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

[Nova]

Agreed and I can see pros and cons with each system but I think that if we had elected prosecutors and elected judges there would be a huge clamour over here for more in-trial transparency.

We do have elected district attorneys in most jurisdictions and elected judges in many. Of course, the prosecutors in most trials are assistant DAs, so they are appointed or hired by the elected head of the department.

(We have to vote yea or nay on our Supreme Court here in California every few years. Lower level judges face regular elections. I hate it, but that's the system in this state. Periodic approval of the Supremes came about because our Court was anti-d.p. and the voters were pro-d.p. So Supremes run unopposed and we just vote them up (almost always) or down.)

 

[Nova]

As a black person, I’m imagining. And I still don’t see anything wrong with what’s been done. His defense attorneys should have known the risks and that this was a possibility. He himself has had the privilege of studying law and likely played a big part in the decision.

They all miscalculated.

Prosecutors want justice and they are pulling the widely known and recognized levers that are available to them. It’s explicitly listed in the constitution.

Nothing here looks or smells like misconduct of any kind.

I hope it was clear I was NOT suggesting there has been any misconduct. I have NO reason to think there has been.

My only point was that given our history, ancient and recent, if the defendant in mostly white Idaho were a person of color, many of us would have a problem if his eventual trial were held in secret. It was meant to be a dramatic example only. And I wasn't talking about GJs, this or any other. I was talking about the rationale for public trials in general.

I.e., this is a constitutional issue and it doesn't really matter who is paying for the proceedings.

ETA spelling.

 

[Nova]

MOO IMO more that the defense was seeking to go after (and for their benefit re-traumatize) survivor- witnesses.

As I posted last night, you are giving the prosecution lawyers more credit for compassion than I do. Of course, you may be right.

I'm sure there was strategy in going to the GJ. (LAW & ORDER has aired more than one story where the choice between PH and GJ was debated as to strategy. I wish I could recall the fictional arguments for each.) Since this isn't a case where the victim is the only eyewitness, I doubt witness comfort was a primary concern in choosing the Grand Jury route.

Sealing the witness list is a different matter; that's simple when both sides agree and doesn't really affect trial strategy, so why not give potential witnesses a break from mobs of reporters?

 

[Cool Cats]

Do you have a citation in Idaho law for that? Truly curious.

I am going to be very disappointed in all the MSM sources here, if that's not what happened. I do believe he waived it - but I'm following WS rules about MSM.

So I need a source. You're usually onto something.

HE DID NOT WAIVE HIS RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL - HE ONLY WAIVED HIS PRELIMINARY HEARING - YOU CANNOT WAIVE SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T EXIST.

A trial did not exist for him at this time, at this time the Court did not know if there was enough evidence to even send him to trial. Then, even if he was bound over for trial the Court didn't know how he would plead. If he pled guilty there is no trial.

I transcribed the Hearing where the judge lets him waive his speedy Preliminary Hearing.
I am also linking 2 articles that specifically say he is waiving his Preliminary Hearing, they do not say he is waiving his speedy trial.

In this article is the Hearing I transcribed where the Judge waives Kohberger's speedy Preliminary Hearing.

Bryan Kohberger waives right to speedy preliminary hearing

Bryan Kohberger, accused of killing four University of Idaho students, waived his right to a speedy preliminary hearing in court Thursday. He will appear for his probable cause hearing June 26.

news.yahoo.com

Judge:
Good morning. We are on record this is Case CR29................
This is the time set in the matter for the Preliminary Hearing Status Conference. So I am going to inquire of counsel, Miss Taylor what is the status at this time?

Taylor:
Thank you your Honor. We are going to ask the court to set Preliminary Hearing out into June we would request the 3rd or 4th week of June and probably 4 or 5 days for Preliminary Hearing. Mr. Kohberger understands his right to a timely Preliminary Hearing and he's willing to waive the timeliness to allow us time to obtain Discovery in this Case. Thank you your Honor.

Judge:
And Mr. Thompson are you in agreement with that?

Thompson:
The State has no objection to that your Honor.....Miss Taylor reached out to us by email yesterday with her proposal..................(Dates are discussed for Preliminary Hearing)

Judge:
So Mr Kohberger I need to speak with you for a moment then. Sir you understand Miss Taylor has represented here that she has advised you of your right to have or fully discussed with you the right that you have which is to have your Preliminary Hearing within 14 days of the date that you initially appear before this court.

