4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #96

[iamshadow21]

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 don't think anything he said implies he found the sheath alone or even first.

MOO

 

[Arkay]

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.

Well, the DNA on the sheath matches to an immediate relative with his father’s DNA found in their home garbage. This is a point of fact.

Bryan Kohberger defense faces DNA battle

A closed-door court hearing has been scheduled to hear arguments on a motion to allow defense investigators to review investigative genetic genealogy materials.

www.newsweek.com

As a point of my opinion, my impression is that the prosecution wants to hold bombshell evidence for trial, as is standard practice.

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

IMO we as yet have no idea if he’d worked up some connection in his mind, which was not reciprocated. Which also of course has long been one of the theories as to why they were so gruesomely murdered.

 

[CKS]

I don't think anything he said implies he found the sheath alone or even first.

MOO

All MOO


From the PCA and Payne's statement...
As I entered this bedroom, I could see two females in the single bed in the room. Both Goncalves and Mogen were deceased with visible stab wounds. I also later noticed what appeared to be a tan leather knife sheath laying on the bed next to Mogen's right side (when viewed from the door).

If I was AT one question I would ask Payne what he meant by 'later' and exactly how much later did he notice the sheath.



From my recollection...

Officer Smith was one of the first on scene, so he must have found the sheath. Nope, no mention from Smith about any sheath, only that he saw the dog.

Smith was leading Payne and Blaker who were the next pair of Moscow PD to arrive on scene at 4:00pm. Smith did not inform them of any sheath being found. Payne states in the PCA that he saw what appeared to be a sheath on the bed next to MM, visible from the doorway.

Blaker was with Payne walking through the scene, but Blaker didn't see any sheath and Payne didn't point it out to either Smith or Blaker that he saw what appeared to be a sheath.

Blaker states that ISP investigators found a sheath at M's right side visible from the door. Although Blaker had arrived at the scene with Payne and they were walked through by Smith, neither Blaker or Smith saw the sheath. And even though Payne states he saw what appeared to be a sheath visible from the doorway of MM's bedroom, he didn't point it out to Smith or Blaker.

Payne and Blaker both state that ISP investigators were already on scene when they arrived, yet the sheath had apparently not yet been taken into evidence because Payne saw it, or what appeared to be it, to the right of MM.

No ISP investigator named who allegedly found the sheath and took it into evidence. Of all of the officers mentioned in the PCA and search warrant, only Payne claims to have seen what appeared to be a sheath.


This is my interpretation and in my opinion it appears that Payne found the sheath.


All MOO

 

[iamshadow21]

All MOO


From the PCA and Payne's statement...
As I entered this bedroom, I could see two females in the single bed in the room. Both Goncalves and Mogen were deceased with visible stab wounds. I also later noticed what appeared to be a tan leather knife sheath laying on the bed next to Mogen's right side (when viewed from the door).

If I was AT one question I would ask Payne what he meant by 'later' and exactly how much later did he notice the sheath.



From my recollection...

Officer Smith was one of the first on scene, so he must have found the sheath. Nope, no mention from Smith about any sheath, only that he saw the dog.

Smith was leading Payne and Blaker who were the next pair of Moscow PD to arrive on scene at 4:00pm. Smith did not inform them of any sheath being found. Payne states in the PCA that he saw what appeared to be a sheath on the bed next to MM, visible from the doorway.

Blaker was with Payne walking through the scene, but Blaker didn't see any sheath and Payne didn't point it out to either Smith or Blaker that he saw what appeared to be a sheath.

Blaker states that ISP investigators found a sheath at M's right side visible from the door. Although Blaker had arrived at the scene with Payne and they were walked through by Smith, neither Blaker or Smith saw the sheath. And even though Payne states he saw what appeared to be a sheath visible from the doorway of MM's bedroom, he didn't point it out to Smith or Blaker.

