ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 61

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting.

But my thought is that instead... he only drove back to see the commotion of a swarm of LE at the crime scene.

It was daylight and he would never have chanced breaking into the house again... especially expecting there to be a crowd of people.
Yeah it wouldn't surprise me at all if his return in the AM was pure morbid curiosity. As in he's thinking did LE come yet? Who is all there? Who knows so far? It may have surprised him to see that the house looked exactly how he left it five hours prior.

I still have to think he considered re-entering after he saw the house seemingly look the same as when he left, but then thought better like what if one of the other roommates was awake? LE could be on their way here now, etc. Perhaps he even remembered encountering DM and thought what if that girl I passed sees me here or when if I go in again?

Since BK left the area of the murders at a 'high rate of speed' per the affidavit, my thought is he was running on pure adrenaline and not thinking clearly. I've read a number of stories from people who have committed murders that meticulously planned things out, but then when it comes to the actual act of doing it, they run on adrenaline and often don't remember the events that took place from the time the murder itself began.

It's why how OJ described the 'hypothetical' murders in "(If) I Did It" he described moving towards Nicole & Ron then 'coming to' and seeing blood all around him with no memory of how it got there. I personally take that chapter as confession and fact and do believe the 'coming to' part. Mollie Tibbett's killer told a similar story about how he became angry when she threatened to call LE when he was being a creep to her and then 'coming to' and realizing her bloody body was in his trunk.

I believe BK had something similar happen. He enters the house and the actual murders are a blur so he probably forgot he dropped his sheath but when he 'comes to' he remembers he doesn't have it.
 
Do you know of any WiFi routers which actually do this? Record the phone # which showed the wireless network as an available network.

Also, how far are the closest AT&T cell towers to the King Road residence? 1/4 mile? 1/2 mile? 1 mile?
I have no idea what it means to “touch” WiFi, but I have seen devices show up on my Google WiFi app that aren’t mine. I identified one such device as a friend of my child (their name was in the device name) but this particular person had never connected to my WiFi and did not have my password. Further review showed this person had talked to my child at the front door briefly, then they left. I don’t believe there was even an attempt to connect.

I’ve seen this happen multiple times, but I’m not sure why or what it means. I’ve had many other people at my house that never show up on my device log, so I’m wondering if “auto join” or “ask to join” would need to be set on.

So my question, if anyone knows, do some routers simply record devices that are within range? Do such devices need to actively search for networks or attempt to connect?
 
What a weird thing to do, like a child, follow someone to the bathroom (like he did with that date). What a weird comment coming from a man (BK). I’m trying to imagine any man I know using this term and I cannot. Mother hatred. This and his other misogynistic verbiage at the brewery makes me think he was trying to test limits (like a child) or relating outside his head the same as he does in a weird fantasy world inside his head. As in responding to real life situations with some self scripted responses that didn’t quite match up.

I agree. He sounds like the kind of guy we all label as "just a Weirdo".

Repeated rejections which should have been blamed on himself, he probably blames women instead.

What a sad think.
 
The biggest questions I have about Kohberger are of the chicken and egg variety. Did he choose to devote his life to the field of criminology because he had a desire to kill? Was he hoping to learn how to beat the system and/or avoid being caught? Or did he choose to study criminology because the subject matter fascinated him? Did he become so obsessed with the need to know what drives people to kill and/or what it feels like to take a life that he decided to take matters into his own hands?

It reminds me of this book I once read called The Last Victim by Jason Moss. As a freshman in college, Moss came up with an unconventional idea for a course research project. The author was fascinated by the motivations of serial killers and dreamed of joining the FBI someday, so he devised a plan to lure notorious serial killers into communicating with him and even forged a full-blown relationship with several.

Before his initial communication with each serial killer, he meticulously researched what interested that killer the most and then cast himself in the role of disciple, admirer, businessman, surrogate, or potential victim. He thought the FBI would certainly be impressed if he convinced these infamous serial killers to buy into his false personas. In a few instances, he won the killer's trust and uncovered secrets. In the case of John Wayne Gacy, he experienced firsthand what it’s like to be stalked, seduced, manipulated, and trapped by a deranged murderer who’d taken the lives of more than thirty young boys.

