4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 72

[North_Idaho_Nony]

WSU's policy is that a graduate student may apply for a leave of absence but it must be done within 30 days of the semester for which they are applying for a leave of absence. And the leave of absence could be up to one year.

So I guess BK didn't apply for a leave of absence since we are now past 30 days into the spring semester, or WBK did apply for a leave of absence and WSU denied his leave of absence request.

Or he actually is on a leave of absence (which I seriously doubt).

Just tossing these two WSU statements into the mix for those who missed them. An important caveat MOO is that BCK’s arrest happened not only during WSU’s Winter Break but also on the Friday (12/30/22) of a huge holiday weekend.

12-30-2022 Statement from Washington State University regarding arrest of WSU student
“Law enforcement officials in Pennsylvania have arrested Bryan Christopher Kohberger, a Washington State University graduate student, in connection with a quadruple homicide that took place in Moscow, ID in November.
<snip>
Kohberger had completed his first semester as a PhD student in WSU’s criminal justice program earlier this month.”
BBM

Interesting at the time to me, at least, to note that BCK was identified by WSU as a former student in the 1-3-2023 Dear Coug email, just four days later:
“The last few months have been trying, and the announcement of the arrest of Bryan Christopher Kohberger, a former WSU PhD student, as a suspect in the deaths of four University of Idaho students has shocked our communities.
<snip>
“Though Mr. Kohberger is not enrolled as a student at WSU Pullman, we recognize some of you may still have questions about safety on campus.”
BBM

MOO

ETA: BCK couldn’t continue in his TA position when he was no longer a grad student, absent special permission for extenuating circumstances.

 

[10ofRods]

I could be proven very wrong but at this point, I really don't feel she's has a lot to offer as far as actual testimony except a general timeline and an unknown person in the house.

I'm wondering if perhaps her and the other roommate may have had a running conversation/vent about household activities that evening since the PCA does suggest that her sleep may have been interrupted. Could something like that be used to establish timeline without forcing her to testify?

I don't think her testimony would be overly detrimental to either side but I could see it not being all that good for her mental health. She's going through a lot and there seems to be a lot of ugliness directed at her on social media, which has put her in a harsh light.

I completely agree. And I think both sides would not want the emotional wild card of bringing DM to the stand.

There are ways of getting her timeline into the case without having her on the stand (she swears out an affidavit under penalty of perjury, but I don't know how that would work in a capital case in Idaho).

I am just shaking my head at the meanness directed at DM online.

I wonder if one of our attorneys could weigh in on the scope of testimony - if she's brought to the stand to testify only about what she saw that night, could she be compelled to answer questions on other topics (such as the "party house," whether she'd ever seen any drug use in the house, the usual things the defense might want to get into the jurors' minds).

IMO.

 

[10ofRods]

I've wondered the same about him wiping his feet. No matter which way I speculate he was going, that diamond print should hold a bit more blood I would think. JMO

Not if he'd taken some steps before leaving that invisible-to-the-naked eye print.

We don't know where he stepped into the blood. We don't know how much blood was around when he stepped in it (I'm pressed by the fact that his entire footprint is pretty much visible - some 20 feet away from Xana's room). I don't know what kind of carpeting might have been in Xana's room - maybe someone remembers? Was there carpeting or wood or laminate?

I am sticking with my theory that the killer tried very hard not to have a lot of blood in his immediate presence. Probably didn't want to step in it. Could certainly have wiped his shoes off - but not sufficiently to avoid latent prints. I do not think there's just the one print - there are others, it's a near scientific certainty; a bloody shoe doesn't only sometimes have blood on it - it has blood on it indefinitely and blood would have been detectable if his shoe had been found the next day even if he'd tossed it in the washing machine. IMO.

But if he picked up the blood by a rapid movement across a bloody floor, and it was only 1 foot, then that foot (in my estimate) would have left 5 more prints (if the blood was from Xana's room). It's entirely possible there was blood on his shoes from the third floor killings as well.

The print immediately prior to the print outside DM's door may well have been seen in the luminol phase, but until they interviewed DM, they didn't realize they need to bring in Amido black to see if there was yet another latent print there (and there was). And there's probably another Amido black enhanced print pointing toward the exit, as LE seems certain he went in and out through the slider (that seems to be what they think and it makes sense).

The killer would not have been able to see his own print just outside DM's door and it's possible he had so little blood on his shoe that he thought he left no prints at all (all were obtained with luminol and Amido black).

IMO.

It's hard to be patient.

 

[10ofRods]

Right— but they’ve already given away the fact that it’s likely a Van’s shoe print?
So why would mentioning more of the same make a difference? The suspect already knows they’ve got a Van’s footprint— so the detail is no longer confidential.