Payne and Blaker both state that ISP investigators were already on scene when they arrived, yet the sheath had apparently not yet been taken into evidence because Payne saw it, or what appeared to be it, to the right of MM.

No ISP investigator named who allegedly found the sheath and took it into evidence. Of all of the officers mentioned in the PCA and search warrant, only Payne claims to have seen what appeared to be a sheath.


This is my interpretation and in my opinion it appears that Payne found the sheath.


All MOO

'I noticed' and 'I observed' are pretty standard language for a personal reporting of a crime scene. It doesn't necessarily imply a singular ownership of recovery of a piece of evidence.

There would have been multiple people working the rooms of that home, documenting everything. They aren't all listed in the PCA.

MOO

 

[SpiderFalcon]

'I noticed' and 'I observed' are pretty standard language for a personal reporting of a crime scene. It doesn't necessarily imply a singular ownership of recovery of a piece of evidence.

There would have been multiple people working the rooms of that home, documenting everything. They aren't all listed in the PCA.

MOO

IMO, I don't think Police are allowed to move the bodies until the coroner sees them. It might have been hard to see the knife sheath "laying on the bed next to Mogen's right side" until they moved the bodies.

 

[SpiderFalcon]

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.

Which court documents states that? Can you provide a link?

 

[SpiderFalcon]

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.

How do you know? IMO, the indictment of Bryan appears to have been built around EVIDENCE, much of which WE know nothing about. How do you know? Asking in the nicest way possible....

 

[CKS]

'I noticed' and 'I observed' are pretty standard language for a personal reporting of a crime scene. It doesn't necessarily imply a singular ownership of recovery of a piece of evidence.

There would have been multiple people working the rooms of that home, documenting everything. They aren't all listed in the PCA.

MOO

All MOO

My interpretation from the PCA is the only one who actually states in the PCA that he saw the sheath was Payne from what I remember.


Surely there's LE body cams/pictures that will obviously show exactly what Payne saw.

IMO it's highly unlikely the sheath was planted and more likely the sheath was actually MM's or KG's. Which is also unlikely but we really don't know do we? It could be BK's sheath but where's the proof?


It's not like the DNA is sweat, blood, etc. In reality, it's 'touch DNA' that is transferable and so is the sheath.


All MOO and again I'm not saying BK is innocent or guilty. Just discussing a different point of view I suppose.

 

[SpiderFalcon]

All MOO

My interpretation from the PCA is the only one who actually states in the PCA that he saw the sheath was Payne from what I remember.


Surely there's LE body cams/pictures that will obviously show exactly what Payne saw.

IMO it's highly unlikely the sheath was planted and more likely the sheath was actually MM's or KG's. Which is also unlikely but we really don't know do we? It could be BK's sheath but where's the proof?


It's not like the DNA is sweat, blood, etc. In reality, it's 'touch DNA' that is transferable and so is the sheath.


All MOO and again I'm not saying BK is innocent or guilty. Just discussing a different point of view I suppose.

IMO, Payne actually states in the PCA that he saw the sheath because Payne wrote the PCA.

 

[CKS]

Which court documents states that? Can you provide a link?

Which court documents states that? Can you provide a link?

 

[CKS]

How do you know? IMO, the indictment of Bryan appears to have been built around EVIDENCE, much of which WE know nothing about. How do you know? Asking in the nicest way possible....

I don't know and it's my opinion much like your statement below that you posted...

IMO, I don't think Police are allowed to move the bodies until the coroner sees them. It might have been hard to see the knife sheath "laying on the bed next to Mogen's right side" until they moved the bodies.

 

[Gemmie]

I don't know and it's my opinion much like your statement below that you posted...

IMO, I don't think Police are allowed to move the bodies until the coroner sees them. It might have been hard to see the knife sheath "laying on the bed next to Mogen's right side" until they moved the bodies.

IMO if the sheathe was "next to" Maddie's body, it wouldn't be hard to see at all without touching nor moving her. Now, had it been fully underneath her body... That's a whole nuther story.