Armed with recorded phone conversations and the perverted writings of multiple killers, Moss convinced his psychology professor to help him write a book about the experience. The killers he corresponded with include Elmer Wayne Henley, Richard Ramirez, Henry Lee Lucas, Jeffrey Dahmer, Charles Manson, and John Wayne Gacy. He developed the strongest relationship with Gacy and even flew to Illinois to visit him in prison a few weeks before his scheduled execution date. It was during this visit when Moss finally realizes it was he who was being played. He was being controlled and manipulated by Gacy, not the other way around. Hence, the title of his book – The Last Victim.

Sadly, his research project had a deeply profound effect on his mental health. He struggled with depression for years before he ultimately killed himself in 2006 at the age of 31.

It reminds me of that Nietzsche quote – “Whoever battles monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster himself. And when you look long into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you.”


ETA: If this post sounds like it was copy and pasted from a book synopsis, I apologize. It's definitely not; I wrote this using my own words. I have a book blog (about guilty pleasure romance novels, not true crime), so my writing style when talking about a book is an occupational hobby hazard. :D
Egg, it's always the egg...
Fascinating book! They made a movie based on that book, but like most movies it fell short of the prose.

 
These are just my thoughts right now on the timeline that night:

—just by chance, Xana was at the front door getting her DoorDash at the same time BK was coming in through the back sliding glass door. He goes upstairs before X comes up to the living room. Neither knows the other is there.
—Xana sits down in the living room or kitchen to eat her food and watch some TikTok. The lights are only half on.
—Xana had to have heard the same noises DM heard coming from upstairs. Maybe she also heard a man’s voice. This causes X to get up and go to her bedroom where she tells Ethan “someone is here”.
—by then BK had started down the stairs and saw Xana go toward her bedroom and followed her.
—BK and Ethan begin fighting and wrestling. That’s when the “thud” happened. Ethan is stabbed and collapses.
—Xana watches the fight and stabbing and begins crying and whimpering. BK turns his attention to her saying “I’m here to help”. He then stabs her to death.
—BK leaves.

This is just how I see it right now. I’m sure it will change.


edit: typo
Wow! Pretty good opinions. Makes much more sense. I just assumed door dash came to sliding door!
 
very interesting but notice that it states this

'Up until that point, in late December, he hadn’t stood out among all the other Elantra owners, the source said, something that is reinforced by a close, informed reading of the affidavit'

That would mean that, in mid December, they had no need to physically track him en route back to PA, because he didn't stand out as a suspect at that time.
So everything we were reading, last week about the plane & car surveillance of his & his father's journey wasn't actually true.
Slates reporting is usually solid but…

If they are right then we’d have to assume that after findig Bryan’s Elantra at the end of November. And pulling up his license photo and noticing his build and bushy eye brows. And and noticing his registration change to Washington (likely explaining the initial lack of front plate).

That they just stopped.

And that the 3 week gap in the PCA (11/30-12-23) has very little relevant or compelling evidence against Bryan.

And whatever inciting action happened shortly before they sought out the cell records.

I just don’t know that I believe that. They likely didn’t have enough for a warrant to gain access to his car, home, office or to arrest him. But I find it hard to believe that after noticing all of that stuff on 11/30 it took another 3 weeks for him to become an actual suspect.
 
I do not, but I know next to nothing about the workings of modern mesh network hotspots. But I wouldn't think the phone number would be logged, more likely the IP or possibly the MAC address.
I have never seen any report as to the type of router in use and how it was configured.

In many cases, the internet provider provides its own router and configures it to default settings and requires a password. For user provided routers, the user can configure the settings of the router. Most of these routers default to not log all access. Even if set to record access, most routers would not record every phone, tablet, or laptop that simply came in range.

This router was likely set up by the landlord or management company. Most likely a password would be required. If BK's phone somehow connected to the router, it would suggest he had access to the password, and may well have been in the house before
 
I have no idea what it means to “touch” WiFi, but I have seen devices show up on my Google WiFi app that aren’t mine. I identified one such device as a friend of my child (their name was in the device name) but this particular person had never connected to my WiFi and did not have my password. Further review showed this person had talked to my child at the front door briefly, then they left. I don’t believe there was even an attempt to connect.

I’ve seen this happen multiple times, but I’m not sure why or what it means. I’ve had many other people at my house that never show up on my device log, so I’m wondering if “auto join” or “ask to join” would need to be set on.

