ID - 4 University of Idaho Students Murdered - Moscow # 21

[doublestop]

I asked the same exact thing yesterday (even the part about setting fire to it). Like what does targeting a house even mean? Is someone enraged by the structure, the design, the materials used in its construction …… or the people who live in it?

Maybe it means targeting the group that is in the house, rather than a specific individual. Or perhaps what the house stands for to the killer.

 

[Crystal clear truth]

But: imagine you were asked to give fingerprints and you say, no? It would look strange, right? You would not refuse being fingerprinted, right?

Your DNA is your fingerprint, merely in the 21st century. You leave it everywhere. Really, if anyone wants your DNA, consider they already have it. Refusal would look strange. No one can deny you drawing a contract that your results are discarded and used only for this case, not entered into any databases, whatever you want. But outright refusal would be suspicious. In fact, LE should have own papers about DNA, detailing how they’ll use yours. JMO.

I think this was true years ago but not in this day and age- I'd not think anything nefarious if people refused only that they are well informed on their rights

 

[10ofRods]

I'm torn on this. I expect that's exactly what they are doing. But there are some people that just don't want to have their DNA taken.
I would be one of them.
And then additional resources would be wasted by investigating those people that simply have a thing about privacy rights.
While the killer just goes on his merry way.

Courts have ruled that asking for DNA doesn't violate a person's right to remain silent, so it's exactly like fingerprints. So yes, you could ask for your lawyer and refuse to cooperate. You would be paying that lawyer, because you wouldn't be charged with anything yet. It's called "refusing to cooperate." And you don't have to.

It would land you squarely on the short list of suspects, of course. It's not "privacy rights" when you are called in for a criminal investigation and you refuse to cooperate by providing breathalyzer or even blood tests (if they think you are intoxicated). Certainly call a lawyer, but be prepared for juries to have a dim view of one's resistance to blood, toxicology, dna and fingerprint collection because of a "right to privacy." Note that in my scenario, there is other evidence to connect you to the criminal situation.

You would also have to be prepared to sit a long time in the station without water or coffee or using the restroom (because your DNA can be collected, legally, from door handles, cups and so on).

I am into privacy rights as much or more than anyone I know, but I also know the criminal investigation system. People called in as suspects in murders fall into two groups: cooperative and uncooperative. The latter group arouses suspicion in everyone who is investigated and in most people with common sense. It's not a casual matter or a casual decision. And police can have you sit a very long time while you obtain a lawyer and that lawyer shows up. Don't touch anything if you're fearful your DNA will implicate you in some way.

 

[Seattle1]

Autopsies were conducted on November 17th. The Latah County Coroner confirmed the identity of the four murdered individuals and their cause and manner of death as homicide by stabbing. The coroner stated the four victims were likely asleep, some had defensive wounds, and each was stabbed multiple times. There was no sign of sexual assault.

King Road Homicides | Moscow, ID

www.ci.moscow.id.us

 

[Skigirl]

I've been browsing this thread and watched a few YT videos about these terrible murders. I've heard/read it mentioned a few times now about Greek life, what does it refer to other than being Greek ? If you don't mind me asking ? TIA

In the US, fraternities (all male) and sororities (all female) are private clubs, always named by Greek letters, that are semi-affiliated with universities. They choose members (and members choose them) at the same time, in a coordinated series of events called "rush." People call fraternities and sororities "the Greek system." Most fraternities and sororities are part of their own respective national organization, with "chapters" at different college campuses.

 

[docfishbone28]

If perp is someone they did not know and in fact is a psychopath, then I would be looking at that apartment complex behind the house. <modsnip> Maybe jealousy, maybe infatuation, maybe was turned away from a party. Halloween was 2 weeks before. Wonder why there was no party going on that night, opportunity, circumstances with individuals leaving or coming back to town, They have a perfect view of that house from the back parking lot and could get around undetected. Still however dont believe he intended to murder 4 and there was a target. Alot of scary movies coming out around this time also could inspire someone to play out their fantasy. If they have not pointed the finger at someone close to them yet that would be next stop that apartment complex

 

[techette]

I don't think parents making repairs to their child's apt/lock indicates any reason for suspicion. My hubby is constantly fixing things at my girls' college apts because the management company notoriously takes forever to fix things. And a lock would be the first thing fixed by a dad worried about their kids safety.

