4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, 2022 #79

[arielilane]

“He has got pit bulls after him.” Idaho victim Kaylee Goncalves’s dad Steve says he will be at the Bryan Kohberger hearing Monday. He says other victims families are planning to go too.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1659021033263837187

https://twitter.com/BrianEntin

 

[U.N. Known]

9

The prosecution had nothing to do with it, it was only up to the defense and the judge if BK could waive his right to a speedy PH.

Of course the prosecution was happy, they were given months and months to gather evidence and serve subpoenas to get ready for a Grand Jury Trial.
The defense lost their gamble. <modsnip> Prosecution comes out better off.

IMO, there wasn't a gamble, but an obvious choice. The defense doesn't have all of the evidence they want five months after that initial ID court appearance; the prosecution said they doesn't have all of the requested evidence yet. I don't believe any reasonable defense attorney would agree to a PH hearing that quickly for a client accused of this crime.

 

[arielilane]

8 hr ago
A grand jury has indicted Bryan Kohberger. What that means is the grand jury reviewed evidence/testimony and found enough evidence to indict. That doesn’t mean they found him guilty. It means there won’t be a preliminary hearing and the charges move forward.

I know it's confusing. This does not mean a jury found him guilty. It means a jury met and decided there is enough evidence for the case to move forward. There will now not be a preliminary hearing.

Here is the Bryan Kohberger grand jury indictment. 4 counts of first degree murder. Signed off on yesterday by the grand jury. Hearing set for Monday morning in Moscow, Idaho -- appears a camera will be allowed. I'll be there.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1658896917017894930

https://twitter.com/BrianEntin

10 min ago
“He has got pit bulls after him.” Idaho victim Kaylee Goncalves’s dad Steve says he will be at the Bryan Kohberger hearing Monday. He says other victims families are planning to go too.

 

[U.N. Known]

MOO:

There has been a whole lot of personal identity information which has gotten "out there" on the internet on this case that is available to anonymous people, regarding who all the "involved parties" are on this case, that it could be fairly obvious who the prosecution might call as a witness before the GJ, or if that didn't occur, the PH, or at trial.

The focus on this case from likely thousands if not millions of people from all over the world who are following it on the internet through MSM, SM, and more closely by viewing court documents and following it on platforms like WS and others like Reddit and Facebook, has made it far too easy for the potential key witnesses (and obviously the victims' families, friends, and significant others, as well as drivers and food delivery people, etc.) to be found out, and to be empathized with perhaps, but more often, sadly, to be intimidated, threatened, harassed, ad nauseum, as has been discussed many times in court documents (as reason given to seal or redact) and posted about here many times.

This is why the GJ was the only route available to the prosecution that would keep things in secret (like the actual list of witnesses), to protect not only the identity of people peripherally, but truly involved in this case, from potential harm.

Every sealed and/or redacted court document on this case has cited this ^^^^ as a reason as to why personal information about parties involved in the case, who are therefore likely to have been interviewed or asked to testify as a witness (and to potentially have blame of some kind laid on them, whether it is reasonable and called for or not), needs to be kept from the public.

MOO

I find the focus on harm to witnesses curious. We can guess some of the witnesses, but I am perplexed as to why anyone feels they could be in danger or from whom. We know of one suspect, who is in jail and BK groupies who think he's innocent. Are those groupies known to be dangerous? This is one of the things that makes me think there is something more complex out there that the public isn't privy to.

 

[IDK]

9

IMO, there wasn't a gamble, but an obvious choice. The defense doesn't have all of the evidence they want five months after that initial ID court appearance; the prosecution said they doesn't have all of the requested evidence yet. I don't believe any reasonable defense attorney would agree to a PH hearing that quickly for a client accused of this crime.

.

ITA with what you are saying. <modsnip - reference was snipped> — they are playing the hand they have been dealt. It’s still very early —IMO, at least.

 

[schooling]

My opinion is that she saw what she saw.
The intruder was a white man plus a few details, eyebrows prominent, not overweight, not short.
MOO Eliminates lots of men.

Most importantly, it doesn't eliminate BK.

If she said the person was 5'4" (or 6'4"), heavyset, with pencil thin eyebrows we would be having a completely different conversation right now.

BK's brow bridge is PROMINENT and dominate over those sunken ghoulish eyes.

 

[Warwick7]

For those asking who were harassed or reseaved threats:

"According to the motion made Wednesday and signed by prosecuting attorney William Thompson, the Third Judicial Court in the county of Latah has reportedly received numerous complaints from potential or prospective witnesses, as well as families and associates, regarding being harassed both in person and via social media—in addition to threats and what appears to be intimidation."