To me, it's the pathway through the house that's important. It should show just one type of shoe if there's just one killer.

But it will also help to show what his initial plan or goal was, something that will be demonstrated at trial.

It's the kind of information, though, that those people who want to insert themselves into the case will use to build a pretend persona. Almost every major case has several people who call the tip line and implicate themselves by building a fantasy story based on the facts already known. By withholding details, these people can quickly be eliminated.

THe footprints, if they started in Xana's room near a puddle of blood might also say something about how many steps he took into the room, whether he had to move quickly (as in a conflict with Xana) and how many steps he took to get to Ethan - and whether it was basically big long rapid steps or something else. To me, revealing the footprints would provide a little mental movie of what happened, something I'd want to leave until trial (and which a judge would likely also want to leave until trial).

Sadly, those prints probably say quite a bit about how everyone died, and possibly, how long some of them suffered. I have my own highly speculative "movie" in mind of course - we probably all do.

At any rate, leading the public to a conclusion before the trial is not good. IMO.

Exactly. and LE couldn't hide it from BK or his counsel anyway, so no big reveal.

BTW, I appreciate your posts because you give thoughtful and objective response to the evidence/process. thanks for that!

Except that the PCA is public and all the discovery just turned over is decidedly not.

There's a gag order, so neither BK nor his attorneys can tell the public the evidence, whereas the PCA was not under the gag order, which is typical.

Now that the gag order is in place, all the evidence flows freely and both sides are supposed to stay quiet.

Apparently the judge does not want any more big reveals of anything - until June. The PA judge may think differently.

 

[Cool Cats]

^^ I absolutely agree with you that it was mentioned due to its proximity to DM's room, but my point (and I believe SSH's) is that IMO JMO is that a barely visible latent shoe print is much less compelling than citing visible patent bloody shoe prints that can positively be matched to the killers shoe size, it would seem very likely they would be around the victims. If indeed they do exist why were they not mentioned, its obvious that brevity wasn't a concern when writing the PCA. Is it possible that if there were indeed patent shoe prints at the scene they were a different size than what BCK wears?

^^ Exactly... there must be a reason LE didn't mention it. IMO MOO JMO, as we know they put specific compelling evidence in a PCA for the judge to review and move forward for trial, it would also seem true that LE would exclude any findings that may damage their case.

They wouldn't know that any of the bloody prints they may have found matched BK's size. Now that they have searched his apartment and got his shoes at time of arrest, they can see if any prints match his size. Even if a bloody print matches his size it doesn't prove he wore the shoes.

I've been following a murder case where bloody shoe prints were found and the shoes were never recovered but LE found a receipt and Walmart video of the mother buying those same exact type of shoes for her sons to wear to the murder scenes.

Just having evidence that BK bought shoes that match prints at the crime scene would be circumstantial evidence.

If the prosecution finds any evidence that may damage their case, evidence that would be favorable to BK, it has to be turned over to the defense. Doesn't have to be in a PCA, but does need to go to the defense.

 

[Dotta]

"Bryan seemed to waver between emotionlessness and fury even under the best of circumstances. But rejection could make him belligerent."

The Idaho Murders, Part 1: How 4 College Kids Lived and Loved

The brutal murders of four Idaho college students shocked millions. Through social media posts, court records, and other primary sources, author Kathleen Hale forensically reconstructs their lives before the crime, and the night they were killed.

www.vanityfair.com

 

[Cool Cats]

Just tossing these two WSU statements into the mix for those who missed them. An important caveat MOO is that BCK’s arrest happened not only during WSU’s Winter Break but also on the Friday (12/30/22) of a huge holiday weekend.

12-30-2022 Statement from Washington State University regarding arrest of WSU student
“Law enforcement officials in Pennsylvania have arrested Bryan Christopher Kohberger, a Washington State University graduate student, in connection with a quadruple homicide that took place in Moscow, ID in November.
<snip>
Kohberger had completed his first semester as a PhD student in WSU’s criminal justice program earlier this month.”
BBM

Interesting at the time to me, at least, to note that BCK was identified by WSU as a former student in the 1-3-2023 Dear Coug email, just four days later:
“The last few months have been trying, and the announcement of the arrest of Bryan Christopher Kohberger, a former WSU PhD student, as a suspect in the deaths of four University of Idaho students has shocked our communities.
<snip>
“Though Mr. Kohberger is not enrolled as a student at WSU Pullman, we recognize some of you may still have questions about safety on campus.”
BBM

MOO

ETA: BCK couldn’t continue in his TA position when he was no longer a grad student, absent special permission for extenuating circumstances.

So he was completely done with WSU? If not arrested he still wasn't going back because he was fired as TA?