I did not mean to imply that fixing a lock constitutes suspicious activity. It just made me think that usually entire family of a victim will be screened so why not include their names on the "cleared" list? Maybe just supposed to be obvious.

 

[CityKid]

What SG knows about E & X is most likely the same as what we know, based on info put out there by MSM & LE. If he doesn't have first hand knowledge than it's by pure speculation (just like us here).

SG stated that he's using logic and putting pieces together. The reason he thinks 1 or both people on the 3rd floor was/were targeted was due to the extra effort the killer made to take the stairs up to the 3rd floor. Not to mention that it's been known since the beginning that the 3rd floor was the bloodiest part of the crime seen. If E and/or X were the target, why even go upstairs?

Perhaps the killer entered on the second floor, killed X and E, and as they were leaving they realized K and M were there?

 

[Allabouttrial]

TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH KAYLEE'S DAD (FOX NEWS)

5th December.

Presenter - S., before we start this interview, I just want you to know how much our hearts go out to you. I know from what I'm hearing from people everywhere that they are with you, they are praying for you and they're also hoping for justice to come sooner rather than later for your daughter and her friends. You mentioned here, you talked about the manner in which Kaylee and Maddie were killed, is different. And, what does that tell you?. And, what are the police telling you that that means?.

Dad - There's a couple things that tell me, with common sense, but I'm not a professional so I want to specify that, but they've said the entry point was the slider or the window. It was in the middle floor. So, to me, he doesn't have to go upstairs. His entry and exit are available without having to go upstairs or downstairs. Looks like he probably may have not gone downstairs. We don't know that for sure, but he obviously went upstairs. So, I'm using logic that he chose to go up there when he didn't have too and I can kind of tell by my daughter's texts messages, she didn't call 911, she wasn't saying anything along the lines of like she heard something or she was in fear. So, I'm just putting the dots together. As far as the investigators - they're very tight lipped and they're keeping everything close to their vest and I understand that and I'm probably not the right person to share all these things with. So, I'm just trusting them that their case is super tight and they don't really need to reach out to the community and all the evidence is right there in that home.

Presenter - So, Steve, and I want to be respectful as I can tell you're trying to walk this tight rope as well with law enforcement, but the desire to know and get some type of action, as well. You've said, both now to Rachel and then in the clip in your appearance with Laurence Jones, that your daughter and Maddie had different means or manner of attack and that suggests one of them was the target. Can you share with us, do you know and you can't share, either way, which one was targeted?.

Dad - I can't. I asked for permission to do just that and they said no. I probably over disclosed information that they wish I wouldn't have said, but the story's going cold. There's less people coming to Moscow. I'm not gonna go sleep in my bed knowing that I could get up and I could go to town and I could I could do something, and I'm not gonna go away and I hate to be a pain but, as a father, I just can't even sleep thinking that I could be doing something. So, that's why I'm...

Presenter - Understandable. Let me ask the flipside too. You're being respectful toward police about the fact that they need to be tight lipped, but if there was something you felt like you deserve to know, or you should know as a father, at this point, are there questions you have unresolved from the police that you feel like, 'hey, just throw me a bone here and let me know'?.

Dad - For sure. I mean, alibis, just share the alibi. If you're not sharing an alibi, to me, it tells me that you're not 100% confident that it's gonna stick. Or, you have somebody who's gonna come forward and say, 'hey, I don't know what he told you or that person's alibi was, but I have this information, I have something'. So, if you don't share the alibi it makes it a little bit harder for us to just let those go and I've said it before, I don't wanna make victims out of just bystanders and witnesses. So, just share those things and that would help.

