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

[Nila Aella]

DBM

 

[PrairieWind]

• 05/11/2023 Notice of Remote Hearing
• 05/11/2023 Reply to Mr Kohbergers Objection

Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest

The reply doesn't seem to pack much of a punch. And it is avoiding glaring issues. This appears to me to almost be directed more to the public and not so much the court.

 

[U.N. Known]

The reply doesn't seem to pack much of a punch. And it is avoiding glaring issues. This appears to me to almost be directed more to the public and not so much the court.

No, it doesn't; IMO, it sounds rather whiney. The writer also failed to mention that the original order was a joint request by the defense and the prosecution.

 

[10ofRods]

Just saw this today:

Newly released documents detail the search of Bryan Kohberger's home and office in Washington state hours after his arrest in Pennsylvania | CNN

Chemical tests for blood were done on over 60 reddish brown stains at Bryan Kohberger's apartment in Pullman, Washington, on December 30, hours after he was arrested in northeastern Pennsylvania, according to newly released legal documents.

www.cnn.com

Did we discuss this before? It's interesting the defense scored a box of receipts. I assume they've shared the contents with the State. I do wonder why those were left behind (by Pullman LE). Was their search warrant not broad enough? Or was it something they overlooked? (Was it hidden? Where was it??)

From the article:

The defense removed “a flat screen TV, a computer monitor, a small box of miscellaneous papers and receipts, a laundry basket that was full of books, and a medium sized box,” whose contents police couldn’t see.

 

[jepop]

• 05/11/2023 Notice of Remote Hearing
• 05/11/2023 Reply to Mr Kohbergers Objection

Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest

Ah, the first one here "Notice of Remote Hearing" concerns Defense's Motion to Compel!

"Notice of Remote Hearing Page 1 of 2
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF
THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LATAH
STATE OF IDAHO
Plaintiff,
v.
BRYAN C KOHBERGER
Defendant.
Case No. CR29-22-2805
Notice of Remote Hearing
NOTICE IS GIVEN That the above-entitled case is set for:
Hearing Type Date Time Judge
Motion to Compel Discovery 05/22/2023 11:00 AM Megan Marshall
The Motion Hearing will take place remotely through VIDEO CONFERENCE".

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/051123%20Notice%20of%20Remote%20Hearing%20CR.pdf

 

[jepop]

Just saw this today:

Newly released documents detail the search of Bryan Kohberger's home and office in Washington state hours after his arrest in Pennsylvania | CNN

Chemical tests for blood were done on over 60 reddish brown stains at Bryan Kohberger's apartment in Pullman, Washington, on December 30, hours after he was arrested in northeastern Pennsylvania, according to newly released legal documents.

www.cnn.com

Did we discuss this before? It's interesting the defense scored a box of receipts. I assume they've shared the contents with the State. I do wonder why those were left behind (by Pullman LE). Was their search warrant not broad enough? Or was it something they overlooked? (Was it hidden? Where was it??)

From the article:

Someone posted the newly released docs here not too long ago (they include the Trespass letter from WSU a few of us were taloking about). There's a ton of them and some are just the PCA again but here they are incase you want to look at them.

The evidence log from WA appartment starts on about page 8. The documentation (by LE) of Defense's visit to appartment including the taking of receipts (in a box in living area apparently) is in there somewhere.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/kohberger-search-records-from-wsu/6e5a6ce24a286a06/full.pdf

 

[Nova]

Is it up to the prosecution to determine what information could be exculpatory without knowing what the defense's strategy is? What if the information about the "naked man" is true and there's some way the defense has to prove it couldn't have been BK?



It's not really a random guess when the prosecution hasn't responded about the specific items the defense is asking for. I come back to the interrogation and Moscow PD notes. There is just no reason for the prosecution not to have these, so if it's true that the prosecution doesn't, then why not? Since they haven't even addressed it (specifically), then I think it's fair to say it's not a random guess that maybe the prosecution isn't really complying with the spirit of the law, triggering the motion to compel.

These are all just questions, but since they're suggestive, I'll just say it's all MOO.

