4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #96
- Thread starter ChatteringBirds
- Start date
Wallendo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 423
- Reaction score
- 4,544
It makes no sense for LE to frame BK. This was not a case where LE "knew" who did it from the beginning but was looking for evidence to arrest and convict. At first there were no suspects. It was a good while before we had reports of the white car that eventually lead to the identification of BK. He wasn't arrested and his DNA taken until after familial DNA was used to locate him.
The only case I can imagine of BK being framed would be if there were a cunning psychopath at WSU who developed a dislike of BK, bought a knife and sheath. Some how obtained his DNA and planted it on the sheath. Convinced in some way BK to travel to the vicinity of the house. Owned or hired a similar white car to take to the crime scene, and somehow knew that there was enough familial DNA information available to make a connection. This might make a great Hollywood movie, but is not likely at all in real life.
The only case I can imagine of BK being framed would be if there were a cunning psychopath at WSU who developed a dislike of BK, bought a knife and sheath. Some how obtained his DNA and planted it on the sheath. Convinced in some way BK to travel to the vicinity of the house. Owned or hired a similar white car to take to the crime scene, and somehow knew that there was enough familial DNA information available to make a connection. This might make a great Hollywood movie, but is not likely at all in real life.
iamshadow21
Amateur Forensics Geek
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2022
- Messages
- 9,507
- Reaction score
- 91,337
I think there's only one cunning psychopath in this case, and I think he's already in custody.
MOO
Arkay
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2019
- Messages
- 2,689
- Reaction score
- 42,179
I agree, except I do believe there is a form of Justice when the murderer is tried and convicted by a jury of his peers and is locked away from a free society. It makes me feel better that people like this are not able to commit this type of heinous crime again.
The grief and human suffering, you're absolutely correct. It cannot be measured and I detest the word 'closure' for the loved ones of a victim. There is never closure IMO, they just learn how to get through it day by day, not over it, or around it but through it.
MOO
I agree with you.
The four aren’t going to be resurrected, so short of that what can be done to make things “right?” It’ll never be right again, but the murderer has to be punished for these heinous murders and also locked away from society.
It’s all that’s left, because closure is really amorphous when you can’t have your children back. But it’s something. Hopefully a turning point that allows the families to get through their days.
As to framing BK, just IMO it’s a non-starter.
Four lively students are viciously murdered and the investigators huddle together to figure out “hey, who’s weird and knows about crime? Let’s blame him!”
No, there is evidence. The DNA, the car, the fact that BK was in the area at the time, all the stuff we already know.
JMO
The defense has been trying to pursue the timeline of the genetic genealogy for a while--their angle is that the dna came first, which led to the name, which could lead to possible avenues of appeal.
This is diametrically opposed to law enforcement planting his dna on the evidence, which would require having the name first, not the dna, then obtaining the dna and planting it (with the facts of the case we know so far, I can't see how anyone other than law enforcement would be able to plant the dna).
This is diametrically opposed to law enforcement planting his dna on the evidence, which would require having the name first, not the dna, then obtaining the dna and planting it (with the facts of the case we know so far, I can't see how anyone other than law enforcement would be able to plant the dna).
Well, he does have a severe personality disorder.
Milkyjoe
Former Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2024
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 114
Mr. Goncalves (incredibly brave, smart, and strong ) stated in a recent interview, that the killer's DNA was under the victim's bodies, as well as on the knife sheath.
IMO Their daughter Kaylee fought like a soldier on a battlefield. She was amazing to fight, for life. Fighting to leave the truth.
<modsnip - posting more than 10% is a copyright violation - see link>
This is quite profound too-
Idaho murder victim family speaks on Kohberger venue change
Idaho murder victim family speaks on Kohberger venue change
SPOKANE, Wash. - A judge granted Bryan Kohberger's request for a change of venue in the murder trial of four University of Idaho students, drawing a "disappointed" reaction from thewww.khq.com
No he didn't, he said on a "sleeve" whereby he meant sheath.
Milkyjoe
Former Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2024
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 114
katydid23
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 68,377
- Reaction score
- 247,868
Where'd they get BK's DNA and why did they pick him?
Did they already know he just happened to be driving around alone, all night, with his phone off? Did they already know that he drove a car just like the one seen on video racing away from the scene?
I don't know how they could have known those things, so pretty darn lucky that they chose a patsy that didnt have an alibi already.
GRT
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2020
- Messages
- 3,043
- Reaction score
- 25,468
Since I don't think BK was framed, those questions are not for me. The discussion around planting evidence comes from insinuations from his defense team. So, it's worth discussing on that basis alone.
