4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, 2022 #78

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #381
PrairieWind said:
<modsnip: quoted post was snipped> The sheath doesn't have to be "planted." Its existents in and of itself is suspicious. The very existence of the DNA may be a defense. We see only the prosecution side of the case so far. And we all KNOW that. Why do we see so many convictions overturned these days? Because prosecutors sought a path and made the evidence fit it. And disregarded anything to the contrary. IF (and its a big if) it is his DNA on the sheath, what does that show? It shows it is his DNA on the sheath. Nothing more.
Click to expand...
I understand what you say as an advocate for doubts about the evidence, but assuming expert comparison and statistical testimony is admitted under IR 402, the question will be not so much what the evidence shows but more what could a reasonable juror infer from it, in the context of the other evidence presented. All MOO. (Not an attorney)
 
  • #382
PRELIM HEARING DATE CHANGED TO JUN 30
gliving said:
A new court date for a motion hearing. @PrairieWind


Event Date and TimeMay 25, 2023 10:00 AM MDT
Event Status Scheduled
Event Type Motion Hearing
Event Location
Latah County Courthouse
522 S. Adams
Room Courtroom 1
Moscow, ID 83843
(208) 883-2255

Click to expand...
Thanks again @gliving . Vinelink lists more changes have been made. NOT changed on public view court schedule page yet.
Event Date and Time Jun 30, 2023 09:00 AM MDT
Event Status Scheduled
Event Type Preliminary Hearing
Event Location
Latah County Courthouse
522 S. Adams
Room Courtroom 1
Moscow, ID 83843
(208) 883-2255
and 2
Event Date and TimeMay 25, 2023 10:00 AM MDT
Event Status Scheduled
Event Type Motion Hearing
Event Location
Latah County Courthouse
522 S. Adams
Room Courtroom 1
Moscow, ID 83843
(208) 883-2255

NOT changed on the court summary below yet:

edit link. Interesting: Vinelink is usually pretty accurate.
 
Last edited:
  • #383
  • #384
I'm Nobody said:
PRELIM HEARING DATE CHANGED TO JUN 30

Thanks again @gliving . Vinelink lists more changes have been made. NOT changed on public view court schedule page yet.
Event Date and Time Jun 30, 2023 09:00 AM MDT
Event Status Scheduled
Event Type Preliminary Hearing
Event Location
Latah County Courthouse
522 S. Adams
Room Courtroom 1
Moscow, ID 83843
(208) 883-2255
and 2
Event Date and TimeMay 25, 2023 10:00 AM MDT
Event Status Scheduled
Event Type Motion Hearing
Event Location
Latah County Courthouse
522 S. Adams
Room Courtroom 1
Moscow, ID 83843
(208) 883-2255

NOT changed on the court summary below yet:

edit link. Interesting: Vinelink is usually pretty accurate.
Click to expand...
There is a sealed notice (3/28) listed on the case summary that has not made it to the cases of interest page. It appeared on the case summary around 4/11.

MOO
 
  • #385
CGray123 said:
@Wallendo has keenly observed that the PCA mentions only the comparison between the DNA found on trash recovered from BK's PA trash dump and the DNA on the sheath found at the murder scene. That comparison showed that the DNA on the trash was not excluded as the father of the person whose DNA was found on the sheath, and that 99.9998 of the male population would be expected to be excluded.

We have no information at all about how the DNA recovered from the knife sheath - or from BK after his arrest - was processed and analyzed, or even whether they match. @PrairieWind rightly reminds us that the admissibility and credibility of the expert DNA comparison testimony will almost certainly be challenged and we can't make definitive judgments about the effectiveness of that testimony. I suspect the expert will also be asked to address the issues mentioned here, like the possibility that touch DNA accounts for the evidence of the sheath. While we can speculate about the outcome of the challenges we really don't have the evidence yet for definitive opinions, and BK is still entitled to the benefit of the doubt in court.

I can only say that I have no reason to doubt that the Idaho State Lab employs competent people who correctly used scientifically tested and accepted techniques with established standards and procedures and with an error rate that is sufficiently low to be relied upon as evidence. I haven't closed my mind on that, but no one has produced MSM information or court decisions suggesting the ISL's performance is anything less than superb. What do we know about the ISL? Anyone?
Click to expand...
QUOTE:
"What do we know about the ISL? Anyone?"