As you recall when I advised you of your rights, that Hearing is a Probable Cause Hearing where the State has to establish that more likely than not these felony offenses were committed and you are the one who committed the felony offenses. If you waive your right to a speedy Preliminary Hearing it does not mean that you are giving up your right to have a Preliminary Hearing, it simply means that you would not be able to come back and challenge that the State did not present Probable Cause within 14 days. Do you understand?

Kohberger:
Yes.

Judge:
Have you had enough time to speak to Miss Taylor about your decision to waive your right to a speedy Preliminary Hearing?

Kohberger:
Yes

Judge:
Do you need any additional time to do so?

Kohberger:
No.

Judge:
Then I will ask at this time as to the 5 Counts, Felony Counts, that were charged in the criminal complaint that was filed December 29th of 2022, are you waiving your right to a speedy Preliminary Hearing and agreeing that that Hearing can be held outside the 14 day period?

Kohberger:
Yes.

Judge:
And Miss Taylor do you concur with his waiver?

Taylor:
I do your Honor, thank you.

Judge:
I will find your waiver of speedy Preliminary Hearing is knowing, intelligently, voluntarily entered here in open court with the assistance of counsel, we will go ahead and set the matter for Preliminary Hearing............
(Preliminary Hearing date is set)

Kohberger waives right to speedy trial; preliminary hearing set for June

Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of killing four University of Idaho students, waived his right to a speedy preliminary hearing Thursday morning.

www.boisestatepublicradio.org

Mistake in article title, article does not say "speedy trial."

"Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of killing four University of Idaho students, waived his right to a speedy preliminary hearing Thursday morning."

A subdued Bryan Kohberger waived his right to speedy court appearance at second hearing in Idaho murders case

Kohberger's former lawyer has said he doesn't think the accused murderer can get a fair trial in Moscow, Idaho.

www.insider.com

"Waiving his right to a speedy preliminary hearing"

 

[Nova]

The question everyone is asking: Why would anyone want to murder four innocent souls?
@Dateline_Keith with exclusive new details Friday at 9/8c on an all-new #Dateline.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

https://twitter.com/DatelineNBC

Who is to say the intruder "wanted" to kill all four? Most of us have discussed hypothetical scenarios in which the intruder set out to kill one and found himself surprised and "forced" to kill more.

I think DATELINE has discovered what we call "click bait" on the interwebs...

 

[cottonweaver]

We do have elected district attorneys in most jurisdictions and elected judges in many. Of course, the prosecutors in most trials are assistant DAs, so they are appointed or hired by the elected head of the department.

(We have to vote yea or nay on our Supreme Court here in California every few years. Lower level judges face regular elections. I hate it, but that's the system in this state. Periodic approval of the Supremes came about because our Court was anti-d.p. and the voters were pro-d.p. So Supremes run unopposed and we just vote them up (almost always) or down.)

yes just tbc the reply string was re UK because the OP mentioned UK.
By 'over here', I meant here in the UK when I posted:
' but I think that if we had elected prosecutors and elected judges there would be a huge clamour over here for.....'

 

[jepop]

The newest defense attorney was just recently added. And much is made of just one case she has handled.
As for the witness, it appears she has information relevant to the crime. Defense counsel would have made numerous attempts to speak with her first, which I think we can assume were rejected. If she has important information, how else is the Defense expected to act? What are they supposed to do? Just forget it? I do far far more civil litigation than criminal. And I can tell you I have had more than one witness brought to a hearing or deposition by a deputy or threat of a deputy because they just didn't want to cooperate. If/when push comes to shove and this case proceeds, the trial judge isn't even going to think twice about ordering the witness to appear.

I think most here know that the roomates will very likely appear at trial via subpeoona? MOO.

Respectfully, going back to the OP's original query, I was also interested in your expert opinion/speculation as an Attorney as to what might have changed.

"If they had enough to get PCA to get the information and warrant for arrest, they had enough to get through a GJ. Why didn't they? Something changed"

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

In addition to Reddit (where they were kicked off and now have to operate more covertly and sort of “dogwhistle” to each other in related forums), I understand there are private “fan” Facebook groups. I don’t use FB, but even if I did I’m not the right kind of inquisitive to go find them...

www.websleuths.com

"Could you explain what "something changed" means? What would change? What would be an example of what that "something" that changed is?"

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

In addition to Reddit (where they were kicked off and now have to operate more covertly and sort of “dogwhistle” to each other in related forums), I understand there are private “fan” Facebook groups. I don’t use FB, but even if I did I’m not the right kind of inquisitive to go find them...

www.websleuths.com

 

[cottonweaver]

Who's most P'd off about getting the GJ indictment news? Has to be Kohberger.
Defense will have always know that GJ was a distinct possibility but can imagine BK's face when he got told he'd missed his opportunity.