We have a hypothetical, but we don't know what's behind it because we're getting very little information due to the gag order.
GRT
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2020
- Messages
- 3,043
- Reaction score
- 25,468
True in some ways. But I'm not sure it's clear yet that his car or one just like it was seen "racing from the scene." Initially LE searched for an older car than BK's. So which cars would be "just like his" is far from clear. Regardless, it's not as though "borrowing" a white Hyundai from model years 2011-2016 for the night would have been difficult. They are very common cars. And anyone wanting to frame BK would have attended to the license plates. (How often do you check your plate/s ?)
I also suspect most people who live alone and aren't in a romantic relationship may not have alibis for 4am. The likely activities of being at home alone and being asleep aren't exactly iron-clad alibis. And in an apartment complex, particularly one inhabited by students, it's very unlikely anyone would have noticed if a specific white car was there all night. And if someone WAS watching BK, it would have been possible to discover he was a "night owl."
So far as BK's car goes, when it was first impounded several of those infamous blathering "former agents" claimed the car would be a treasure trove of biological evidence. Here's an example Why Bryan Kohberger's car could be key to case—former CIA officer
Several former agents were sure there would be evidence of a sloppy cleanup too. We don't know all the evidence at this point. Some things we think we know may turn out to not be true in quite the way we think. And it's quite possible LE has evidence we know nothing about. But certainly there has been nothing to suggest those agents were right about the car being a "treasure trove." In fact, in some high profile cases (the Brian Laundrie/Gabby Petito case in particular) it's shocking how totally wrong former agents often turn out to be. (Maybe that's why they are former agents?)
IF BK was framed I wouldn't think getting a DNA sample would have been difficult. We aren't talking about managing to leave his fingerprint at the scene, after all. Getting DNA would involve planning and watching him. That would also reveal his habits. And watching BK would have revealed he wasn't likely to spend his Saturday nights with someone who could provide an alibi.
IF BK was framed by the "real killer" then failure of the frame so far as BK went wouldn't necessarily be a disaster for the framer, as long as the failure details didn't lead back to the framer.
At this point, I don't really think BK was framed. But I also don't see framing him as an impossibly complicated task. Seems it would be fairly simple to me.
MOO
GRT
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2020
- Messages
- 3,043
- Reaction score
- 25,468
Good analysis and excellent points--especially the one about "former agents."
Strangeworld
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,278
- Reaction score
- 2,503
.
katydid23
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 68,377
- Reaction score
- 247,868
So in this hypothetical frame job, the killer first picks out his patsy and stalks him for awhile? . He chooses BK somehow. Gets some of his touch DNA, and places it only on the inner under portion of the snap of a sheath. But no where else at the vast crime scene?
Goes to all that trouble to get that damning DNA but only places a very minor amount in a very obscure place on the sheath:? None placed in the crime scene for good measure? No DNA left on the mattress or doorknob in the bedrooms?
So they watch the patsy for awhile, maybe weeks, to see if he goes out during the wee hours, so there will be no real alibi?
And they see what kind of car he drives? So did they then rent or borrow a white Elantra to drive that night?
Was still pretty lucky that their patsy just happened to turn his own phone off and go on a long rambling drive all night long that night.
So after they got the patsy's DNA, got the knife sheath ready, borrowed a white Elantra, they chose some house and went and killed 4 students, placing the one tiny snip of Touch DNA under 1 victim, and drove away in the borrowed car?
And the person they rented or borrowed the Elantra from never reported it? And BK never noticed being stalked before the murders?
I hope the defense lays this out as their theory for how the DNA got there.
Justice101
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 2,554
- Reaction score
- 17,977
My point was not what the defense may or may not say. We don't know the evidence nor do we know what the prosecution will say. (We may think we do, but we don't really. And some of what some people seem to think has already been publicly revealed about the evidence, hasn't been. Rather, an awful lot of MOO, JMO, & 2 cents opinions have later morphed into "known facts" during discussions.)So in this hypothetical frame job, the killer first picks out his patsy and stalks him for awhile? . He chooses BK somehow. Gets some of his touch DNA, and places it only on the inner under portion of the snap of a sheath. But no where else at the vast crime scene?
Goes to all that trouble to get that damning DNA but only places a very minor amount in a very obscure place on the sheath:? None placed in the crime scene for good measure? No DNA left on the mattress or doorknob in the bedrooms?
So they watch the patsy for awhile, maybe weeks, to see if he goes out during the wee hours, so there will be no real alibi?