Yes, in most cases it is up to the prosecution to determine what might be exculpatory to the defendant. IANAL but I believe the DA is supposed to consider any possible defense strategy in making that determination.

The defense doesn't have to prove a "naked man" wasn't BK. The defense, as I'm sure you know, doesn't have to prove anything. But if your point is that we may have two eyewitness accounts--one saying the intruder was nude, the other saying he was dressed in black--I do expect the defense to make much of it.

<modsnip> Neither of us knows how long it takes to get the notes of the Moscow PD, how long it takes to review them, nor how long it takes to prepare them for discovery.

I see no evidence of anything but the usual pre-trial gamesmanship. You see it otherwise, but neither of us has any real insight into what is going on behind the scenes.

And we wouldn't even be discussing pre-trial motions if there weren't a gag order that prevents us from getting more substantial info to ponder. I'm not arguing against the gag order, just stating a fact as I see it.

 

[jepop]

I can give you one off the top of my head: maybe the defense is wrong and, in the prosecution's view, there is nothing exculpatory to BK in the requested material. Just because the defense "thinks" it, doesn't make it true or enforceable on the DA.

Maybe the DA is playing games, or maybe the defense is trying to mount a smear campaign making the DA look like s/he is hiding something.

Any of these are possible and have happened in other trials. So I don't know how you or I or anyone else not on the inside can form an "opinion". Random guess, maybe, but not an opinion, as I understand the term.

ETA because the "advertisers" didn't like an adjective I used that refers to a horse-like animal.

RSBBM: didn't realise donkey was a bad word...learn something new everyday.

 

[Nova]

The censor also doesn't like our species name, so I have to abbreviate H. sapiens.

I noticed that! It was my "Laugh of the Day" yesterday!

 

[jepop]

Yes, in most cases it is up to the prosecution to determine what might be exculpatory to the defendant. IANAL but I believe the DA is supposed to consider any possible defense strategy in making that determination.

The defense doesn't have to prove a "naked man" wasn't BK. The defense, as I'm sure you know, doesn't have to prove anything. But if your point is that we may have two eyewitness accounts--one saying the intruder was nude, the other saying he was dressed in black--I do expect the defense to make much of it.

<modsnip>. Neither of us knows how long it takes to get the notes of the Moscow PD, how long it takes to review them, nor how long it takes to prepare them for discovery.

I see no evidence of anything but the usual pre-trial gamesmanship. You see it otherwise, but neither of us has any real insight into what is going on behind the scenes.

And we wouldn't even be discussing pre-trial motions if there weren't a gag order that prevents us from getting more substantial info to ponder. I'm not arguing against the gag order, just stating a fact as I see it.

RBBM: As far as notes and recordings from MPD is concerned, in this specific Motion to Compel,IMO all the defense is requesting is the specific notes and recordings connected with DET Payne's "interrogation" of the defendant. It's Request 119 in the motion and as this is the only item specified under 119, I think it's safe to assume that the Defense are otherwise satisfied with what they have received so far in terms of notes and recordings from Moscow PD. MOO.

I may be wrong, but it's hard to read item 119 in any other way, IMO, and Moscow PD notes and recordings aren't mentioned in any other items as far as I can see. MOO

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/050423%20Motion%20to%20Compel%20Discovery.pdf

ETA: MOO end of para 1.

 

[jepop]

Yes, in most cases it is up to the prosecution to determine what might be exculpatory to the defendant. IANAL but I believe the DA is supposed to consider any possible defense strategy in making that determination.
[respectfully SBMFF]

RBBM: That's interesting as the State does ask for possible defense strategies in its Response to discovery, so as to assist in locating any potential exculpatory info/material "as used or interpreted". But from what I read here recently, and I can't remember the posters now, there was a suggestion that the defense wouldn't offer any stratgies in the discovery until post prelim, though I can't remember why that might be the case/the norm. INAL either! MOO

Regarding the bolded below, it's only a request by the state so I wouldn't imagine it's part of any binding Court rule, but when the Defense writes that information is exculpatory "on belief and information" (in relevant items of Motion to Compel) that sounds like it could tie in with "...information which may be exculpatory as used or interpreted". MOO

State's Response to Defense's Request for Discovery.
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)."