Presenter - S., do you get the sense that you're being asked to not talk more and that law enforcement is being so tight lipped to protect an investigation that is honing in on a conclusion, or because they are totally lost and there is no real sense of direction?. I think all of us, we want to trust law enforcement, we want them to do their job, but I don't know if you know. I have no idea - Is this thing honing in at this point, or is it scattered all over the place?.

Dad - Wish I knew for sure. I did sit down with the investigator, the lead investigator, and I looked in his eyes and I got a sense that this guy was gonna do everything in his power to figure something out. But, if the evidence isn't there, that's the part that I'm concerned.. and then there's layers of separation. The communication is not the same as the boots on the ground. All the officers that are out on the streets, those guys are working their tails off, but there's a different person who does the communication and that guy's sitting with the lawyer and that guy's sitting there telling him, 'you gotta protect things that are beyond the case, like the town and the community and the college itself'. Those don't matter as much to me. I mean, I definitely don't want to hurt them, but I have an agenda and I think it's pretty clear it's these two girls and that's what I'm working for and I'm not gonna let that story fall apart, just because they don't want wanted posters, you know, on their next rush of students that come into town.

Presenter - Wow. You know, I have to say, S., I hadn't really considered those factors, but it's obvious that that would be a consideration for the Communications Director of the Police Department and also the PR for the school and the town. Are you communicating with the parents of the other victims?. Are they feeling as frustrated as you are?. I hate to ask a two-part question, but I'm going to do it anyway. Do you feel confident in the police investigation and the people investigating right now?.

Dad - I do not feel confident and that's why I push the envelope and say a little bit more. I hate to be that guy but, you know, there's a job to do. Everybody has a job and a role to play in this and this is my role as a parent. I have talked to, obviously, Maddie's mother and her father and I've talked to Xana's father and he said, 'hey, you can speak on behalf and you can help push this narrative'. So, I feel confident there. That's as far as the real communications that I have. So, one family have missed out to being able to be in the same location, and the same (??) to really get on the same page. So, I try not to mention that and stay within my lane of what is my role and I'm not trying to just gear it all to my daughter. It's just I can't speak for other people.

Presenter - S., before we let you go, just share a little bit with our audience about Kaylee.

Dad - Kaylee was amazing, hard worker. She was like.. she hung out with two boys, her brother and her cousin, and she was right in between. She wanted to be faster than them. She was that girl that was like, really like, she was kind of like a Punky Brewster type girl. And we missed out on a really smart person that was going to be a little conservative. She was conservative. She was always looking up stories on child, you know, getting trafficked and she was telling me that she thinks it's a lot bigger than people understand. So, you know, we can't replace her guys. There's no replacing any one of these people.

Presenter - S, we're all parents on this couch and I just can't tell you how much we feel for you. Can't imagine what you're going through, you and your whole family and I know that you came on the show today because you're hoping that people that might have information, you're hoping that more information come forward, and so we encourage anybody to call 208-883-7180. And I've heard you say before S., it could be anything. You have no idea how small the piece of information could be that could help.

You know, and S., good on you for agitating. We need more men and fathers willing to do precisely what you're doing. Keeping people honest and working toward a solution. God bless.

You're doing your daughter's memory proud and frankly you're an amazing example of fatherhood, even after something tragic like this happened. Thank you for joining us today.

Dad - Thank you guy's. Have a good day.

 

[TKG]

It was the house to the right of 1122 Kings Lane. The back of that house faces the parking area of 1122 Kings Lane, the front faces away but the ring camera on the front picks up traffic on Kings Lane as well as what is in front of that house, so that is how they were seen arriving home and the driver leaving shortly after dropping them off.

Thank you for the information. Where did you read or hear this? I have been looking for this since the family first announced they were caught by a neighbor's surveillance footage? This is important IMO. Lights going on and off, footage of the dog barking, going in and out. They also said they saw the girls on footage let Murphy out and then lock their door!

ETA: The camera would not seem to catch the dog going in and out or them locking the door if it was on the front of the neighbor's home. That piece of information is what has thrown me.

 

[waldojabba]

he kept hinting that they'd offered to help him out on the side so thanks for the confirmation.