 

[Charlot123]

About all these love letters to BK, most likely they are all from the same person, his mother.

Meanwhile, someone at the jail is about to be fired.
JMO

Edit for @wary: Thanks, yes. I don't want to give BK 's fan club any credibility so for me it's his mother.

"An employee at the jail, who did not reveal their name, but has frequent contact with the inmate told The Messenger 'it's disturbing.' 'He gets these letters a couple of times a week...they're usually handwritten with hearts and stars...colored envelopes,' he said. 'Everyone in the jail talks about how weird it is.'

Idaho murderer Bryan Kohberger receives flood of love letters

Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of killing four near the University of Idaho campus, has received more than two dozen 'handwritten' love letters as he awaits trial for the brutal killings.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I was always thinking that if indeed BK was not acting alone, or there is any connection between him and other residents of Moscow, unknown to us, these “love letters” are a good way to share information. In might apply to many cases. It just hit me that people like Hislope, known for their tendency to fall for violent criminals, might partially use it as a side business. Who would be surprised if a person known for hybristophilia falls for yet one more criminal offender and starts writing to him?

 

[jepop]

As I posted last night, you are giving the prosecution lawyers more credit for compassion than I do. Of course, you may be right.

I'm sure there was strategy in going to the GJ. (LAW & ORDER has aired more than one story where the choice between PH and GJ was debated as to strategy. I wish I could recall the fictional arguments for each.) Since this isn't a case where the victim is the only eyewitness, I doubt witness comfort was a primary concern in choosing the Grand Jury route.

Sealing the witness list is a different matter; that's simple when both sides agree and doesn't really affect trial strategy, so why not give potential witnesses a break from mobs of reporters?

Whilst I personally think there are multiple (or at least more than one) reasons/rationales that played into State's decision re GJ, IMO it's not unreasonable to speculate that part of defense's (perhaps covert) strategy might have been to try and wear down, frighten, or even "re-traumatise" the surviving victims, for the current or future benefit of the defense. This would be something that the State might seek to subvert. Pure speculation and MOO.

 

[Charlot123]

There has been speculation that that is stuff from an earlier order. The drink in particular looks like it’s been sitting around for a while.

I think stomach contents would at least indicate whether there was any food eaten, what it was, and at what time.

 

[Cool Cats]

I just posted 4 or more WS approved links on that matter and I assume no one wants me to post them again. It's on this thread.

So you're saying that MSM had it totally wrong?

Could be. Do you have a source for that?

Only one of your 4 links mentions speedy trial, the other 3 links say he waived his Preliminary Hearing, which is the only thing he waived.

Where are all these articles specifically saying Bryan Kohberger waived his right to a speedy trial?
And what is their source?

He wasn't even bound over for trial. Still isn't - unless he pleads "not guilty" Monday.

 

[Cindizzi]

Only one of your 4 links mentions speedy trial, the other 3 links say he waived his Preliminary Hearing, which is the only thing he waived.

Where are all these articles specifically saying Bryan Kohberger waived his right to a speedy trial?
And what is their source?

He wasn't even bound over for trial. Still isn't - unless he pleads "not guilty" Monday.

I think You may be correct. Finally found something that says the 6 months starts from time of arraignment.

Different case, same State.

Chad Daybell waives right to speedy trial, clearing the way for possible postponement

Prosecutors in Eastern Idaho are seeking the death penalty against Daybell for the murders of JJ Vallow, Tylee Ryan, and his late wife Tammy Daybell.

www.ktvb.com

In accordance with Idaho Code and the U.S. and Idaho constitutions, criminal defendants have the right to be brought to trial within six months of their arraignment, unless they expressly waive that right. Otherwise, they may have the case dismissed.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[girlhasnoname]

I don't think this can be the standard fan club folks that follow killers. I think this must refer to threats from people more closely related. Is this why GJ was used instead of PH? Not sure, but maybe. But that raises new questions.

If they had enough to get PCA to get the information and warrant for arrest, they had enough to get through a GJ. Why didn't they? Something changed.
BK to the best of my knowledge has not waived speedy trial.

BK did waive his right to a speedy PH (my bad)

<snipped>

Bryan Kohberger, the suspect arrested in the University of Idaho student murders, has waived his right to a speedy preliminary hearing, delaying the start date of a potential trial.

