4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, 2022 #80

[Deleted member 718]

I agree with Mr Goncalves. Let both sides lay it out, give it transparency.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660862269096599552

 

[Erutan]

Is everyone ready to hang him without a trial?

I doubt LE would have arrested and charged him without strong evidence.
No one is talking about hanging anyone without a trial, nor has anyone here said this.
But certainly -- everyone wants to see justice done, no matter what.

 

[Deleted member 718]

https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/moscow-idaho?assettype=image&sort=newest&phrase=moscow%20idaho&license=rf%2Crm

 

[Erutan]

Just opinions. My opinion is gulty, but he deserves a fair trial.

Yes, of course it's opinions.
And we can speculate here, which is what most have been doing while we wait.
Everyone deserves a fair trial; and I've no doubt BK will have a fair one.

My .02 is that LE have much more than we know about !
Which is why they moved to apprehend the perp when they did.
M00.

 

[Ksfarmer8]

I doubt LE would have arrested and charged him without strong evidence.
No one is talking about hanging anyone without a trial, nor has anyone here said this.
But certainly -- everyone wants to see justice done, no matter what.

A question I have in regards to evidence, because this was such a "messy" and horrific crime scene, is it possible that some of the revealing photos may be argued about or suppressed because they are so revealing? Will the defense try to get some of the photos thrown out so as not to prejudice the jury? Just wondering.

 

[Idaho transplant]

Yes, of course it's opinions.
And we can speculate here, which is what most have been doing while we wait.
Everyone deserves a fair trial; and I've no doubt BK will have a fair one.

My .02 is that LE have much more than we know about !
Which is why they moved to apprehend the perp when they did.
M00.

If Kohberger were to strike a deal for life in prison without the possibility of parole (I hope he gets the DP), does the evidence the prosecution has against him become public record? Or, does the public have to rely on authors such as James Patterson to find out the details of the crime?

 

[MyBelle]

Yes, of course it's opinions.
And we can speculate here, which is what most have been doing while we wait.
Everyone deserves a fair trial; and I've no doubt BK will have a fair one.

My .02 is that LE have much more than we know about !
Which is why they moved to apprehend the perp when they did.
M00.

ITA. LE has much more evidence than we know about, imo.

Prosecutor: More than 20,000 pieces of evidence given to Kohberger attorneys

Prosecutors said that they have given Bryan Kohberger's defense team thousands of files, including more than 50 terabytes of data.

www.courttv.com

Prosecutors filed a response to the motion ahead of a scheduled May 22 hearing on the issue, saying that as of May 4, the Latah County Prosecutor’s Office had provided approximately:

• 10,000 pages of reports and other written materials
• 10,200 photographs
• 9,200 tips
• 51 terabytes of audio/visual media and digital materials

 

[NuttMegg]

If Kohberger were to strike a deal for life in prison without the possibility of parole (I hope he gets the DP), does the evidence the prosecution has against him become public record? Or, does the public have to rely on authors such as James Patterson to find out the details of the crime?

When Watts confessed (guilty plea to avoid dp) to murdering pregnant Shanann and her 2 babies and desecrating their bodies, a discovery package of nearly 2000 pages was released, plus a multitude of videos, interviews, cop cams, etc. But guilty pleas don't require full details as much as everyone would like to know. Again, in the Watts case, as he would not (at that time) describe what he did, he was required to sign a document admitting that the prosecution had the evidence to convict him. That specific document was detailed on the Scott Reisch channel, and here on WS. He later voluntarily participated in a 5 hour detailed confession, with LE, but that took him 3 months to man up as to how he killed them. That confession was released to the public about 3 weeks later. In Colorado, of course.

 

[I'm Nobody]

---snipped---
View attachment 424023

View attachment 424024

https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/moscow-idaho?assettype=image&sort=newest&phrase=moscow%20idaho&license=rf%2Crm

Thanks @gliving Can't help it, Thompson looks like Santa.
You know parents are going to use this at the holidays.
Santa not only knows if you've been good or bad but he will prosecute you.


JMO

 

[Warwick7]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1660650709631508482

 

[NuttMegg]

Weird and Creepy per Scott.

 

[Idaho transplant]

When Watts confessed (guilty plea to avoid dp) to murdering pregnant Shanann and her 2 babies and desecrating their bodies, a discovery package of nearly 2000 pages was released, plus a multitude of videos, interviews, cop cams, etc. But guilty pleas don't require full details as much as everyone would like to know. Again, in the Watts case, as he would not (at that time) describe what he did, he was required to sign a document admitting that the prosecution had the evidence to convict him. That specific document was detailed on the Scott Reisch channel, and here on WS. He later voluntarily participated in a 5 hour detailed confession, with LE, but that took him 3 months to man up as to how he killed them. That confession was released to the public about 3 weeks later. In Colorado, of course.

Thanks for your reply! ...'he was required to sign a document admitting......' Is that what is referred to as the Alford Plea?

I fear that Kohberger's case could follow the same strategy as you have laid out about the Watt's case. IMO, a travesty of justice.