"because he fears cops in the major case are too “inexperienced.....
Steve Goncalves raised his fears Sunday in an exclusive interview with The Post, saying he was also concerned one suspicious character had been ruled out too quickly — seemingly allowing him to flee the country without taking a DNA test.
He lashed out at the lack of leads coming from cops.....
One of the murder squad officers is only 26, he complained, meaning he was only 19 when the sleepy city of Moscow last had a slaying, in 2015.
“So they’re just inexperienced — and I don’t want anyone making mistakes in my child’s case,” Goncalves told The Post, also blasting the officers as “not exactly the most tech-savvy people.”
“One of the private detectives I talked to has 50 years in the game,” he said of his outside help

( he also points finger at a particular individual)


context:
80 -100 LEO on this case, made-up of MPD, ISP and FBI ( 80 was reported by Idaho reporter a week ago, up to a 100 mentioned by Banfield on her last show)

think we all appreciate why this can be problematic - from last time we discussed it on the threads

IMO If he has hired a PI I give him credit
I would do the same thing myself.

What confuses me is why there is a need to share that information and air of all his grievances publically.
I know he wants to be helpful to the investigation and keep it in the public eye so I guess he must think this is the most effective way to do that ? Perhaps it is the way the NY Post writes the article that make it sound like a bit of negativity towards LE?
My heart truly breaks for this grieving father with all the best of intentions -

From the NY Post article
"...interview with The Post, saying he was also concerned that one suspicious character had been ruled out too quickly — seemingly allowing him to flee the country without taking a DNA test.
He lashed out at the lack of leads coming from cops, who backtracked on claims that the killer appeared to be targeting at least one of the four roommates and have yet to even suggest a profile of the likely slasher.
One of the murder squad officers is only 26, he complained, meaning he was only 19 when the sleepy city of Moscow last had a slaying, in 2015.
The cops are “just inexperienced — and I don’t want anyone making mistakes in my child’s case,” Steve Goncalves told The Post of murdered 21-year-old Kaylee.“We’re trying to give them the benefit of the doubt,” he said of police investigators...


.

 

[steeltowngirl]

I tried, but the transcripts just seemed to get all mixed in with a bunch of media. And I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed.

In that instance I was trying to find transcripts of the two press conferences. But I know there is a lot of work that goes into creating them, and they can be invaluable in discussions. I just wish we had them all together in one, easily searched location.

Anyway, thanks for all your work! It is greatly appreciated.

To find and filter to the excellent transcripts created by @Allabouttrial for this case, go to the media thread, then go up to the magnifying glass, do a search on the field “this thread” on member Allabouttrial

Results:

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/search/811135/

 

[layer]

Courts have ruled that asking for DNA doesn't violate a person's right to remain silent, so it's exactly like fingerprints. So yes, you could ask for your lawyer and refuse to cooperate. You would be paying that lawyer, because you wouldn't be charged with anything yet. It's called "refusing to cooperate." And you don't have to.

It would land you squarely on the short list of suspects, of course. It's not "privacy rights" when you are called in for a criminal investigation and you refuse to cooperate by providing breathalyzer or even blood tests (if they think you are intoxicated). Certainly call a lawyer, but be prepared for juries to have a dim view of one's resistance to blood, toxicology, dna and fingerprint collection because of a "right to privacy." Note that in my scenario, there is other evidence to connect you to the criminal situation.

You would also have to be prepared to sit a long time in the station without water or coffee or using the restroom (because your DNA can be collected, legally, from door handles, cups and so on).

I know all that, and yet...

If they wanted to waste their time and follow me around and go through my trash etc, so be it. I can't control them, only myself. As I said, I'm torn on it. In theory I would want them to clear me as quickly as possible so they can go look for the real killer. In practice, I would make them get a warrant to submit my DNA. Not all fear is rational.

If I found myself feeling like an actual suspect in any case, of course this would be different. I would seek and follow the advice of my counselor.

