ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 71

[Sandra Ade]

That makes sense. XK could have gone downstairs to pick up her DD at the front door.

<moo>

Yep

 

[jepop]

I agree completely re prosecutorial misconduct. Easy sources for those who would like to research further.

Equal Justice Initiative

EJI works to end mass incarceration and racial inequality.

eji.org

Search The Marshall Project’s archives

The Marshall Project is a nonprofit news organization covering the U.S. criminal justice system.

www.themarshallproject.org

Innocence Project

We work to free the innocent, prevent wrongful convictions, and create fair, compassionate, and equitable systems of justice for everyone.

innocenceproject.org

I also want to respond to the 'real killer' talk re framing, sheath, etc. I am one of the people who raised those points, not because I believe them but because dots were being connected that did not connect (eg; BK's car was seen so BK as driving - this requires an assumption, albeit a pretty logical one). I highlighted some of the issues because this is where the defense may seek to raise doubt. when there is a possible question, there can be doubt. reasonable or not is the big issue. enough doubts raised, the bigger the pool of doubt goes. In BK's case, the PCA is imo jmo not enough for bard. ICBW.
Do I think he did it? Yes.
Do I feel BARD has been met? No.
And all it takes is one juror to vote not guilty BARD.

BBM for focus
Yes, I also want to just keep mentioning that the PCA was intended to provide evidence of probable cause for arrrest IMO. It's fine, ofcourse, to keep pointing out the PCA is not enough to convict, but that is because it was never intended to be enough for a convistion, IMO. Conviction, by law, cannot happen at the stage of probable cause. MOO

ETA: BBM for focus

 

[wary]

They are gathering evidence, this is why they asked to delay the preliminary hearing.

They will present evidence, they are requesting 4 or 5 days for the hearing.

What would their motive be for presenting evidence at the preliminary hearing? The judge isn’t going to be swayed to their side by a battle of the experts.

Let’s consider a recent preliminary hearing, the supposed murder of Maya Millete. Still Missing - CA - Maya Millete, 39, missed daughter's birthday, Chula Vista, 7 Jan 2021 *husband arrested* #5

It’s in another state, and its a no-body case, so many things are different. However, it took nine days of testimony, the defense cross-examined like mad, (no pun intended,) but the defense did not call any witnesses. I believe that’s quite typical for prelims.

MOO

 

[TeaTime]

He has no alibi. No one framed him. He is just another psycho. There really is no more to it.

With all that stabbing, there is a 99.9% chance that he cut himself and bled at the scene.

It's him. Only him.

He will plead and take life in prison with out the possibility of parole over the jurors' recommendation of execution.

His family will talk him into it to save everyone further trauma.

JMHO

 

[Sachi]

He has no alibi. No one framed him. He is just another psycho. There really is no more to it.

With all that stabbing, there is a 99.9% chance that he cut himself and bled at the scene.

It's him. Only him.

He will plead and take life in prison with out the possibility of parole over the jurors' recommendation of execution.

His family will talk him into it to save everyone further trauma.

JMHO

Appreciate this!

Remembering Ethan Chapin, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Kaylee Goncalves

 

[SMK777]

I cringe every time I hear someone say "I have nothing to hide! I'll tell them everything! They can track all my movements and have all my records!"

Lots of innocent people with 'nothing to hide' have sat behind bars and continue to sit behind bars to this day.

People are very naive.

 

[iamshadow21]

He has no alibi. No one framed him. He is just another psycho. There really is no more to it.

With all that stabbing, there is a 99.9% chance that he cut himself and bled at the scene.

It's him. Only him.

He will plead and take life in prison with out the possibility of parole over the jurors' recommendation of execution.

His family will talk him into it to save everyone further trauma.

JMHO

I'd like to think he'd take the smart, less traumatic option and plea out in exchange for life imprisonment, like Gary Ridgway did.

But everything I've seen said about him to me suggests an arrogance, a sense of superiority and entitlement that reminds me more of Bundy. A man who enjoyed the theatre of his multiple trials possibly as much as the murders he committed. Not to mention the theatre of his appeals, the constant interviews with media, biographers and profilers, and the fan mail from women pathologically attracted to dangerous men.

Bundy also had a mother who loved him, who begged from the depths of her soul for his life. He had a long term partner with a young stepdaughter, and then, he married another woman and fathered a child while incarcerated. Every single one of these people, he protested his innocence to, right up until the end, until it was completely clear he was not going to dodge the chair. Then, only then, did he tell his loved ones that he was every bit as much a villain as he was known to be. He didn't plea to spare them anything, though he could have. Tactically, it would have made more sense to plead guilty. He might be alive today if he had. But he was having too much fun.

I think BK is going to enjoy it all.

 

[Cool Cats]

What would their motive be for presenting evidence at the preliminary hearing? The judge isn’t going to be swayed to their side by a battle of the experts.

