He seems like the kind of person who would have followed a well rehearsed script, imo. And who would not have deviated from that script, regardless of unanticipated circumstances. All moo.Pretty sure that after he saw the effects of stabbing a knife into one person that, at that point, he knew he was killing someone with a knife, and yet he moved right along to the next person.
That's premeditation. What else would it be? Even if he was somehow overtaken by passion and jealousy at the sight of his unintended victim, he went on to three more. His feet moved him around the house, instructed by his brain.
IMO, K was in her own room at the beginning of this, fled to M's room, where he killed both of them. He knew what a knife can do and he had one in his hand, he unsheathed it, no one else unsheathed. When you have a big personal defense/offense knife and you unsheath it, you know you have a big weapon in your hand.
He then thrust the weapon into the first victim and now had first hand knowledge of what the knife could do. He continued to use the knife.
That's premeditation, under the law, IMO. Even if he had some squirrelly argument about one of the victims "making him do it" or "causing extreme passion such that he could not control himself."
Oh, and of course, he entered the house in the middle of the night, knowing it was not his house and that he had no legal right to be there. With a knife. Which he unsheathed. After driving around the house 4 times and even having to do a 3 point turn to get himself in position to park where he wanted to park.
And he turned off his phone beforehand.
Good point! This makes me wonder if the surviving roommates were put in a type of witness protection of sorts until the suspect was apprehended. Can you even imagine what the roommates have been through? Not specific to the online accusations but D.M. Knowing she saw something that night and not reacting the way she feels like she should have or done something right then.I feel for the families of the students. IMO early comments by authorities implying that roommates could be witnesses makes sense. IMO going out to get tatoos and not speaking to murdered students families also makes sense. IMO fear can paralyze.
I liked that they said they specifically saw him exit the vehicle they believe was involved in the crime and that he is on video doing so.I think they are trying to saying they have direct proof that these cell pings are from a cell phone he uses. They say they have video of him at the grocery store too, just to indicate that there's a direct connection between the phone pings and him, and it was not a phone that was sold or that he let someone else borrow.
He may have seen her but maybe a specific injury kept him from killing her. Maybe hoped she couldn't id him possibly. This is the big question
Thinking that also…..just not sure at this point.Perhaps this relates to disposing of the knife.
Just my thoughts.
Otis
weren't there 2 survivors? Who is the other roommate"BK smiles in court after being denied bail".
![]()
Idaho murders suspect Bryan Kohberger's DNA 'found on knife sheath'
Kohberger, 28, is accused of murdering Maddie Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin on November 13 in the quiet, college town of Moscow, Idaho.www.dailymail.co.uk
So curious about why/how he chose these victims and what the motive was.Cathy Russon
@cathyrusson
·
7m
Affidavit:
Police traced the cell records to determine if Kohberger stalked the victims ahead of time. At least TWELVE occasions prior to Nov 13 his phone was in the area of the home. "All of these occasions, except for one, occurred in the late evening and early morning hours.
Where did you read about the turtleneck?It is. The part about him pulling the turtleneck over his face and also the 2nd email that he got. It's not all spot on, but it's obvious the guy/girl had inside info.
Me too. I have the same theory. I actually mentioned Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde here on WS, I believe. I think it's consistent with certain known mental states that other criminals have had. Truly bizarre.Me too. I have the same theory. I actually mentioned Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde here on WS, I believe. I think it's consistent with certain known mental states that other criminals have had. Truly bizarre.
I think it's also worth considering that people at his apartment building mentioned that he was frequently up at night (the downstairs neighbor said so). They may have noticed this only after the murders, but I'm guessing he had trouble sleeping. His computer use and phone use will probably show that. As a loner (we have no evidence that he ever had a friend at WSU or any other place) he would have grown accustomed to interior role-playing as a way of having dialogue with someone (himself). Unfortunately, people acting alone and mainly on their own internal advice often get themselves into trouble (rarely murdering, which is why this crime still stands out among all the other crimes I know about).
He's still one for the record books (only mass murder of this type that I can think of - in which it's not ideologically based nor family annihilation). He may have seen his victim(s) before, but I don't think he interacted with them in any meaningful way.
Perhaps on his first approach he saw a car pull into the driveway, which ended up being DoorDash. Had this been other friends, the whole thing might have not happened. Then he realizes it was only DoorDash, so he drives by, turns around, and comes back. It could also have been nerves (can I do this or not) affecting him. If he saw the doordash (which he had to have see), it implies there is someone awake in the house. That's what blows my mind, is that he had to have known that there was at least one person awake. Again, I have to read the timeframes again to see if this all fits.I wasn't able to copy, but page 7 of the PCA states that a camera shows the suspect car was seen passing the victims house for the fourth time at 4:04. I had long suspected he was hiding in the house prior to the victims returning home, but it doesn't appear that happened.
Good point. I think it's important also to remind ourselves that intelligence comes in many forms that are not necessarily associated in the same person. The Ph.D. degree can demand a very specific kind of intelligence that can be trained to understand a narrow field of study in extraordinary detail, and to raise and pursue questions that would never occur to those of us without such intelligence and training. This form of intelligence is very valuable, especially if it works within a scientific community that keeps pushing the limits of human knowledge.I don't disagree with you, but BK was a PhD student (not a candidate) and there are some important distinctions. He was a first semester student who was in coursework, he hadn't taken any exams, and he certainly hadn't begun work on his dissertation. So he was far from an expert in criminology, despite his previous MA work.