Then that is probably why his dad flew out to help him drive his car back home to Pennsylvania. No need to keep his car in Pullman if not going back to WSU.

I wonder what he was planning to do?

 

[10ofRods]

@10ofRods Thanks for your reply. Zeroing in on--- "No one in that meeting had any ability to fire anyone nor was any such decision made at that meeting."

Indirectly, in a very awkward way, that's what I was getting at ---
who is the decisionmaker re HR/employment issues re a TA's performance.

Seems statement in NYT --- decision was made at "department's end of year meeting" ---is not accurate.
Seems likely it would have been more accurate to state termination was ANNOUNCED at the meeting, IIUC.

Again, thx @10ofRods.

I think someone else already described it pretty well. If a prof is unhappy with a TA, they typically bring it to their Department Chair, then to the Department and some discussion occurs. People who have that person in classes report on their demeanor there, etc. If it's unanimous within the Dept that the person had to go (can't TA anymore), then it's AS IF he is doomed to being fired, because having all of one's discipline faculty say one needs to be fired is huge.

So, then the Dean documents the meeting (usually a brief email between Chair and Dean). There are official evaluation documents to be filled out by the supervising professor. There could be a supplemental evaluation by the Dean. I wouldn't be surprised if the Dean asked BK in, just to have a brief conversation with him and to ask why he wasn't going through with his IP (Improvement Plan).

At any rate, the Dean is a manager. Is not faculty, is not staff. They are the conduit by which things to go HR. Deans typically go to meetings with HR throughout the year and learn the latest law, changes in forms and, bring up problems just like this one. In a recent firing at my college, the Dean had a meeting with the errant faculty person (untenured) and his Department Chair (to whom the guy had been exceedingly rude, but she had no witnesses until that meeting). So the errant prof repeats all the stuff he said to the Chair, most of it angry, rude, inappropriate and involving language that the Dean deemed unprofessional (one word, according to the Chair, starts with sh-- and another word was used to modify the word "stupid" and it starts with F. Really unprofessional language (we hear it from our students all day long, but I never hear faculty using it - well, maybe at a party at a professor's house, but still rare).

That happened on a Friday, the guy was cleaning out his office on the next Tuesday. One of the fastest HR responses ever. It went Dean>Vice President>President>HR. The President is considered in charge of hiring and firing this category of employee (it's all in our policies). So President asked HR to start and finish the termination process ASAP and they did. There's a lot more to this story than just the cussing - there were contractual violations of the worst kind, completely counter to Ed Code and to local policy.

So faculty do not have the decision making ability and cannot contact HR directly, but the Dean has the authority to start an HR process and the President has the authority to expedite it, when there's evidence (as there was in this case).

 

[Charlot123]

I completely agree. And I think both sides would not want the emotional wild card of bringing DM to the stand.

There are ways of getting her timeline into the case without having her on the stand (she swears out an affidavit under penalty of perjury, but I don't know how that would work in a capital case in Idaho).

I am just shaking my head at the meanness directed at DM online.

I wonder if one of our attorneys could weigh in on the scope of testimony - if she's brought to the stand to testify only about what she saw that night, could she be compelled to answer questions on other topics (such as the "party house," whether she'd ever seen any drug use in the house, the usual things the defense might want to get into the jurors' minds).

IMO.

If I remember correctly, before the affidavit the only people mentioning DM in a mean way were the ones cluelessly commenting on the photo and TikTok videos. But that was nothing, people can always misinterpret what exactly they see. (Take BK, who is considered attractive by many, for example). All meanness started with PCA.

I think mentioning her in PCA was a mistake. JMO. It opened the door to interpretations and misinterpretations and at this point, achieved nothing, except for putting her on the second floor.

 

[Twistinginthewind]

So he was completely done with WSU? If not arrested he still wasn't going back because he was fired as TA?

Then that is probably why his dad flew out to help him drive his car back home to Pennsylvania. No need to keep his car in Pullman if not going back to WSU.

I wonder what he was planning to do?

Live back at home in The Poconos with Mom and Dad, and see if he could do some online PhD coursework, at which he could maybe be successful? JMO

 

[mooseandcoffee]

I wouldn't think sm memorials, remembering the victims and so forth would be a violation of the gag order. MOO

The gag order pertains to the trial, right? Why would memorials on social media have anything to do with that?

 

[ktm44]

If I remember correctly, before the affidavit the only people mentioning DM in a mean way were the ones cluelessly commenting on the photo and TikTok videos. But that was nothing, people can always misinterpret what exactly they see. (Take BK, who is considered attractive by many, for example). All meanness started with PCA.