Let’s consider a recent preliminary hearing, the supposed murder of Maya Millete. Still Missing - CA - Maya Millete, 39, missed daughter's birthday, Chula Vista, 7 Jan 2021 *husband arrested* #5

It’s in another state, and its a no-body case, so many things are different. However, it took nine days of testimony, the defense cross-examined like mad, (no pun intended,) but the defense did not call any witnesses. I believe that’s quite typical for prelims.

MOO

Yes, usually in preliminary hearings the defense sticks to cross examining the prosecution witnesses. I saw a bond hearing and only the prosecution presented a witness, but like you mentioned, the defense was heavily questioning that witness.

BK's attorney said they need 6 months to gather evidence for the hearing, this could include their own evidence to present as well as gathering prosecution evidence so they can have time to prepare their responses to it.

The prosecution presents evidence which can include witnesses in order to prove that there is enough probable cause to proceed forward with the Case towards trial. The burden of proof is significantly lower for a preliminary hearing than for a trial. The preliminary hearing just needs to establish probable cause, It protects the defendant from unfounded prosecution.

The Difference Between a Preliminary Hearing and a Trial

A "prelim" tests the prosecutor's decision to bring the case. It is not a trial.

www.nolo.com

.........What Can Defendants Gain From a Preliminary Hearing? ..........

Even though the defense doesn't expect to see all the prosecution's cards, the preliminary hearing may give the defense a preview of:

how strong the prosecution's evidence is
how persuasive the prosecution's witnesses are, and
how believable those witnesses might be should the case go to trial.
Basically, the defense tries to size up how solid the government's case is as a whole. Such information can be important to the defense—whether it ultimately settles the case in a plea bargain or proceeds to trial.

If the prosecution's case seems weak—say the prosecution witnesses change their earlier stories, forget important details, or are otherwise discredited—the defense may decide it's worthwhile to proceed to trial. The prosecution, on the other hand, might decide to offer a generous deal, or at least, the defense may gain leverage to push for one.

..........Defense Strategies for Cross-Examining Witnesses at the Preliminary Hearing...........

As useful as a vigorous cross-examination of prosecution witnesses can be, a sound alternative defense strategy is to cross-examine prosecution witnesses very briefly and politely. This serves two purposes:

First, it may relax and lull a witness into admitting damaging evidence either then and there, or later when the defense attorney unexpectedly gets aggressive at trial.

Second, the defense may save evidence that hurts the witness's credibility and spring it on the witness at trial. Because the defense did not produce this evidence at the preliminary hearing, the witness may not be expecting it at the trial, and the surprise may fluster the witness and make him or her look bad in the eyes of the jury.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

I'm not convinced that he stalked any individual(s) in a conventional sense and other than media narrative, nothing has been presented to convince me it's fact.

I'm leaning toward the fact that he was looking to kill and the house itself provided what he felt was the ideal location to carry out his plan.

I agree. And one reason the house was idea is that it housed young women he could attack.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

He could present:
- a cctv and his signature from a gym if he claimed he attended it that night
-a cctv and a receipt from a night store if he claimed he went there
- a statement from a friend if he claimed he visited this person that night
Etc, etc

A person can always prove one's innocence, provided it is true.

Wherever we go, we leave some traces.

As he left his at murder scene.

JMO

I'm home alone right now, and my internet history would show that, both in terms of the Wifi network I'm using and my browser and text history. My floodlight camera would show what time I came home and put the car in the garage for the night. Chris Watts was caught in part because his neighbor caught him backing his truck into his garage very early in the morning, which he had never done before. That said, I don't think it's possible to "always" prove innocence, or there wouldn't be innocent people in prison. But the same technology that allows law enforcement to spot criminals via surveillance cameras, license plate readers, GPS could also help an innocent person.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

I don't recall the victims families being part of the gag order. JMO

It's a lawyer who wants to be able to get media attention.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

jmo imo he could say he never knew. it's only once he was accused that he realizes this must be what happened, and off the hook for reporting them stolen. imo jmo. I don't believe that's whaat happened, but can I prove it? no. I'm hoping that if he's guilty, the prosecution can prove it bard. I hope they have physical evidence placing him in the house - blood, please or hair. something other than touch dna. jmo imo

he is not glued to his car, so they need to prove the he was in the car. jmo imo. what seems logical 'of course he was in it' can't jut be assumed at trial. esp with the theft issues with Elantras. Kia and Hyundai under Fire from Cities, Insurers over Too Easily Stolen Vehicles

I think it would be worse for him if he lied about an alibi and then couldn't prove it.imo jmo.

It's pretty hard to argue the car and his phone (!) were stolen when the car was in his possession the next morning.

 

[wary]

It's a lawyer who wants to be able to get media attention.

The six page memorandum certainly sounds as though the judge wanted to gag the families. Obviously, that’s only one side of the story. We’ll see what happens.

 

[Nova]

I don't believe there is much to be made of it. It has been said multiple times that even if the roommate had done something differently, the victim's wounds were so catastropic that none could have been saved.

