Kittycat40
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2022
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 817
Yup as more and more comes out. It just makes you go huh???We will get answers to these questions in time. Case just continues to get stranger.
Yup as more and more comes out. It just makes you go huh???We will get answers to these questions in time. Case just continues to get stranger.
I believe it can be determined if the phone was intentionally turned off vs the battery dying. Additionally a phone can still be tracked and can ping while off but not if its dead.But why was the phone turned off? He could argue that the battery just happened to die at the same time the victims died? It gets to the point that there are just too many unlucky coincidences to be believable.
Every report I have read prior to today said first floor. No idea where/how that got started. But it occurs to me that it was planted by the police to protect DM immediately after the murders. She would have told them what came out in the affidavit on May 13. It wasn't until awhile later that the police had a lead to BK. Police perhaps assumed the masked intruder was not aware he saw her. If he became aware of that possibility, her life might have been at risk from the killer. And, before they had any leads on BK, it would not have been impossible to imagine her being at risk for years. By telling the public she was asleep on the first floor and saw/heard nothing the killer might not be as motivated to go after her.
It’s a lot to take in for sure. I’ve been reading ( and sometimes re-reading ) one page at a time to let it sink in.Thank you for responding respectfully. I got to read all these affidavit and transcripts cause what transpired doesn’t make sense.
Like I said before, it's like a general planning for a beach invasion and forgetting about planning for how many boats and ships he's going to need.
This was anything but careful planning. The aimless driving, 3 point turns, driving into a dead end area and driving back and forth in front of the murder house....in a neighborhood that doesn't get that much vehicle traffic at that point during the day. Not to mention using your car in the first place with all the cameras. That is not moving with a purpose. That's sloppy. It was the LE mentioning that it was a sloppy crime scene that made me feel it was not a prior soldier as many on here claimed.
Forget everything else. Just the actions of the vehicle movement alone shows me this was POOR planning.
I think he assumed it did not contain his DNA and, therefore, was not evidence that would link him to the crime
Eeeeeewwww. But how would he have had the time? The wording about him possibly leaving thru the sliding glass door was weird. 4 people in 15 minutes…idkNormally, a knife that large would be carried on a belt. So either BK did have the knife in a sheath attached to his belt or he carried in his hand when he entered the home. It was very dark outside so he could have held it next to his leg as he walked. Having it in his hand poses problems, though. It means when he went to use it, he'd have to use two hands instead of one to open the clasp to release the knife. That could be how he left it behind. An alternate theory is that he did have it on a belt and for some reason he undid his belt and the sheath slipped off when he did so. So that something else he left behind may have been biological.
I am unsurprised that BK would own this knife, particularly due to its military branding. His intense interest in criminology, law enforcement, security/policing may indicate a fetish of the field. A lot of fetishists collect or covet military and police style items, even if they themselves are not members of the military and/or LE. Huge, bizarre red flag.
I work in this field, and when I come across people who are extremely interested (literal hobbyists) without any service background themselves — you have to wonder why.
They either didn’t make the cut, or wouldn’t, or couldn’t… or (strangest, I think) want to be attached to the industry for the power, control, fetish and/or other wrong reasons.
That's how I interpreted it as well. I'm sure they still had safety concerns for both surviving roommates even with the story they were both asleep on the first floor, but it would be considerably different if it was highly publicized that one of them saw him. (I doubt denying the presence of anyone else was feasible since that would have eventually been reported on.) And more than that, her description of him was really quite accurate, especially given how unreliable witness statements can be. MOOEvery report I have read prior to today said first floor. No idea where/how that got started. But it occurs to me that it was planted by the police to protect DM immediately after the murders. She would have told them what came out in the affidavit on May 13. It wasn't until awhile later that the police had a lead to BK. Police perhaps assumed the masked intruder was not aware he saw her. If he became aware of that possibility, her life might have been at risk from the killer. And, before they had any leads on BK, it would not have been impossible to imagine her being at risk for years. By telling the public she was asleep on the first floor and saw/heard nothing the killer might not be as motivated to go after her.
You're saying the FBI is lying here?FBI does not have to disclose its investigations or operations. The affidavit gives a clear sense that the Idaho police thought this murderer was their guy and the only way to surveil him after he left Idaho was through the FBI. Before the FBI got checked in the 80s we never knew about all of the operations they did on citizens like MLKjr and others. So, I take their denial with a grain of salt. They say they didn't, anon sources say they did.... and magically a man suspected of being responsible for 4 horrific murders (with some good evidence that it was him before the DNA link as we found out today) was stopped twice (I am corrected that his license was run once), given no warnings or tickets but was then surveilled on his property not even 24 hours later. JMHO though.
Yeah, I think Snoopster's post seems like an underestimation of XK - she's not going to be drawn in by someone who just stabbed her boyfriend. I agree that it may have been BK sadistically saying it.Your post gave me chills. I had been reading the "I'll take care of you" in a kind, comforting manner (even if it was BK saying it to lower Xana's guard). But, now I wonder if it was said/intended as a threat: "I'll take care of you."
MOO
That's stalking as it says. That's not carefully planning a murder.Maybe the at least 12 times of stalking per the affidavit?
Staking-out/stalking the house 12 times prior to the murders is a start.He did leave evidence all over the place. Sheath, shoe print, video footage, phone records, witness.
What examples can you give that his was "carefully planned"? IMO, wearing black, having a mask and turning your cell phone on/off wouldn't qualify as careful planning. I'm curious as to what you think that he did that was well-planned.
Remember that long after the initial examination of the house was done, other agents showed up and removed items from the house? Wonder what that was about!I think he assumed it did not contain his DNA and, therefore, was not evidence that would link him to the crime.
Incredible job! Thank you for this link.Thank you for sharing this!
Okay, I understand what you're saying. And I also say that there were rookie mistakes that he didn't make that make me think this was at least a--sort-of planned crime?
All I've been trying to say is that he didn't just wake up that night and commit these crimes harum-scarum.
There was a level of planning that went into it. Otherwise we would have, hypothetically, witnesses who saw him staggering home that night drenched in blood.
Did he not profess an interest in teachi ng police in rural areas how technology works?Another random thought while I'm trying to work...
How [cognitively impaired] is BK with his phone management?!
"Uh, take it with me, then turn it off just as I leave to commit a crime, then turn it back on as I'm heading home..duh, I'm a GENIUS!! That criminology masters has really come in handy!" <beams with pride>
All allegedly and MOO![]()
Okay, I understand what you're saying. And I also say that there were rookie mistakes that he didn't make that make me think this was at least a--sort-of planned crime?
All I've been trying to say is that he didn't just wake up that night and commit these crimes harum-scarum.
There was a level of planning that went into it. Otherwise we would have, hypothetically, witnesses who saw him staggering home that night drenched in blood.