Here's something about the Idaho State Lab that LE uses. This shows the company they used for the genetic testing. They actually use a different company for that.

slate.com

Police Haven’t Said How They Cracked the Idaho Murders. This Is How.

Investigators found suspect Bryan Kohberger with the method that solved the Golden State Killer case. But they aren’t saying so.
slate.com slate.com

Idaho State Police has a contract with Othram, a forensic genealogy company, to conduct genealogy testing, according to a July 2021 memo. (Othram and Idaho State Police Forensic Services declined to comment.)

Once the DNA profile is ready, it gets uploaded to GEDmatch or FamilyTreeDNA, if not both; these are two primary genealogy sites that permit some types of law enforcement searches. The FBI played a role in the forensic genealogy work in the Idaho case, according to the source familiar with the investigation, something several genealogists confirmed would be likely to happen in such a high-profile investigation. (The FBI declined to comment, and Anthony Dahlinger, spokesperson for the Moscow Police Department, wrote, “Due to the gag order issued by our Judge I am not allowed to discuss the case in any form.”)

Regardless of who is conducting the investigation, genealogists look for partial matches, hoping to find relatives within the third-cousin range. They then began the process of building an enormous family tree, using a vast array of public records and more-traditional detective work to create a short list of people within that tree who could plausibly be the suspect. The fact that Kohberger lived 10 miles from the crime scene would have helped him stand out. So too would the fact that he owned a white Elantra.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20230430-002151.png
    Screenshot_20230430-002151.png
    491.7 KB · Views: 22
  • #386
A more detailed look at some of the warrants...

I am looking at the warrants for the story. IMO -- and this is just the way I am looking at this -- I try to keep any speculation within the framework of the known facts, so even if I like a theory, if it's incongruent with what we know now, I put it aside (although admittedly, a few of the things I thought were total hooey at the beginning of this have been pulled back in as potentials - that's how wild this trail has been!)

IMO the warrants tell a story. I am connecting the dots in various ways, following behind as LE followed the leads. There are a lot of holes, a lot we don't know, but there is a trail IMO. I keep in mind that court rules/ID statutes determine what is exempt from PRR and what can be sealed/redacted as I wade through these. I.C.A.R. 32. Records of The Judicial Department - Examination and Copying - Exemption From and Limitations on Disclosure. | Supreme Court I.C.A.R. 32(i)

The financial institution warrants are of particular interest to me (not more than DD and Tinder and 19-20 accounts and the footprints and the 8 hours and the exculpatory evidence - but they're way up there on List of Things I Want to Know), so I went back and took another look because the other most interesting pieces are really spaghetti at wall right now IMO). A few other caveats that I tried to remember as I reviewed these:
  • The other 3 and 5 may not always be the same 3 and 5 on each warrant.
  • The other 3 and 5 may not may not just be the roommates and boyfriends.
  • The other other 3 and 5 may not be names known to us at all.
  • The other 3 and 5 redacted names on the receipts may be different from receipt to receipt, warrant to warrant; IOW, I cannot assume it's only a pool of 7 or 9 people total.
  • The only combination I can be certain of is that of the four victims. The rest is assumption.
LE did the first round of financial institution warrants 11/19 - 6 days after the victims were discovered. It totally makes sense to see if there was a financial motive and/or trail within those records:
  • Bank of America: 11/19, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Block: 11/19, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Umpquah Bank: 11/19, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Paypal/Venmo: 11/19, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
After that, the number of additional parties increases from 3 to 5 - but why?
Warrant requirement tells us that there's a nexus to the crime, so what probable cause did LE have for the increase in accounts and parties? Maybe it's just a lot of free toasters and credit cards, but that's a lot of toasters and a lot of unsecured debt to college students imo.