And they see what kind of car he drives? So did they then rent or borrow a white Elantra to drive that night?
Was still pretty lucky that their patsy just happened to turn his own phone off and go on a long rambling drive all night long that night.
So after they got the patsy's DNA, got the knife sheath ready, borrowed a white Elantra, they chose some house and went and killed 4 students, placing the one tiny snip of Touch DNA under 1 victim, and drove away in the borrowed car?
And the person they rented or borrowed the Elantra from never reported it? And BK never noticed being stalked before the murders?
I hope the defense lays this out as their theory for how the DNA got there.
I'm not saying BK was framed. I think I made that clear in my previous post. But the idea that a frame couldn't possibly have happened given the supposed evidence doesn't hold water.
It wouldn't have been impossible to obtain somebody's DNA and place it on a small moveable object left at the scene. Probably wouldn't have even been difficult. And IMO it's likely more convincing it wasn't a frame if the borrowed DNA wasn't splashed all over the scene. So a good reason to not put it on doorknobs and mattresses (although I'm not at all sure if it had been planted on one of the mattresses it would have been found.)
IF somebody was planning in advance to try to successfully frame another person, it would take some effort. So many of the things mentioned in your latest post don't necessarily seem that outlandish. It certainly would be helpful to know a person's habits and helpful to know what sort of car he drove before trying to frame him. "Stalking" wouldn't have been necessary. (And no, I wasn't suggesting the framer rented or bought an old Hyundai just like BK's [assuming the car video ID is accurate and we don't know that.] Criminals have been known to steal cars.)
It's also pretty obvious a person who lives alone might not have an alibi for the middle of the night. I suspect that's true for most people who live alone and don't work night shifts. Some might happen to be awake at 4am on a given night and be doing things that might provide documentation of location, but most would not. So the chances BK would have an alibi seems pretty slim. And if he did, so what? A frame by the real perp would be designed to draw attention away from the perp, not necessarily to convict BK.
Again, I'm not saying he was framed. I'm just saying the idea isn't impossible. And many of the reasons given that it couldn't be done are not at all convincing to me.
MOO
MeadowMuffin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2018
- Messages
- 379
- Reaction score
- 2,747
I also hope the defense lays out this theory.So in this hypothetical frame job, the killer first picks out his patsy and stalks him for awhile? . He chooses BK somehow. Gets some of his touch DNA, and places it only on the inner under portion of the snap of a sheath. But no where else at the vast crime scene?
Goes to all that trouble to get that damning DNA but only places a very minor amount in a very obscure place on the sheath:? None placed in the crime scene for good measure? No DNA left on the mattress or doorknob in the bedrooms?
So they watch the patsy for awhile, maybe weeks, to see if he goes out during the wee hours, so there will be no real alibi?
And they see what kind of car he drives? So did they then rent or borrow a white Elantra to drive that night?
Was still pretty lucky that their patsy just happened to turn his own phone off and go on a long rambling drive all night long that night.
So after they got the patsy's DNA, got the knife sheath ready, borrowed a white Elantra, they chose some house and went and killed 4 students, placing the one tiny snip of Touch DNA under 1 victim, and drove away in the borrowed car?
And the person they rented or borrowed the Elantra from never reported it? And BK never noticed being stalked before the murders?
I hope the defense lays this out as their theory for how the DNA got there.
Because it is preposterous.
IMO they will push SODDI as well as "LE is incompetent", which is the usual defense when they don't have anything else.
BK is guilty. IMO.
I've always wondered if anyone responded to BK's survey and contacted BK somehow or just took an interest in him.
Another thing that might be of concern is that a university police officer identified BK through their database of cars that park on campus, it was a white elantra and the university police officer looked up the owner's information and photo ID and decided that BK had "bushy eyebrows." This seemed to begin the focus on BK as the suspect and led to their interest in him, genealogy search, etc.
Like other posters, I think it is unlikely that BK was framed (see #1 above) or misidentified (#2 above), but the defense team may have material to work with to try to cast some doubt with member(s) of the jury.
Another thing that might be of concern is that a university police officer identified BK through their database of cars that park on campus, it was a white elantra and the university police officer looked up the owner's information and photo ID and decided that BK had "bushy eyebrows." This seemed to begin the focus on BK as the suspect and led to their interest in him, genealogy search, etc.
Like other posters, I think it is unlikely that BK was framed (see #1 above) or misidentified (#2 above), but the defense team may have material to work with to try to cast some doubt with member(s) of the jury.