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/012323%20States%20Response%20to%20Request%20for%20Discovery.pdf

 

[wary]

RBBM: That's interesting as the State does ask for possible defense strategies in its Response to discovery, so as to assist in locating any potential exculpatory info/material "as used or interpreted". But from what I read here recently, and I can't remember the posters now, there was a suggestion that the defense wouldn't offer any stratgies in the discovery until post prelim, though I can't remember why that might be the case/the norm. INAL either! MOO

Regarding the bolded below, it's only a request by the state so I wouldn't imagine it's part of any binding Court rule, but when the Defense writes that information is exculpatory "on belief and information" (in relevant items of Motion to Compel) that sounds like it could tie in with "...information which may be exculpatory as used or interpreted". MOO

State's Response to Defense's Request for Discovery.
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)."

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/case/CR29-22-2805/012323%20States%20Response%20to%20Request%20for%20Discovery.pdf

Consider the defense strategy in the case of Mollie Tibbetts’ murder: “the Real Murderers” kidnapped our client and forced him to drive them to where they grabbed Mollie and killed her. That’s why he knew where her body was.”

Is any DA really supposed to imagine that defense strategy?

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Yes, in most cases it is up to the prosecution to determine what might be exculpatory to the defendant.

This doesn't sound logical to me. Do you have a source/link so I can read more on this as it relates to the PH? Discoverable items are discoverable. The prosecution can't hold back items while awaiting information about the defense's strategy to make a determination of what is and isn't exculpatory at this point in the process. If you have information to the contrary, please provide a source as this contradicts my understanding of the process.

IANAL but I believe the DA is supposed to consider any possible defense strategy in making that determination.

In making what determination? I think we're talking about two different things. I disagree that the DA is supposed to consider defense strategy in determining evidence that's discoverable (with the exception of certain things that aren't discoverable unless used at trial, though that does not apply to the things listed in the motion to compel). I haven't seen any language in the law (much of which has been posted in this thread) that suggests the state gets to determine this with regard to items listed in the motion to compel. IMO, it's nonsensical because the DA doesn't know what the defense's investigator supposedly found and at this point, doesn't even know what strategy the defense is using.

The defense doesn't have to prove a "naked man" wasn't BK. The defense, as I'm sure you know, doesn't have to prove anything. But if your point is that we may have two eyewitness accounts--one saying the intruder was nude, the other saying he was dressed in black--I do expect the defense to make much of it.

No, the defense doesn't "have to prove" anything. But I'm saying that the prosecution would have no way of knowing exactly what is and isn't exculpatory according to the defense team's own investigation.

<modsnip> Neither of us knows how long it takes to get the notes of the Moscow PD, how long it takes to review them, nor how long it takes to prepare them for discovery

This forum is for opinions. IMO, there is no reason the turning over of notes should take this long. I never claimed to know how long it takes. If I did, I would get rid of the IMO and supply a link instead.

All above MOO.

 

[10ofRods]

This is in today's Daily Mail, FWIW:

VIDEO: Blood possibly found in Bryan Kohberger's bedroom

VIDEO: Newly released Idaho murder case court documents reveal investigators discovered traces of blood during search of the suspect's apartment

www.dailymail.co.uk

Interesting take/spin on the documents. It was written by an actual journalist (the L.A. beat reporter for the Daily Mail). She's also a reporter for a local news outlet.

I'm going to contact her about her sources, but in the past, I've found her trustworthy.

IMO.

(Article says the the red stains were tested and presumed positive for blood in BK's apartment and were therefore sent for further analysis). I don't know what to make of it. Seems it would be BK's own blood, given the locations, although who knows?

IMO.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

DBM

 

[NCWatcher]

This doesn't sound logical to me. Do you have a source/link so I can read more on this as it relates to the PH? Discoverable items are discoverable. The prosecution can't hold back items while awaiting information about the defense's strategy to make a determination of what is and isn't exculpatory at this point in the process. If you have information to the contrary, please provide a source as this contradicts my understanding of the process.



