sufficient sureties, and in such sum as he deems proper, conditioned for his appearance before him at a time specified in such bond, and for his surrender, to be arrested upon the warrant of the governor of this state.


jmo

Pardon my ignorance.

Just curious but why was he a fugitive at that point? If he was a fugitive why didn't they just arrest him on either of the two traffic stops in Indiana on his way to PA?

The definition of a fugitive is a person who has escaped from a place or is in hiding, especially to avoid arrest or persecution.

Let's say LE did indeed believe he was 'on the run' then again why didn't they just arrest him either of the two times they pulled him over on his way to PA?

Another question is why didn't they just bring BK in for questioning when he was still in Idaho and ask him for a DNA sample then?

Why follow him across country?
 
Courtroom is live!
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
163
Guests online
2,668
Total visitors
2,831

Forum statistics

Threads
603,023
Messages
18,150,624
Members
231,621
Latest member
bluestlamb
Back
Top