 

[Nova]

Good characterisation IMO. And if he is staying silent in "protest", to me also smells of arraogance (MOO), because he is free to change his plea at any time and for all practical purposes he is entered as pleading NG. What difference could it make? So he can say afterwards (if exonerated) I never pleaded? I beat the system? Why not just plead NG? So perhaps there is another strategic reason? Someone mentioned Alford Plea. Sorry if this is already talked out and if so please ignore. MOO

I forget how we got to talking about Alford pleas. I don't think such a plea is relevant at this time (and I think it would serve no purpose unless a deal were struck with the prosecution).

A YT defense lawyer who was hosting the video of the hearing said that by "standing silent", a defendant avoids having his inflection judged by potential jurors when he says the words "Not Guilty". I was reminded how famous (and famously mocked) O.J. Simpson's "100% NOT GUILTY!" was 30 years ago...

 

[NuttMegg]

Thanks for your reply! ...'he was required to sign a document admitting......' Is that what is referred to as the Alford Plea?

I fear that Kohberger's case could follow the same strategy as you have laid out about the Watt's case. IMO, a travesty of justice.

No, it wasn't an Alford Plea. I'm sorry I don't remember the title of the document, but the DA required it's use because Watts would not, at that time, do any more than confess to the murders and desecration of the bodies. We talked about it on one of the dozens of threads here, and as I said Reisch posted the actual document on his community page, because so many people were wondering how his guilty plea could be accepted while he would not give details.

 

[NuttMegg]

I forget how we got to talking about Alford pleas. I don't think such a plea is relevant at this time (and I think it would serve no purpose unless a deal were struck with the prosecution).

A YT defense lawyer who was hosting the video of the hearing said that by "standing silent", a defendant avoids having his inflection judged by potential jurors when he says the words "Not Guilty". I was reminded how famous (and famously mocked) O.J. Simpson's "100% NOT GUILTY!" was 30 years ago...

Johnny Depp's attorney, Ben, was just on Law an d Crime, and said that if it had been his client he would have wanted a firm "not guilty" spoken out.

 

[Nova]

They could not change to an Alford plea if BK's team pled not guilty. If they plead not guilty, the only plea they can change to is guilty. Basically the strategy to stand silent is to leave all options open in terms of pleas. Since the defense does not yet know if this is a death penalty case, they are simply leaving all options on the table until they find out. This gives them the choice of Alford plea, Not Guilty plea or Guilty plea. Defendants usually enter an Alford guilty plea if they want to avoid a possible worse sentence were they to lose the case against them at trial. It affords defendants the ability to accept a plea bargain, while maintaining innocence.

None of this is emotional.

Have you heard of an Alford plea that was NOT agreed-to in advance by both sides? I have not (but IANAL).

In cases I've read about--most recently the West Memphis Three--the Alford plea was generally a way for the prosecution to save face while allowing the defendant(s) to go free.

 

[NuttMegg]

 

[Nova]

Though the explanation is tempting, I'm not sure it is correct. As I asked on the previous page, don't most defendants who enter Alford pleas start out by pleading not guilty?

JMO

Indeed. If they had pleaded "Guilty" there would be no reason for the Alford plea.

 

[Charlot123]

When Watts confessed (guilty plea to avoid dp) to murdering pregnant Shanann and her 2 babies and desecrating their bodies, a discovery package of nearly 2000 pages was released, plus a multitude of videos, interviews, cop cams, etc. But guilty pleas don't require full details as much as everyone would like to know. Again, in the Watts case, as he would not (at that time) describe what he did, he was required to sign a document admitting that the prosecution had the evidence to convict him. That specific document was detailed on the Scott Reisch channel, and here on WS. He later voluntarily participated in a 5 hour detailed confession, with LE, but that took him 3 months to man up as to how he killed them. That confession was released to the public about 3 weeks later. In Colorado, of course.

District Attorney Michael Rourke was amazingly professional.

 

[Cool Cats]

I forget how we got to talking about Alford pleas. I don't think such a plea is relevant at this time (and I think it would serve no purpose unless a deal were struck with the prosecution).

A YT defense lawyer who was hosting the video of the hearing said that by "standing silent", a defendant avoids having his inflection judged by potential jurors when he says the words "Not Guilty". I was reminded how famous (and famously mocked) O.J. Simpson's "100% NOT GUILTY!" was 30 years ago...

Yup!

What you said happened. Right away it was all over the media how BK put all this energy into his vocal replies in court to the judge's questions - then contrasted to that - it seemed odd for him to stay silent on his "not guilty" plea.

So yes, had he said "not guilty" out loud, it would have been mocked and torn to shreds no matter how he said it.

He couldn't even walk to his seat without being accused of staring at women in the gallery. As it is, it is a feeding frenzy over his staying silent, letting the judge put in his plea.

His quick smile to his attorney has turned into a middle finger to the families, his beating a hasty retreat instead of shooting the breeze with his attorney means he is going to fire his counsel. I have never seen anything reaching this level before.

2 Cents