IMO it looks like LE was following a trail - but of what?
It looks like they knew about the 11/19 accounts initially, and then something happened and they started adding more parties and obviously looking at more accounts. But why?
  • Numerica Credit Union: 11/27, 4 victims and 5 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Idaho Central Credit Union: 11/27, 4 victims and 5 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Wells Fargo: 11/27, 4 victims and 5 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • American Express: 11/27, 4 victims and 5 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and I can't tell how many others because bullet points were redacted)
  • Idaho Dept of Labor: 11/28, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Discover Bank: 11/28, 4 victims and 5 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Banner Bank : 11/28, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Potlach Credit Union #1: 11/28, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
And why didn't they do this one right away or at least with 11/27-11/28 ones:
  • Elan Financial Services: 12/22, Kaylee only (by this time they knew about BK, but it's interesting and potentially telling that they did not do a warrant for this along with the other rounds - why not?)
Was there no probable cause prior to that? If not, why not? What changed?

Other warrants with similar dates - Do any of those pieces fit together?

The Apple warrants are not for the victims; theirs were done earlier and their names are not redacted.
  • Apple warrant #1 Order to Seal - warrant and affidavit sealed - 11/28
  • Apple warrant #2 Order to Seal - warrant and affidavit sealed - 11/28
  • Apple warrant #3 Order to Seal - warrant and affidavit sealed - 11/28
  • First DoorDash warrant was 12/6. Ditto for first Tinder warrant for 19-20 redacted.


I also find this one interesting because it's a warrant for AT&T and not for the victims or BK and completely sealed, not just redacted (warrant and affidavit) on 1.6.23, after BK was in custody:


These 3 are completely sealed (warrant&affidavit), we don't even know to whom, so why is that? What would the name tell us?
This one on 11.16
This one on 12.5
This one on 1.9.2023 (after BK was in custody, completely sealed warrant and affidavit):

This is all IMO except for the specific dates and information stated in the orders, warrants and receipts. Those are linked here: Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest
I do not want to stir up speculation, but to share my summary and put this out, not expecting answers because we just don't know, but to raise questions and see if others are considering the same things.

We know LE cannot get warrants for curiosity. There must be probable cause and specificity as to things and places to be searched/seized and nexus to crime. Warrants are not issued for spitballing (see general warrant information below) If the court is honoring the fourth amendment (and I like to believe that they do), then probable cause exists, and the compelling evidence of that within the sealed affidavits. If all that is true, then these warrants tell a story. In support of my statements above re 4A and general warrants:
Why general warrants are verbotten and of Probable Cause and Particularity:
harvardlawreview.org

Geofence Warrants and the Fourth Amendment - Harvard Law Review

Introduction: If You Build It, They Will Come For months, Zachary McCoy tracked the distance of his bike rides around his neighborhood in Gainesville,...
harvardlawreview.org harvardlawreview.org
and some links in here and an explanation of why general warrants are not allowed:
 
Last edited:
  • #387
I haven't seen this link shared here (I did a search and didn't find it) but re the 5.25 motion hearing:

Idaho Criminal Rules: I.C.R. 12. Pleadings and Motions Before Trial - Form of Pleadings - Defenses and Objections. | Supreme Court

(a) Pleadings and Motions. The only pleadings in criminal proceedings are the complaint, indictment or information, and the pleas of guilty and not guilty. Defenses and objections before trial must be raised by motion to dismiss or to grant appropriate relief as provided in these rules.

(b) Pretrial Motions. Any defense objection or request which can be determined without trial of the general issue may be raised before the trial by motion. The following must be raised prior to trial: (the most interesting ones IMO are bolded)

(1) defenses and objections based on defects in the prior proceedings in the prosecution;

(2) defenses and objections based on defects in the complaint, indictment or information (other than that it fails to show jurisdiction of the court or to charge an offense, which objections may be made at any time during the pendency of the proceedings);

(3) motions to suppress evidence because it was illegally obtained;

(4) request for discovery under Rule 16;

(5) request for a severance of charges or defendants under Rule 14; or

(6) motion to dismiss based on former jeopardy.

(c) Motions to Suppress. A motion to suppress evidence must describe the evidence sought to be suppressed and the legal basis for its suppression sufficiently to give the opposing party reasonable notice of the issues.

(d) Motion Date. Motions under Rule 12(b) must be filed within 28 days after the entry of a plea of not guilty or seven days before trial whichever is earlier. In felony cases, motions under Rule 12(b) must be brought on for hearing within 14 days after filing or 48 hours before trial, whichever is earlier. The court may shorten or enlarge the time and, for good cause shown or for excusable neglect, may relieve a party of failure to comply with this rule.