I think mentioning her in PCA was a mistake. JMO. It opened the door to interpretations and misinterpretations and at this point, achieved nothing, except for putting her on the second floor.

I don’t feel they had much choice at the time but I think it has put her in an awful position that may not be totally safe.

I just can’t imagine the lengths that people on social media have gone to and how many people’s reputations have been destroyed over this case.

 

[SRWCF]

Live back at home in The Poconos with Mom and Dad, and see if he could do some online PhD coursework, at which he could maybe be successful? JMO

Maybe, but what about all his belongings in his college apartment? If he was really moving back to PA and was done with WSU, I think he would have at least rented a small Uhaul trailer and towed his stuff back with him.

 

[I'm Nobody]

Live back at home in The Poconos with Mom and Dad, and see if he could do some online PhD coursework, at which he could maybe be successful? JMO

Considering BK's pattern of denial -- he didn't tickle his date, he didn't creep out the PA brewery staff -- IMO learning of his termination on/about December 19 or during the drive home with his dad, he would deny being fired rather than admit to his parents he'd done anything wrong. Having left his computer back in WA when his TA position was already headed south, I think he planned go back, take some BS job to survive and continue what he enjoyed and thought he was good at -- killing.

MOO
edit added word "or" during drive home.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I'm not convinced that the roommate's statement is all that significant in the bigger picture and unless there is something more later on, it only speaks to someone in the house and a fairly broad description so in my opinion, the weaker evidence (latent shoe print) supports a weaker statement.

I really don't feel either have a great deal of courtroom value nor do I believe that either was anything more than a starting point for the investigation.

It does leave me with questions though. I will admit that I have to remind myself often that the PCA is a starting point and we don't have any knowledge of the nature of the victim's wounds but as someone who can't drink coffee without spilling some, I can't imainge BK not having stepped in blood somewhere in the house. That particular latent print also leaves me wondering if he wiped his shoes on something after his last victim.

ktm44, I agree. It does seem like "a latent shoe print" raises so many questions. It's understood that it was included to corroborate DM's account of having seen a person pass by her bedroom door but begs the question of why only one.
And that makes me wonder, too, what would they have jeopardized by having simply adding an "s" and made it plural. What could that have complicated?
I can't imagine.

 

[SRWCF]

Considering BK's pattern of denial -- he didn't tickle his date, he didn't creep out the PA brewery staff -- IMO learning of his termination on/about December 19 during the drive home with his dad, he would deny being fired rather than admit to his parents he'd done anything wrong. Having left his computer back in WA when his TA position was already headed south, I think he planned go back, take some BS job to survive and continue what he enjoyed and thought he was good at -- killing.

MOO

Very possible!

 

[Auntie Cipation]

Maybe, but what about all his belongings in his college apartment? If he was really moving back to PA and was done with WSU, I think he would have at least rented a small Uhaul trailer and towed his stuff back with him.

At the time BK drove with dad back to PA, he had not been fired yet. He certainly might have anticipated it though, with the build-up of "altercations" regarding his behavior.

He may or may not have been planning to return to WA, though certainly (IMO) he didn't plan to bring the Elantra back if he did return.

I'd really like to know what story he had told his parents at that point.

MOO

 

[Auntie Cipation]

Considering BK's pattern of denial -- he didn't tickle his date, he didn't creep out the PA brewery staff -- IMO learning of his termination on/about December 19 during the drive home with his dad, he would deny being fired rather than admit to his parents he'd done anything wrong. Having left his computer back in WA when his TA position was already headed south, I think he planned go back, take some BS job to survive and continue what he enjoyed and thought he was good at -- killing.

MOO

BBM: wasn't the drive home in the Dec. 13-15 timeframe? My memory fails me.

Related: is there a timeline in the media thread?

 

[Dotta]

I think he planned go back, take some BS job to survive and continue what he enjoyed and thought he was good at -- killing.

MOO

I agree.

Besides, living with parents at the age of nearly 30 might be considered a failure for him.
And the word "failure" seemed not to exist in his dictionary.

Again in family home?
Sorry, this ship has already sailed away into the horizon.

JMO

 

[I'm Nobody]

BBM: wasn't the drive home in the Dec. 13-15 timeframe? My memory fails me.

Related: is there a timeline in the media thread?

We have something in common. My memory fails me too. That's why I said on/about Dec 19.

"Indiana State Police said a trooper stopped Kohberger and his father east of Indianapolis on Dec. 15 for following another vehicle too closely."

Idaho murders: Bodycam shows moment Indiana police pulled over suspect Bryan Kohberger in white Elantra

Body camera shows the moment the Indiana State Police unknowingly pulled over the University of Idaho murders suspect as he drove cross-country after the crimes.

abcnews.go.com