Why Bryan Kohberger wants to delay trial

 

[girlhasnoname]

Grounds for Motion to Dismiss Indictment in ID???

Could BK's def. team gain traction on any of the four following grounds?

"Idaho Criminal Rule 6.6." (in its entirety)
"Grounds for Motion to Dismiss Indictment"
"A motion to dismiss the indictment may be granted by the district court on any of the following grounds:
• a valid challenge to the array of grand jurors;
• a valid challenge to an individual juror who served on the grand jury that found the indictment, except that finding of the valid challenge to one or more members of the grand jury is not grounds for dismissal of the indictment if there were 12 or more qualified jurors concurring in the finding of the indictment;
• that the charge in the indictment was previously submitted to a magistrate at preliminary hearing and dismissed for lack of probable cause; or
• that the indictment was not properly found, endorsed and presented as required by these rules or by the statutes of the state of Idaho."

Effective 2017. I.C.R. 6.6. Grounds for Motion to Dismiss Indictment | Supreme Court

=======================================
RE #1 & #2.
IIRC, @10ofRods post, re Section 2-212 of Idaho Code (https://legislature.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/statutesrules/idstat/Title2/T2CH2.pdf)
discusses irregularities in selection of jurors (basically failure to comply w statute) for which the judge may stay proceedings, and quash the indictment, or grant other relief.
@10ofRods, pls correct any ^misstatement or misunderstanding^ re your post. TiA.

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

Not sure, honestly. I haven't followed the Daybell-Vallow case very closely, which is the only other murder case in Idaho that could provide an example of judge selection. Perhaps Judge John Judge is just presiding over the arraignment, or presided over the GJ and so is signing off on the court...

www.websleuths.com

=================================================
Which, if any of the reasons in 4 ^bullets?

IIUC, we/gen.pub/websleuthers have no info re possible irregularities, so no reason, ATM, to think def. team has basis for #1 or #2 challenge to indictment.

#3 could be grounds for dismissing indictment, only if the charge(s) had been submitted at to magistrate at PH & dismissed for lack of PC. So nope, not #3.

So, what about bullet #4?

I have no reason to believe the State didn't follow procedure so I have to say:
Nope to #4

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Thank you for that very cogent explanation!

But it's a scary thought that the DA feared it couldn't get past a PH that would still be over a month away. That doesn't scream "very much" evidence to me...

I don't think it means the State feared it couldn't get past a PH at all. I think it was a strategic, legal move on their part. A very smart one IMO.

 

[Cindizzi]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Justice101]

Every time I see those young smiling faces, I think of the absolute confusion and horror of them being stabbed in their sleep/half sleep.

There is nothing to bring those precious young people back to life again. The only thing left of any solace is to bring swift and strong justice to the perpetrator.

I'm 90% sure police have the right guy and a grand jury agrees.

 

[U.N. Known]

Whilst I personally think there are multiple (or at least more than one) reasons/rationales that played into State's decision re GJ, IMO it's not unreasonable to speculate that part of defense's (perhaps covert) strategy might have been to try and wear down, frighten, or even "re-traumatise" the surviving victims, for the current or future benefit of the defense. This would be something that the State might seek to subvert. Pure speculation and MOO.

I've seen a couple of posts insinuating that the state and/or the defense are developing their case strategies to include protecting or traumatizing the remaining roommates.

As my students say, "Make it make sense." How would that in any way help BK's defense? Attacking the roommates' credibility and intimidating them to prevent their honest testimony would (IMO) only make sense if they had reason to feel endangered by BK/his "associates" or if they saw enough to positively ID him as the murderer. If either of those things were what the state was relying on to gain a conviction then maybe scaring them into modifying their testimony would make sense. However, to our knowledge, neither of those scenarios is true.

We now know that BF has some information that the defense feels is valuable to help BK so the defense likely (IMO) was on their best witness-friendly behavior before resorting to a subpoena because they want her help. Wearing her down, frightening her, or traumatizing her would not be in their best interests.

I don't find it logical that the state would convene a grand jury for the sake of the witness in this case. Unless there is some unknown (public) information they don't want the defense to rebut prior to trial, the roommates' testimony isn't (IMO) serious enough to spend that much time discrediting. It was very interesting to learn that DM heard and saw what she did, but IMO, her testimony is more a confirmation that something happened than news of what happened or how.

 

[mickey2942]

At this point, all BK can do is stall, and game the system. I am waiting for him to request new counsel, attempt to get evidence excluded, file motions. People have done this, especially with capital murder charges. He has nothing but time here, and being in jail is a lot better than death row.