(e) Ruling on Motion. A motion made before trial must be determined before trial unless the court orders that it be deferred for determination at the trial of the general issue. Where factual issues are involved in determining a motion, the court must state its essential findings on the record.
 
  • #388
Sister Golden Hair said:
(4) request for discovery under Rule 16;
Click to expand...
I highlighted that one because of the request and response below and because I wonder if there some room for discussion between the state and the defense and because of the potential exculpatory information BF may contribute? IMO that's not totally out of the realm of possibility given the series of these events and the original responses, but again IMO and ICBW.

Defense request:
#11:
Exculpatory evidence. Provide to the defendant all material evidence within the
scope of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97
(1976), Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 115 S.Ct. 1555 (1995) and their progeny.
Specifically, any and all favorable or exculpatory evidence, information, and documents
in possession of the prosecuting attorney’s office or other agency or person available to
the prosecution through due diligence.
A. See also, Idaho Rules of Professional Conduct 3.8 (d) and (g)


State's response:
#9
All material or information within the prosecuting attorney's possession or control
which tends to negate the guilt of the accused as to the offense charged or which would tend to
reduce the punishment therefore have been or will be disclosed or otherwise made available. See
Exhibit "A." In addition, with regard to material or information which may be exculpatory as used or interpreted, the State requests that the defendant inform the State, in writing, of the defense which will be asserted in this case, so counsel for the State can determine if any additional material or information may be material to the defense, and thus fulfill its duty under I.C.R. 16(a) and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (bold and italics mine - edited by me)


There were also 1st and 2nd supplementary requests and responses, but I can't tell much from them unless I fill in blanks myself - and I mentally have done that but not fit for this WS thread discussion :)
 
Last edited:
  • #389
Othram does genetic genealogy based on results from labs that process DNA (like the ISL or 23andme). 23andme uses a proprietary DNA profile software which is why it resists subpoena's from LE (the profiles in their database are not the entire raw data obtained from the saliva sample they require).

Othram can either use the testing from a forensic lab or a swab or sample can be sent to their lab for amplication and initial DNA analysis. All of their lab personnel are forensic geneticists and qualified to testify in court. I would assume that in this high profile case, LE had the initial analysis done in their lab, and then sent one or more swabs to Othram (so doubling up on expertise).

Their main mission is to apply their genealogical research techniques to forensic DNA samples. They use the same overall theoretical framework as 23andme (or Ancestry.com) which is based on SNP's. However, since they are interested in solving crimes instead of establishing ancestry or ethnic ties, their formula is more robust (IMO).

Definition of SNP:

NCI Dictionary of Genetics Terms

A dictionary of more than 150 genetics-related terms written for healthcare professionals. This resource was developed to support the comprehensive, evidence-based, peer-reviewed PDQ cancer genetics information summaries.
www.cancer.gov www.cancer.gov

//A DNA sequence variation that occurs when a single nucleotide (adenine, thymine, cytosine, or guanine) in the genome sequence is altered and the particular alteration is present in at least 1% of the population. Also called single nucleotide polymorphism.//

So once the "letters" (ATCG) are produced through the initial DNA analysis, this system looks for the minute variations that distinguish one person from another. Here's a little video:

www.genome.gov

Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs)

Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are a type of polymorphism involving variation of a single base pair.
www.genome.gov www.genome.gov

This is also the procedure used in trying to determine the genes of various diseases (millions of Americans have opted into this kind of research in one form or another). The raw data from all these people is not attached to their identity (in medical research, at this point in time).

Here's a typical missing person case processed by Othram (they used the LE lab profile to do it, in this case):

dnasolves.com

Golden Valley John Doe (2021) is now Identified

Mohave County Sheriff's Office Teams with Othram to Identify 2021 Golden Valley John Doe
dnasolves.com dnasolves.com

There's quite a bit more info on the "Technology" tab at their website:

othram.com

Othram - A Revolution in Cold Case Resolution

Othram is revolutionizing how forensic cases are solved, justice is served, and families are mended.
othram.com othram.com

They encourage LE to send a sample to them for back-up results/amplification and evidence preservation.
 
  • #390
Sister Golden Hair said:
A more detailed look at some of the warrants...