In making what determination? I think we're talking about two different things. I disagree that the DA is supposed to consider defense strategy in determining evidence that's discoverable (with the exception of certain things that aren't discoverable unless used at trial, though that does not apply to the things listed in the motion to compel). I haven't seen any language in the law (much of which has been posted in this thread) that suggests the state gets to determine this with regard to items listed in the motion to compel. IMO, it's nonsensical because the DA doesn't know what the defense's investigator supposedly found and at this point, doesn't even know what strategy the defense is using.



No, the defense doesn't "have to prove" anything. But I'm saying that the prosecution would have no way of knowing exactly what is and isn't exculpatory according to the defense team's own investigation.



This forum is for opinions. IMO, there is no reason the turning over of notes should take this long. I never claimed to know how long it takes. If I did, I would get rid of the IMO and supply a link instead.

All above MOO.

As a non-lawyer my opinion is the same. If I'm incorrect about the law in Idaho, I'd like to see a link too.

If a defense request involves an item that normally can't be compelled to be turned over (like a work product of the state's staff regarding trial strategy, for example) that's one thing. I don't think anything the defense is requesting has fallen into that kind of category. But if the item is normally discoverable, it doesn't make any sense that the prosecution can choose to refuse discovery unless the defense can make a convincing case for why it's wanted-- in other words that the defense can be forced to reveal it's possible trial strategy to get access to requested materials!
JMO

 

[maconrich]

Commencement ceremonies at University of Idaho live-streamed --

The Moscow ceremonies will be streamed live at 9:30 a.m. and 2 p.m. Pacific time Saturday, May 13, at uidaho.edu/live.

ETA -

• Moscow — ASUI-Kibbie Activity Center. Saturday, May 13. Graduates receiving a doctoral, educational specialist or master’s degree will attend the respective ceremony for their college.
  • 9:30 a.m.
    • College of Agricultural and Life Sciences
    • College of Business and Economics
    • College of Engineering
    • College of Natural Resources
    • College of Science
  • 2 p.m.
    • College of Art and Architecture
    • College of Education, Health and Human Sciences
    • College of Law
    • College of Letters, Arts and Social Sciences

Just to note for those wanting to watch, the 9:30 (PT) commencement ceremony has started (EST).

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Just to note for those wanting to watch, the 9:30 (PT) commencement ceremony has started (EDT).

Thanks! Louis Freeh, former Director of the FBI is the Commencement speaker, speaking now

 

[maconrich]

"The families of Mogen and Goncalves are expected to attend and accept the posthumous degrees, CNN affiliate KXLY reported. Relatives of Chapin and Kernodle will accept their certificates at another time at the request of their families."

University of Idaho is awarding posthumous degrees to four slain students | CNN

Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle, Madison Mogen, and Ethan Chapin will be awarded posthumous degrees on Saturday, exactly six months after the University of Idaho students were killed in the off-campus home.

www.cnn.com

 

[Twistinginthewind]

"The families of Mogen and Goncalves are expected to attend and accept the posthumous degrees, CNN affiliate KXLY reported. Relatives of Chapin and Kernodle will accept their certificates at another time at the request of their families."

University of Idaho is awarding posthumous degrees to four slain students | CNN

Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle, Madison Mogen, and Ethan Chapin will be awarded posthumous degrees on Saturday, exactly six months after the University of Idaho students were killed in the off-campus home.

www.cnn.com

It was a beautiful ceremony. The President addressed the loss of the 5 students who passed away in the academic year who were being awarded posthumous degrees. I missed what he said about Guadalupe Ruiz's degree.

Regarding Xana, Ethan, Maddie and Kaylee, he said they met with Xana's family in a private ceremony on Monday and awarded them her degree, and they would be sending Ethan's degree to his family in the coming weeks. Maddie's parents accepted her degree in person. I didn't see Kaylee's 4 siblings or the Goncalves family accept hers, but they could have come up when I stepped away.

ETA: Louis Freeh's commencement speech was very moving and inspirational. He mentioned them all and gave many words of wisdom. <3