Update in Bryan Kohberger case raises question about witn...

"Some of those people, you never know what they're capable of," former FBI agent Jennifer Coffindaffer told Newsweek.

www.newsweek.com

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

I find the focus on harm to witnesses curious. We can guess some of the witnesses, but I am perplexed as to why anyone feels they could be in danger or from whom. We know of one suspect, who is in jail and BK groupies who think he's innocent. Are those groupies known to be dangerous? This is one of the things that makes me think there is something more complex out there that the public isn't privy to.

IMO ICBW More complex things ... here are my top examples:

1. 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:

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/022823%20Order%20to%20Seal%20-%20ATT.pdf

Why completely seal a warrant for AT&T?

And these three completely sealed (warrant and affidavit), we don't even know to whom, so why is that?

This one on 11.16: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/022823 Order to Seal.pdf

This one on 12.5: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/022823 Order to Seal 1.pdf

Judge's order to seal for the two above states these reasons:

(l) The documents contain highly intimate facts or statements, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person;
(2) The documents contain facts or statements that might threaten the safety of or endanger the life
or safety of individuals; and
(3) Disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy

This one on 1.9.2023 (after BK was in custody, completely sealed warrant and affidavit): https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/022823 Order to Seal 2.pdf

Judge's order on 1.10.23 stated these reasons:
1. Interfere with enforcement proceedings;
2. Constitute an unwananted invasion of personal privacy,
3. Disclose the identity of a confidential source; and
4. Disclose investigative techniques and procedures.

And we know it's not BK or the victims, and if it were the roommates, why not just redact the name like in all the other warrants? We also know that the roommates are not CIs, so ???

For the victims and BK, they didn't redact names, so we know it's not them. And on other warrants, the business/organization/agency is named on the warrant. Even the WSU one that's otherwise completely sealed is to WSU. But these are locked down tight. Not to mention the reasons given... so yes, I've got to wonder... there are other questionable things as well, but these really scream "more complex things" IMO ICBW

 

[maconrich]

"According to the motion made Wednesday and signed by prosecuting attorney William Thompson, the Third Judicial Court in the county of Latah has reportedly received numerous complaints from potential or prospective witnesses, as well as families and associates, regarding being harassed both in person and via social media—in addition to threats and what appears to be intimidation."

Update in Bryan Kohberger case raises question about witn...

"Some of those people, you never know what they're capable of," former FBI agent Jennifer Coffindaffer told Newsweek.

www.newsweek.com

What really stood out to me was this (note: I normally don't pay much attention to what she says, but this made sense):

"Coffindaffer told Newsweek via phone that the motion leads her to believe it will be upheld and sustained. She also said the public will never likely know which witnesses appeared before the grand jury, with authorities keeping it a "secret."

"My only question is, were there other witnesses called that we didn't anticipate other than law enforcement officers; other than individuals that know about the cellphone data; other than scientists, (or) the two roommates?" she said. "Is that something that they're concerned about getting out?"

 

[Sundog]

What really stood out to me was this (note: I normally don't pay much attention to what she says, but this made sense):

"Coffindaffer told Newsweek via phone that the motion leads her to believe it will be upheld and sustained. She also said the public will never likely know which witnesses appeared before the grand jury, with authorities keeping it a "secret."

"My only question is, were there other witnesses called that we didn't anticipate other than law enforcement officers; other than individuals that know about the cellphone data; other than scientists, (or) the two roommates?" she said. "Is that something that they're concerned about getting out?"

I think this is something that is a significant part of the decision by the D.A. to go the Grand Jury route. JMO.

 

[Deleted member 718]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1659038451558129664

 

[al66pine]

ID. Grand Jury & Indictment

This clarifies the evidentiary aspects of GJ proceedings, noting that although they are not bound to hear evidence for the defendant, they can order evidence to be produced and witnesses to testify:

I.C.R. 6.4. Grand Jury Proceedings | Supreme Court

snipped for focus @Twistinginthewind
Thanks for posting Section 6.4 of ID Crim Rules to enlighten us about evidentiary aspects of G.J.'s. Anticipating further discussion re ID. GJ's, here's more.
(Personally, now I'm heading to 6.3, Secrecy & Confidentiality of GJ Proceedings)

At Idaho Criminal Rules (I.C.R.) | Supreme Court
See Title III – THE GRAND JURY, THE INDICTMENT AND THE INFORMATION

Rule 6. Formation of the Grand Jury

Rule 6.1. Prosecuting Attorney’s Role with Grand Jury

Rule 6.2. Transcript of Grand Jury Proceedings

Rule 6.3. Secrecy and Confidentiality of Grand Jury Proceedings

Rule 6.4. Grand Jury Proceedings

Rule 6.5. Indictment

Rule 6.6. Grounds for Motion to Dismiss Indictment

Rule 6.7. Discharge of Grand Jury

Rule 6.8. Other Prosecution

 

[Helechawagirl]

IMO ICBW More complex things ... here are my top examples:

1. 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:

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/022823%20Order%20to%20Seal%20-%20ATT.pdf

Why completely seal a warrant for AT&T?