So my question, if anyone knows, do some routers simply record devices that are within range? Do such devices need to actively search for networks or attempt to connect?
I turn off wifi on my phone from time to time. The gym's wifi was so bad and dysfunctional that I turn it off when I go to the gym.

Then, I forget to turn it on again. I go to a large chain gym.
 
Interesting.

But my thought is that instead... he only drove back to see the commotion of a swarm of LE at the crime scene. He was there to marvel at the huge national homicide case unfolding before him.. that HE was responsible. Was probably proud.

It was daylight and he would never have chanced breaking into the house again... he would have been seen or caught red handed.... especially with him fully expecting there would be a crowd of law enforcement and onlookers there.
I just think it’s very risky to come back only 5 hours later just to see if there was any activity. It puts him on the radar straight away if he was to bump into an emergency service worker or even a member of the public who could identify him and his car at a later date, even if he wasn’t doing anything wrong at that particular time.
Then again he might like the control of seeing people trying to piece together what’s going on when he knows exactly what happened.
Also to counter my own argument even more, it is also very risky to enter a home and murder 4 people while driving your own car and having your phone on you so I guess anything after that isn’t exactly considered a risk to him.
 
I have had the experience of my cell phone connecting with a wi-fi network at various locations IF I have logged in with their password a previous time.

For example, dentist's office, doctor's office, library, friend's house. Even if I have done it only once before, it seems that my phone is automatically connected to their wi-fi without logging in with their password in the future, my phone automatically connects to their wi-fi if I am in that vicinity again. Even months later.

First time this happened, it surprised me. It was automatic.
True (unless you turn off the setting for automatically connecting. But unless the murderer had previously connected to the King Road house's wifi, I believe he wouldn't connect automatically just by being nearby, unless the house has an open wifi connection.
 
These are just my thoughts right now on the timeline that night:

—just by chance, Xana was at the front door getting her DoorDash at the same time BK was coming in through the back sliding glass door. He goes upstairs before X comes up to the living room. Neither knows the other is there.
—Xana sits down in the living room or kitchen to eat her food and watch some TikTok. The lights are only half on.
—Xana had to have heard the same noises DM heard coming from upstairs. Maybe she also heard a man’s voice. This causes X to get up and go to her bedroom where she tells Ethan “someone is here”.
—by then BK had started down the stairs and saw Xana go toward her bedroom and followed her.
—BK and Ethan begin fighting and wrestling. That’s when the “thud” happened. Ethan is stabbed and collapses.
—Xana watches the fight and stabbing and begins crying and whimpering. BK turns his attention to her saying “I’m here to help”. He then stabs her to death.
—BK leaves.

This is just how I see it right now. I’m sure it will change.


edit: typo
I think the DD arrived at 4:00, and BK was still trying to park his car at 4:04. So I suspect the DD guy was gone by the time BK entered the house. Of course a lot of this depends on the accuracy of the times given in the PCA, but I assume LE would have worked to nail down those times as best possible.
 
This is just my personal thought, but I think BK likely knew he'd left behind the sheath long before 9am the next morning. If he thought he better go back for it, I think he would have done so while still dark. Jmo. I think he came back to see if therre was activity.
I agree. If he threw it in the river on the long trip home, I bet it was a surprise when he didn't have it. I wonder if he searched the car thinking he dropped it there.
 
He showed malice aforethought, IMO, which is directly related to things like having ill will, hatred, animosity, just downright evil feelings towards someone(s). When you hate so strongly, there must be anger about something at the root.
AJMO
Everyone has seen this photo many times. I wanted to get a closer look, but am no good with photo software. Even one enlargement with my "paint" program got my interest. To me, it looks as if he may have injuries/scratches to his hand/dark bruise at top of opening between ring and pinky finger?, maybe to the underside of his forearm? I see possible injury to his center mouth/coldsore? I do wear glasses btw, so maybe my vision isn't the best. Can anyone else enlarge it to form most accurate opinions?
one of the victim's graves? Bruce Lee grave in Seattle?
 
True (unless you turn off the setting for automatically connecting. But unless the murderer had previously connected to the King Road house's wifi, I believe he wouldn't connect automatically just by being nearby, unless the house has an open wifi connection.
And there are no reports that the phone ever connected to the wifi at the residence.
 