I am looking at the warrants for the story. IMO -- and this is just the way I am looking at this -- I try to keep any speculation within the framework of the known facts, so even if I like a theory, if it's incongruent with what we know now, I put it aside (although admittedly, a few of the things I thought were total hooey at the beginning of this have been pulled back in as potentials - that's how wild this trail has been!)

IMO the warrants tell a story. I am connecting the dots in various ways, following behind as LE followed the leads. There are a lot of holes, a lot we don't know, but there is a trail IMO. I keep in mind that court rules/ID statutes determine what is exempt from PRR and what can be sealed/redacted as I wade through these. I.C.A.R. 32. Records of The Judicial Department - Examination and Copying - Exemption From and Limitations on Disclosure. | Supreme Court I.C.A.R. 32(i)

The financial institution warrants are of particular interest to me (not more than DD and Tinder and 19-20 accounts and the footprints and the 8 hours and the exculpatory evidence - but they're way up there on List of Things I Want to Know), so I went back and took another look because the other most interesting pieces are really spaghetti at wall right now IMO). A few other caveats that I tried to remember as I reviewed these:
  • The other 3 and 5 may not always be the same 3 and 5 on each warrant.
  • The other 3 and 5 may not may not just be the roommates and boyfriends.
  • The other other 3 and 5 may not be names known to us at all.
  • The other 3 and 5 redacted names on the receipts may be different from receipt to receipt, warrant to warrant; IOW, I cannot assume it's only a pool of 7 or 9 people total.
  • The only combination I can be certain of is that of the four victims. The rest is assumption.
LE did the first round of financial institution warrants 11/19 - 6 days after the victims were discovered. It totally makes sense to see if there was a financial motive and/or trail within those records:
  • Bank of America: 11/19, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Block: 11/19, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Umpquah Bank: 11/19, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Paypal/Venmo: 11/19, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
After that, the number of additional parties increases from 3 to 5 - but why?
Warrant requirement tells us that there's a nexus to the crime, so what probable cause did LE have for the increase in accounts and parties? Maybe it's just a lot of free toasters and credit cards, but that's a lot of toasters and a lot of unsecured debt to college students imo.

IMO it looks like LE was following a trail - but of what?
It looks like they knew about the 11/19 accounts initially, and then something happened and they started adding more parties and obviously looking at more accounts. But why?
  • Numerica Credit Union: 11/27, 4 victims and 5 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Idaho Central Credit Union: 11/27, 4 victims and 5 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Wells Fargo: 11/27, 4 victims and 5 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • American Express: 11/27, 4 victims and 5 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and I can't tell how many others because bullet points were redacted)
  • Idaho Dept of Labor: 11/28, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Discover Bank: 11/28, 4 victims and 5 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Banner Bank : 11/28, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
  • Potlach Credit Union #1: 11/28, 4 victims and 3 add'l (receipt says they got info for 4 victims and 3 others)
And why didn't they do this one right away or at least with 11/27-11/28 ones:
  • Elan Financial Services: 12/22, Kaylee only (by this time they knew about BK, but it's interesting and potentially telling that they did not do a warrant for this along with the other rounds - why not?)
Was there no probable cause prior to that? If not, why not? What changed?

Other warrants with similar dates - Do any of those pieces fit together?

The Apple warrants are not for the victims; theirs were done earlier and their names are not redacted.
  • Apple warrant #1 Order to Seal - warrant and affidavit sealed - 11/28
  • Apple warrant #2 Order to Seal - warrant and affidavit sealed - 11/28
  • Apple warrant #3 Order to Seal - warrant and affidavit sealed - 11/28
  • First DoorDash warrant was 12/6. Ditto for first Tinder warrant for 19-20 redacted.


I also find this one interesting because it's a warrant for AT&T and not for the victims or BK and completely sealed, not just redacted (warrant and affidavit) on 1.6.23, after BK was in custody:


These 3 are completely sealed (warrant&affidavit), we don't even know to whom, so why is that? What would the name tell us?
This one on 11.16
This one on 12.5
This one on 1.9.2023 (after BK was in custody, completely sealed warrant and affidavit):

This is all IMO except for the specific dates and information stated in the orders, warrants and receipts. Those are linked here: Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest
I do not want to stir up speculation, but to share my summary and put this out, not expecting answers because we just don't know, but to raise questions and see if others are considering the same things.