At this point, we still actually don't know what the roommate saw or heard except brief mention in the PCA and much of it appears to be backed by their phone records and within that information may be a lot more information on her perception of events that evening. I very strongly doubt that anyone rolled over and went to sleep believing that people were being murdered in their home.

Even if the situation played out as people have speculated, there aren't many college students that have discovered their roommates slaughtered on a Sunday morning and if we take the PCA literally, the sounds she believes she heard, in no way warranted a 911 call.

Oh, I basically agree. But I can imagine a defense attorney using the delay in calling 911 to suggest that although DM's account seems ominous with hindsight, it apparently didn't motivate her to hurriedly call the authorities. I'm not saying there are no rebuttals to be made in response; we were just speculating as to what a defense of BK might look and sound like.

Just yesterday I UNsubscribed from a YT channel that often had good info, but the host kept insisting the 8-hour delay is evidence DM was doing something untoward during those hours. (I am omitting details.) THIS IS UTTER SPECULATION AND, IMHO, DISGUSTING! There is not a scintilla of evidence for it. Again, I am no longer watching that YouTuber! But he speaks to what some people might believe.

 

[Nova]

There are three events are happening simultaneously at approx 4am. Door dash -- something waking DM -- KG making noise upstairs. It seems to me that BK was inside the house. <moo> ....

Very interesting! I tend to agree it is unlikely the intruder--whoever he was--saw the food delivery and then broke into the house anyway and within minutes.

Either he was already inside, arrived a few minutes after the food delivery (which may make the sounds of Murphy playing unrelated to the crime), or maybe he was approaching from above the tree line behind the house and his view of the front was obstructed. But re the latter, I would expect him to hear the Door Dash guy at that hour of night, even if he couldn't see him.

 

[Zella]

Per the PCA, the Door Dasher was there around 4 am approximately and BK drove up for that final time before the murders at 4:04 am. It's unclear when his previous laps around the house were other than they'd started approximately 30 minutes earlier.

I think he was blithely unaware of the Door Dasher and that he was probably doing another one of his turns like he was recorded doing at the gas station right about when the food was being dropped off. My guess is if he'd seen the Door Dasher, he may have been spooked off that night since I suspect one of the reasons he was doing laps was to make sure everyone was asleep. MOO

 

[Thewiley]

Just who are these so-called "sources close to the investigation"? I saw basically the same thing reported on News Nation (Banfield). If they have a source, they should name it, otherwise, IMO, it's just hearsay.

Idaho victim Xana Kernodle fought back against alleged killer Bryan Kohberger: report

Slain University of Idaho student Xana Kernodle fought back against alleged killer Bryan Kohberger — suffering noticeable defensive wounds on her hands, a report said.

nypost.com

Hi @Ceska
Respectfully, news, journalists, etc do not reveal their sources, without permission.
there is a good reason for this, I’m sure you know why.
just like, whistleblowers remain anonymous…
witnesses remain anonymous
etc…
I can respect the logic behind this
edited to add… I have to make the decision, fact check and so on if I take the word of the press , respectfully

 

[Nova]

BK planned to kill while avoiding any dangers and difficult situations that could arise....

But for me, coward will do fine.

I am scratching my head at this debate re whether the intruder was a "coward". What does it matter? (I'm not picking on you, CGray123. Yours is just the last post of many I have read on the subject.)

If the charges are true, BK is a brutal killer, and probably a sadist and a psychopath. All of which trumps "coward" in my book!

 

[Ceska]

Hi @Ceska
Respectfully, news, journalists, etc do not reveal their sources, without permission.
there is a good reason for this, I’m sure you know why.
just like, whistleblowers remain anonymous…
witnesses remain anonymous
etc…
I can respect the logic behind this
edited to add… I have to make the decision, fact check and so on if I take the word of the press , respectfully

Except certain details conflict with what police have stated. Respectfully, I will stick with the facts from law enforcement.

 

[Nova]

Thanks. This explains why the defense is saying they have no evidence to turn over to the prosecution at this time.

(I'm not disagreeing or lecturing you, CC. Yours is merely the last post I saw on the subject.)

The site I link below includes replies from a number of lawyers re the rules of reciprocal discovery AND the limitations thereon, none of which refers to Idaho specifically, though most states have similar rules based on federal requirements. (Any requirement for reciprocal discovery on the part of the defense has to be tempered by the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and rules re attorney-client privilege, I think.)

My best guess--IANAL--is that IF the defense requires the DA to disclose material, then the defense must reciprocate with a list of its witnesses, exhibits and any report that will be relied upon by expert witness, etc. Also required is disclosure of any alibi evidence.

If I am reading correctly--and there's no guarantee I am--the defense is NOT required to disclose things it will not use at trial. I am thinking of expert witness testimony that doesn't help the defense. So any report by the defense expert who toured the crime scene won't be disclosed unless BK's lawyer plans to use it.

Maybe Cassady or one of our other lawyers will want to clarify my conclusions. I promise I will not be offended.

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/what-does-defendants-reciprocal-discovery-mean-in--2086622.html