What a weird thing to do, like a child, follow someone to the bathroom (like he did with that date). What a weird comment coming from a man (BK). I’m trying to imagine any man I know using this term and I cannot. Mother hatred. This and his other misogynistic verbiage at the brewery makes me think he was trying to test limits (like a child) or relating outside his head the same as he does in a weird fantasy world inside his head. As in responding to real life situations with some self scripted responses that didn’t quite match up.

My belief is that he is very socially awkward around females, and at his root, dislikes them. He may not even be fully aware that he truly dislikes women. Some of the worst offenders, I've been around, proclaim their love of women, all women, just look at them, what's not to love? They cook, clean, and can have relations w/o worrying about performance issues, not to mention they give us children. Their whole view was based on what women can do for THEM. So, yes, they perceived that they loved women, yet these were the same men that usually abused the women in their lives, quite terribly. Not all struck their partners, some firmly believed in not striking women and those men felt uber superior in their love of women.
 
Everyone has seen this photo many times. I wanted to get a closer look, but am no good with photo software. Even one enlargement with my "paint" program got my interest. To me, it looks as if he may have injuries/scratches to his hand/dark bruise at top of opening between ring and pinky finger?, maybe to the underside of his forearm? I see possible injury to his center mouth/coldsore? I do wear glasses btw, so maybe my vision isn't the best. Can anyone else enlarge it to form most accurate opinions?
I want to believe injuries are represented in the pictures too. But a quick look over the court photos tell a different story. His arms are clearly visible in dozens of them and nothing like the likely shadows in the car represented.

Unless we are assuming that the first 6 weeks of healing didn’t do the job or left scars but the subsequent 2 in Pennsylvania did and got rid of the scars.
 
I have no idea what it means to “touch” WiFi, but I have seen devices show up on my Google WiFi app that aren’t mine. I identified one such device as a friend of my child (their name was in the device name) but this particular person had never connected to my WiFi and did not have my password. Further review showed this person had talked to my child at the front door briefly, then they left. I don’t believe there was even an attempt to connect.

I’ve seen this happen multiple times, but I’m not sure why or what it means. I’ve had many other people at my house that never show up on my device log, so I’m wondering if “auto join” or “ask to join” would need to be set on.
So my question, if anyone knows, do some routers simply record devices that are within range? Do such devices need to actively search for networks or attempt to connect?
I can only say what my phone does. If Wi-Fi on my phone Is left on, then it will give opportunity to connect to any wi-fi available to connect to (both my phone and wi-fi know each other is there). If I don't leave wi-fi on, then it doesn't. It's that easy for mine, anyway. I usually turn my wi-fi off when I leave the house. I have to have it on at home because my house is in a 5g dead spot.

ETA:Every wi-fi connection at any friends house knows I'm there even if I have never connected. It sees me as an available connection. We check these things. It's just how we are.
 
Last edited:
In fact my first comments on this case were were disbelief that so called forensic experts, even former FBI, laughable former NYPD saying it was a certainty he cut his hands. I used that knife in basic for hours and hours, striking dummies made out of 2x8" and no one in our class even had a scratch.
Blood is very slippery and the knife gets covered in attacks such as this. The nature of a stabbing is the knife will come to a sudden halt, the hand will want to continue downward with momentum due to the now slippery handle compromising the grip.

There is a reason homicide detectives always want to see the hands of suspects as soon a possible after a knife attack. Suspects with hand injuries are common.
 
Last edited:
And there are no reports that the phone ever connected to the wifi at the residence.
To identify who’s close enough to connect to a WiFi, would you need to know the IP address? If so how would SG recognize it as BK’s? Does he have cell tower pings confused w/WiFi connections?
 
And there are no reports that the phone ever connected to the wifi at the residence.
Yep. And I'm trying to figure out what "touch someone's wifi" means. My phone could show probably a hundred or so wifi addresses as I walk down a street, but that doesn't mean I'm trying to get close to a particular address, or that I even know how close I am to the location with that wifi address.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
197
Guests online
279
Total visitors
476

Forum statistics

Threads
608,867
Messages
18,246,784
Members
234,475
Latest member
Strange Sally
Back
Top