Last edited:
All MOO
I think the whole sheath discovery is confusing b/c from the PCA it appears that Payne was the one who first saw it but if I remember correctly he didn't arrive to the scene until 4 hours after other LE. Yet somehow no other LE agents saw it?
Also, it doesn't necessarily have to be the case that someone had a sample of BK's DNA and planted it on there. It could just be that it's not even a match to begin with. There's a reason why the prosecution is so desperate to keep all of their DNA/IGG work secret.
It's been stated in court documents that the profile is "partial and ambiguous"... well, ambiguous means "open to more than one interpretation", which really tells you all you need to know.
Since it was a partial profile, they had to use a statistics-based computer program to fill in the rest. It's possible that if an outside expert was allowed to compare the alleged sheath sample to the swab taken from BK, they would not be a match.
The entirety of the case against Bryan will come down to one self identified eyewitness, with a dubious story. For example, DM somehow hearing someone say 'I'm here to help' but doesn't hear four humans being murdered while at least one of them fought back. Not too mention possibly never calling 911 since we don't know who did call 911 8 hours allegedly after it all happened.
Bryan has no connection to any victim, their friends, their family or co -workers. He never worked with them, traveled with them, dated them or partied with them. He has no prior arrests, no history of violence, threats, stalking, intimidation of the victims or those in their orbit. He is without a motive.
There are no eyewitnesses, earwitnesses, fingerprints, footprints, or video of him coming or leaving the house at 1122. There is no DNA of any victims in his car, house, office or apt. He appeared at a doctors office for a physical 3 days after the bloody, brutal stabbing murder of the 4 victims, and had no cuts, bruises, scratches or injuries.
The indictment of Bryan appears to have been built around speculations, rather than investigators following leads of those persons of interest, who had motive, had anger issues with the victims, had means and opportunity.
Of course, one of the biggest head scratchers imo is that it appears that BK engaged in close physical combat with at least two of the victims (X and K) yet somehow did not leave any of his DNA anywhere in the house other than a spec on the button of the sheath. Also, since he was at the doctor three days later we know he had no cuts/wounds which again is hard to believe if he did it.
There was also not one spec of DNA/blood anywhere in BK's apt, car, office, etc which is a miracle imo. The odds of this are borderline impossible.
All MOO and remember I'm not saying he's innocent but I am not ready to say he's guilty either.
I think the whole sheath discovery is confusing b/c from the PCA it appears that Payne was the one who first saw it but if I remember correctly he didn't arrive to the scene until 4 hours after other LE. Yet somehow no other LE agents saw it?
Also, it doesn't necessarily have to be the case that someone had a sample of BK's DNA and planted it on there. It could just be that it's not even a match to begin with. There's a reason why the prosecution is so desperate to keep all of their DNA/IGG work secret.
It's been stated in court documents that the profile is "partial and ambiguous"... well, ambiguous means "open to more than one interpretation", which really tells you all you need to know.
Since it was a partial profile, they had to use a statistics-based computer program to fill in the rest. It's possible that if an outside expert was allowed to compare the alleged sheath sample to the swab taken from BK, they would not be a match.
The entirety of the case against Bryan will come down to one self identified eyewitness, with a dubious story. For example, DM somehow hearing someone say 'I'm here to help' but doesn't hear four humans being murdered while at least one of them fought back. Not too mention possibly never calling 911 since we don't know who did call 911 8 hours allegedly after it all happened.
Bryan has no connection to any victim, their friends, their family or co -workers. He never worked with them, traveled with them, dated them or partied with them. He has no prior arrests, no history of violence, threats, stalking, intimidation of the victims or those in their orbit. He is without a motive.
There are no eyewitnesses, earwitnesses, fingerprints, footprints, or video of him coming or leaving the house at 1122. There is no DNA of any victims in his car, house, office or apt. He appeared at a doctors office for a physical 3 days after the bloody, brutal stabbing murder of the 4 victims, and had no cuts, bruises, scratches or injuries.
The indictment of Bryan appears to have been built around speculations, rather than investigators following leads of those persons of interest, who had motive, had anger issues with the victims, had means and opportunity.
Of course, one of the biggest head scratchers imo is that it appears that BK engaged in close physical combat with at least two of the victims (X and K) yet somehow did not leave any of his DNA anywhere in the house other than a spec on the button of the sheath. Also, since he was at the doctor three days later we know he had no cuts/wounds which again is hard to believe if he did it.
There was also not one spec of DNA/blood anywhere in BK's apt, car, office, etc which is a miracle imo. The odds of this are borderline impossible.
All MOO and remember I'm not saying he's innocent but I am not ready to say he's guilty either.