And these three completely sealed (warrant and affidavit), we don't even know to whom, so why is that?

This one on 11.16: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/022823 Order to Seal.pdf

This one on 12.5: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/022823 Order to Seal 1.pdf

Judge's order to seal for the two above states these reasons:

(l) The documents contain highly intimate facts or statements, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person;
(2) The documents contain facts or statements that might threaten the safety of or endanger the life
or safety of individuals; and
(3) Disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy

This one on 1.9.2023 (after BK was in custody, completely sealed warrant and affidavit): https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/022823 Order to Seal 2.pdf

Judge's order on 1.10.23 stated these reasons:
1. Interfere with enforcement proceedings;
2. Constitute an unwananted invasion of personal privacy,
3. Disclose the identity of a confidential source; and
4. Disclose investigative techniques and procedures.

And we know it's not BK or the victims, and if it were the roommates, why not just redact the name like in all the other warrants? We also know that the roommates are not CIs, so ???

For the victims and BK, they didn't redact names, so we know it's not them. And on other warrants, the business/organization/agency is named on the warrant. Even the WSU one that's otherwise completely sealed is to WSU. But these are locked down tight. Not to mention the reasons given... so yes, I've got to wonder... there are other questionable things as well, but these really scream "more complex things" IMO ICBW

Could there be an undercover operation going on in Moscow?

 

[Helechawagirl]

Who’s being threatened? Anyone whose name is known to the public, I suspect.

MOO

Roommates, early suspects…IMO

 

[maconrich]

I think this is something that is a significant part of the decision by the D.A. to go the Grand Jury route. JMO.

It does seem more and more likely, IMHO.

 

[katydid23]

This is the first I have heard of this. That would really surprise me if this has indeed happened. it doesn't make much sense to me for the prosecutor to have taken this direction.

The first thing I thought of was the Barry Morphew case. It all fell apart at the hearing and he seems to be walking away from the murder charges and is now threatening to sue for false arrest.

Maybe the prosecutor wanted to avoid a similar fate. The defense attorneys in the Morphew case did some aggressive grandstanding and it caught the prosecution off guard. They never recovered.

 

[jepop]

And his parents would reply, "you're already a Judge, but if you want to do that when you grow up, you can become a judge in more than name."

Will Judge John Judge preside over the prospective trial or are trial Judges drawn after arraignment? IMO this current Judge is Judge by name, judge by nature.

 

[Cool Cats]

9

IMO, there wasn't a gamble, but an obvious choice. The defense doesn't have all of the evidence they want five months after that initial ID court appearance; the prosecution said they doesn't have all of the requested evidence yet. I don't believe any reasonable defense attorney would agree to a PH hearing that quickly for a client accused of this crime.

MSN

Waiving its rights to a speedy trial was a "big gamble" that didn't bode well for the defense, Coffindaffer said.

Former FBI Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer said the decision to convene a grand jury likely stemmed from Kohberger's decision to waive his right to a speedy trial. By doing so, the defense gave the prosecution time to gather a grand jury—a loss for the defense, according to Coffindaffer.

"I thought it was a huge mistake at the time, it opens the door for the grand jury," Coffindaffer told Newsweek.

It's unclear when the defense found out about the grand jury, as Coffindaffer said it's conducted in "complete silence."

Most times, the legal defense prefers a preliminary hearing, which allows them the opportunity to cross examine witnesses and hear evidence from the prosecution. With a grand jury, the defense isn't even in the room. The chances of the grand jury determining probable cause are high.

 

[Sister Golden Hair]

Could there be an undercover operation going on in Moscow?

Seems to be something going on in Moscow, but the question is: How would an undercover operation tie into the four murders? And if the witnesses were undercover LE, it doesn't seem like warrants would be required so still some missing pieces. And that's before we consider lots of other things that don't fit here. Lots of other things imo.

 

[Nova]

I'm glad he's indicted, but I'm kind of bummed that we probably won't learn anything new until trial. Dramatic sigh....

I realize this is all being done according to the prosecutor's normal discretion, but it is beginning to feel like a "star chamber", don't you think?