Moo. The bushy eyebrows description is at least partially subjective to the witness who observed a masked stranger ( to her) inside and apparently heading towards rear slider in a very specific context as per PCA. To me, if necessary (which seems unlikely?) the state may be driven to demonstrate or suggest on direct or redirect, how prominent brow structure in combo with the lighting and mask, witness would come to describe the stranger thus. And imo BK certainly has what could be described as prominent brow structure jmo.
Adding, there are other aspects to witness description that also do not exclude BK. And in all events, BK's brows in Nov 2022 could not be objectively described as "thin", "refined", "not prominent" or "unthick". Moo
Trimming BK's eyebrows for court technically shouldn't have much of an impact, as it's how he was on the night that matters. State could potentially find a way to emphasise this if it becomes an issue at trial ( raised by defense say on cross of the witness) jmo, maybe through another witness who knew and saw BK just prior to the murders. Jury may also see photo from BK's licence or a still from Oct 2022 LE pull over near WSU. Just speculating. However, can't see this occurring unless D goes hard at questioning witness re how she could describe the person she saw as bushy browed and door is opened for the state ( if it even could be, noting INAL).moo
In summary, not really sure eyebrows will play too much of a role. Though perhaps d will try to insinuate bias of LEO who first looked at BK licence and also saw the brows a bushy. If so, I see state countering with good records of the LEO with emphasis on past and current professionalism.
Moo