We know LE cannot get warrants for curiosity. There must be probable cause and specificity as to things and places to be searched/seized and nexus to crime. Warrants are not issued for spitballing (see general warrant information below) If the court is honoring the fourth amendment (and I like to believe that they do), then probable cause exists, and the compelling evidence of that within the sealed affidavits. If all that is true, then these warrants tell a story. In support of my statements above re 4A and general warrants:
Why general warrants are verbotten and of Probable Cause and Particularity:
harvardlawreview.org

Geofence Warrants and the Fourth Amendment - Harvard Law Review

Introduction: If You Build It, They Will Come For months, Zachary McCoy tracked the distance of his bike rides around his neighborhood in Gainesville,...
harvardlawreview.org harvardlawreview.org
and some links in here and an explanation of why general warrants are not allowed:
Click to expand...
This is fantastic! Thanks. You put a lot of time and thought into this. Now let’s see if I can challenge my brain and try to make something make sense in this case!
 
  • #391
Bogbacal2 said:
This is fantastic! Thanks. You put a lot of time and thought into this. Now let’s see if I can challenge my brain and try to make something make sense in this case!
Click to expand...
:)
 
  • #392
Balthazar said:
One thing I have found in researching this case is that there is reciprocity between UofI and WSU Pullman. In fact, students, faculty and staff at either Uni can get parking permits for both universities: Reciprocal Parking - PTS | University of Idaho

These permits are for "for students, faculty and staff participating in cooperative programs and cross listed courses."That tells me that students at both Universities can take classes at either University in the same semester and professors and other staff may work at both schools. We know BK was a TA and he was also seen at the Student Union at UofI allegedly on more than one occasion. Given that, there seems to be a possible legitimate reason for him to have been at UofI, at least between 7am and 10-11pm on week days when most classes would be taught. UofI offers a Bachelors degree in Criminology. Bachelor’s in Criminology Degree | University of Idaho.
Click to expand...
snipped by me for focus:

I didn't do a lot of work on this, so I didn't find the exact link, but I think it's altogether possible that there could be MOUs that allowed/required BK to be on the UofI campus. Both interlocal agreements and MOUs exist in the area, and those could be used to work out any issues re allocation of costs/funding/etc.

Here's one re tribes:
https://www.uidaho.edu/-/media/UIdaho-Responsive/Files/president/direct-reports/tribal-relations/inter-institutional-mou.pdf

Here's an interlocal agreement that covers LE: MRSC - Interlocal Cooperation in Law Enforcement
There are other interlocals between WA & ID, too.

And of course, Moscow's 911 calls go to Pullman, WA, so the states have definitely found ways to make cooperation and sharing resources work to benefit all of the citizens while being mindful of their duties re state resources.

WHITCOM 9-1-1

www.pullman-wa.gov www.pullman-wa.gov

Register for WSU and U of I co-op | University of Idaho

UIdaho and WSU share academic resources that enrich educational opportunities for students at each university.
www.uidaho.edu www.uidaho.edu

and there's a reciprocity agreement between ID & WA, so maybe this could have come into play with BK as well? I'm not going to dig in and do the research, but I think you raised a really valid point, and I think that concerns re state funding and taxes, etc. are probably already resolved b/c the two states do work together.

RCW 28B.15.750: Waiver of nonresident tuition fees differential—Washington/Idaho reciprocity program.

app.leg.wa.gov app.leg.wa.gov
 
Last edited:
  • #393
Just had a thought but how would it affect this case if it came to light that BK had some form of real life connection / interactions with any of the victims or surviving victims or he was a known visitor to the house at any point?

Is it possible he could have?
 
  • #394
Observe_dont_Absorb said:
Just had a thought but how would it affect this case if it came to light that BK had some form of real life connection / interactions with any of the victims or surviving victims or he was a known visitor to the house at any point?

Is it possible he could have?
Click to expand...
IMO very possible based on the scope of some of the warrants. LE wasn't spitballing. They had probable cause.
 
  • #395
Observe_dont_Absorb said:
Just had a thought but how would it affect this case if it came to light that BK had some form of real life connection / interactions with any of the victims or surviving victims or he was a known visitor to the house at any point?

Is it possible he could have?
Click to expand...

A few of us said this in earlier threads and at least some of us still believe that to be the case. MOO.

Don't know how it'll affect things. I think it depends on the nature of the contact/interactions.
 