It's not just me. My mom, may she rest in peace, never would consent to having her fingerprints taken. LOL

 

[NuttMegg]

Quickie from google: 20,000 to 30,000 black bears in Idaho. I can't speak to Idaho, but there is not a hunter in Alaska (imo) who goes to the woods without a huge sheath knife, sometimes successfully using it to fight off a grizzly or black bear. Definitely to quarter a huge game animal to pack or sled out. I don't think the connection between hunting and big knife can be overemphasized in this murder case. The skill and familiarity using that large weapon, developed over a lifetime.

Jmo, but that's all we've got about now, opinions.

 

[al66pine]

If Dad's comment is accurate and not a LE rehearsed script-fed to the Media-and one of the victims wounds were different -say - worse-----wouldn't that mean that victim was probably killed last? The extra time and noise needed to overkill would wake up the others if still alive? imo

Was intended Victim Killed Last?

@Birmingplumb Thx for your comment explaining intended vic was probably killed last.
Another possibility --- perp initially encountered one person, a non IntVic (e.g., awake making bathroom stop?). on second or third floor, quietly killed vic, then proceeded to 2nd person on same floor, who may or may not have been IntVic. Then perp proceeded to other floor, killed the other two.
And another possibility: Perp may have killed IntVic first, then the other three, then returned to the already dead IntVic to inflict further injuries.
Just possibilities, personally open to the sequence in your post, or to any above, or another idea not yet discussed.
imo, moo, jmo.

eta: Hit send too early. After posting, added & changed several sentences. Sorry.

 

[layer]

To find and filter to the excellent transcripts created by @Allabouttrial for this case, go to the media thread, then go up to the magnifying glass, do a search on the field “this thread” on member Allabouttrial

Results:

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/search/811135/

I did try that, but like I said I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed. Then I thought about just clicking on @Allabouttrial and searching through Content, but I got a creepy stalker vibe so I didn't

 

[darring21]

Courts have ruled that asking for DNA doesn't violate a person's right to remain silent, so it's exactly like fingerprints. So yes, you could ask for your lawyer and refuse to cooperate. You would be paying that lawyer, because you wouldn't be charged with anything yet. It's called "refusing to cooperate." And you don't have to.

It would land you squarely on the short list of suspects, of course. It's not "privacy rights" when you are called in for a criminal investigation and you refuse to cooperate by providing breathalyzer or even blood tests (if they think you are intoxicated). Certainly call a lawyer, but be prepared for juries to have a dim view of one's resistance to blood, toxicology, dna and fingerprint collection because of a "right to privacy." Note that in my scenario, there is other evidence to connect you to the criminal situation.

You would also have to be prepared to sit a long time in the station without water or coffee or using the restroom (because your DNA can be collected, legally, from door handles, cups and so on).

I am into privacy rights as much or more than anyone I know, but I also know the criminal investigation system. People called in as suspects in murders fall into two groups: cooperative and uncooperative. The latter group arouses suspicion in everyone who is investigated and in most people with common sense. It's not a casual matter or a casual decision. And police can have you sit a very long time while you obtain a lawyer and that lawyer shows up. Don't touch anything if you're fearful your DNA will implicate you in some way.

Technically, you wouldn't need a lawyer or have to sit at the police station unless you have been arrested. I would also be reluctant to give the government my DNA. It is becoming more common.

 

[Dysfunkshun]

I got the vibe from the News Nation special yesterday that the parents of the victims aren't getting along. Anyone else get that vibe?

Either that or he feels someone is trying to put a wedge between the parents/families.

 

[EmmieA]

I’m wondering how many people would still think K was the so-called target if her family wasn’t giving daily interviews. In other words, I think people think she’s the target simply because she is the victim we hear about the most & know the most about.

IMO there wasn’t a single target and the only thing I can think of that makes K stand out as a possible target is she was only there for the weekend. But that’s not enough for me to label her the target

MOO

ebm: typo

 

[Allabouttrial]

I did try that, but like I said I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed. Then I thought about just clickiing on @Allabouttrial and searching through Content, but I got a creepy stalker vibe so I didn't

Needs must!