All JMO!

 

[SpiderFalcon]

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.

View attachment 535374

View attachment 535371

Can you please link the entire document?

 

[CKS]

IMO, Payne actually states in the PCA that he saw the sheath because Payne wrote the PCA.

All MOO

So do you think that Payne didn't see the sheath but b/c he wrote the PCA he says he saw it? I'm confused?

Asking in the nicest way possible....


Again, I am not trying to convince BK is innocent or guilty. Just overanalyzing the case I suppose.

 

[CKS]

Can you please link the entire document?.

On page 15 it says that the profile is ambiguous and partial.

The declaration also mentions the other DNA found at the crime scene on page 13.

For some reason I cannot get the link to work. Google Barlow Affidavit 06/23/23

 

[CKS]

IMO if the sheathe was "next to" Maddie's body, it wouldn't be hard to see at all without touching nor moving her. Now, had it been fully underneath her body... That's a whole nuther story.

All JMO!

I agree. From the PCA we know it wasn't underneath MM's body. Payne says 'next to Mogen's right side.'

As I entered this bedroom, I could see two females in the single bed in the room. Both Goncalves and Mogen were deceased with visible stab wounds. I also later noticed what appeared to be a tan leather knife sheath laying on the bed next to Mogen's right side (when viewed from the door).

 

[GRT]

Which court documents states that? Can you provide a link?

That comes from the Bicka Barlow filing:

The fact of this match made by the CODIS system is considered Brady material
because it provides possible avenues of investigation of other suspects in the case. Given
the subjective nature of mixture interpretation, it is reasonable to believe that other experts
might disagree with whom actually is the candidate. And in this case, in which the profile
at issue is ambiguous and partial, other suspects are an important area of investigation.

 

[iamshadow21]

View attachment 535374

View attachment 535371

That doesn't relate to the profile found on the sheath. That was a full profile from a single source, not a mixture.

And the second relates to other DNA found in and around the home that doesn't reach the threshold for CODIS. Nonstarter.

Either that, or they were the profiles of people who had been in the home but had solid alibis for the window of the crime and were excluded as being the contributor to the profile on the sheath.

MOO

 

[GRT]

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.

To be sure, if anyone suggested a frame job that wild, it would be laughed out of court. I don't think AT is that silly.

I think they're more likely to claim something along the lines of BK being "identified" by someone who knew he drove a white sedan and thought he was creepy. It's not an Elantra because that wasn't the make of the car first identified by LE. But similar. Maybe LE took a look at him, saw he had bushy eyebrows, and they got more interested. Maybe then they found his cell phone pings put him in the vicinity of the murder house on the fateful night. But maybe that wasn't enough. Maybe they needed to wrangle a bit of DNA from BK and plant it on a piece of evidence that would be considered crucial to the case. The Defense may then say the lack of any more of BK's DNA in the house backs up that theory. And then they may also point to a lack of victim DNA in his car and apartment, etc. To top it off, they've got a cellphone expert who usually testifies for the prosecution, testifies for the defense and says the evidence he's seen to date is exculpatory.

Now, I don't think he was framed, but the defense isn't going to make up a silly story. They're going to try an connect the dots in a way that makes it look as though the DNA was a plant. MOO.

I don't think AT will go down a rabbit hole...

 

[SpiderFalcon]

All MOO

So do you think that Payne didn't see the sheath but b/c he wrote the PCA he says he saw it? I'm confused?

Asking in the nicest way possible....


Again, I am not trying to convince BK is innocent or guilty. Just overanalyzing the case I suppose.

From: https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/...061623+States+Motion+for+Protective+Order.pdf



IMO, he (Payne) wrote the PCA, and he only stated in the PCA what HE saw. He didn't give a list of who else saw it. And he said "I later noticed" because it wasn't fully visible due to being under Maddie and a comforter, where BK dropped it, with his SINGLE SOURCE MALE DNA, IMO, JMO