  • #396
whoops. DBM
 
  • #397
Sister Golden Hair said:
And why didn't they do this one right away or at least with 11/27-11/28 ones:

  • Elan Financial Services: 12/22, Kaylee only (by this time they knew about BK, but it's interesting and potentially telling that they did not do a warrant for this along with the other rounds - why not?)
Was there no probable cause prior to that? If not, why not? What changed?

,,,snipped for focus.....
Click to expand...
WOW, just WOW @Sister Golden Hair. Great job. Thank you.

RE: Dec 22 Kaylee's new car financing company Elan Financial Services: 12/22, Kaylee only
IMO this warrant has more to do with the county towing her vehicle when they were preparing to tow all the vehicles away from the house. The other cars were most likely all ready papered/registered to either other victims or the parents. Titles can be searched from license plates; however, KG's Range Rover title may have still been processing because her RR had no front license plate. There is a plate on the rear which appears to be a vanity plate for the RR dealer but not anything on the front. Cool car picked up from the city lot by attorney Shannan Gray six weeks after tow to city lot

JMO


"Attorney Shanon Gray helped a pair of Moscow police officers scrape ice from the windshield and brush away snow on the 2016 Range Rover Evoque that Kaylee Goncalves excitedly purchased days before her slaying."


www.foxnews.com

Idaho murders: Kaylee Goncalves' Range Rover retrieved from city lot

Family lawyer Shanon Gray picked up slain University of Idaho student Kaylee Goncalves' silver Ranger Rover from Moscow, Idaho, police on Thursday, nearly six weeks after her murder.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
 
Last edited:
  • #398
Observe_dont_Absorb said:
Just had a thought but how would it affect this case if it came to light that BK had some form of real life connection / interactions with any of the victims or surviving victims or he was a known visitor to the house at any point?

Is it possible he could have?
Click to expand...
It could point towards motive IMO.

Absolutely possible that BK had some kind of IRL connection w some/one of the victims beforehand. For context, by connection I am including online, one-sided and IRL. JMO.
 
  • #399
Observe_dont_Absorb said:
Just had a thought but how would it affect this case if it came to light that BK had some form of real life connection / interactions with any of the victims or surviving victims or he was a known visitor to the house at any point?

Is it possible he could have?
Click to expand...

The people posting just above you certainly seem to think so.

We have no WS-approved sources on this question (and the non-approved sources are all over the place).

So I'd say, we don't know. PCA says he was in the area of 1122 King at least 11 times. But there's no evidence of prior interactions. Being in the neighborhood would be a "connection" to me, but that's not a word we probably all agree on ("connection"). It gets pretty loose when we go to "connections" IMO.

An interaction in the real world, to me, means face-to-face. There's NO evidence of that, so far, that I know of. Someone will correct me if there are MSM or other approved sources.

IMO.
 
  • #400
Sister Golden Hair said:
IMO very possible based on the scope of some of the warrants. LE wasn't spitballing. They had probable cause.
Click to expand...

I'm curious. Which warrants show interaction? Or even connection?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ChatteringBirds
  • Locked
ID - 4 University of Idaho Students Murdered - Moscow # 15
48 49 50
Replies
987
Views
229K
YaYa_521
YaYa_521
ChatteringBirds
  • Locked
ID - 4 University of Idaho Students Murdered - Moscow # 20
52 53 54
Replies
1K
Views
187K
YaYa_521
YaYa_521
ChatteringBirds
  • Locked
ID - 4 University of Idaho Students Murdered - Moscow # 13
48 49 50
Replies
995
Views
208K
Sillybilly
Sillybilly
ChatteringBirds
  • Locked
ID - 4 University of Idaho Students Murdered - Moscow # 11
47 48 49
Replies
979
Views
217K
YaYa_521
YaYa_521
ChatteringBirds
  • Locked
ID - 4 University of Idaho Students Murdered - Moscow # 19
50 51 52
Replies
1K
Views
183K
YaYa_521
YaYa_521

Members online

... and 135 more.
Total: 2,053 (members: 136, guests: 1,917)

Online statistics

Members online
136
Guests online
1,917
Total visitors
2,053
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
632,284
Messages
18,624,309
Members
243,075
Latest member
p_du80
Back
Top