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

[IDK]

Well,
A Success has many fathers
But...
A Failure is an orphan

Took me a moment, but this is a great quote.

 

[iamshadow21]

Police have ‘no record’ of whether Bryan Kohberger was offered internship position

The Independent filed a public records request with the Pullman Police Department earlier this year

www.independent.co.uk

The Washinton state police department that interviewed Bryan Kohberger for an internship months before the Idaho murders has “no documentation” regarding whether he was offered the position.

The Independent filed a public records request with the Pullman Police Department earlier this year, asking for any documents relating to Mr Kohberger’s application for the research assistantship for public safety position.

One of the core goals of the request was to determine whether Mr Kohberger had been offered the position - as the department had previously declined to answer that question.


A public records officer responded to the request with 10 documents on Friday - but with a major caveat.

“The Pullman Police Department does not have any documentation regarding whether or not Mr. Kohberger was chosen for the internship position,” the officer stated in an email.

​

How very passive-voice. You'd think someone, somewhere, might have written something down in a circumstance regarding hiring somebody, even if only an email to say, "not that guy, no way, lol. drinks tonight?" No? Oh well. We can't all be record keepers.

 

[IDK]

Duplicate

 

[maskedwoman]

Police have ‘no record’ of whether Bryan Kohberger was offered internship position

The Independent filed a public records request with the Pullman Police Department earlier this year

www.independent.co.uk

The Washinton state police department that interviewed Bryan Kohberger for an internship months before the Idaho murders has “no documentation” regarding whether he was offered the position.

The Independent filed a public records request with the Pullman Police Department earlier this year, asking for any documents relating to Mr Kohberger’s application for the research assistantship for public safety position.

One of the core goals of the request was to determine whether Mr Kohberger had been offered the position - as the department had previously declined to answer that question.


A public records officer responded to the request with 10 documents on Friday - but with a major caveat.

“The Pullman Police Department does not have any documentation regarding whether or not Mr. Kohberger was chosen for the internship position,” the officer stated in an email.

​

In the normal world, anytime my company offers someone a position, there are records of that offer and the response. Since we're dealing with the government, that response could mean anything from "he never worked here" to "we didn't offer him that position, but we did hire him as our IT guy."

 

[10ofRods]

I also think the DNA is underneath the snap.
And he possibly cleaned only the outer surfaces.
JMO

Yep, me too. And in the leather itself. Leather is a really good medium for capturing and preserving DNA, but of course, the procedure for obtaining the human DNA (separate from the bovine) is a bit more complicated than a swab would be. Although a swab could have turned up DNA on the leather, of course - all that's needed is one good sample to tie someone to an object. In this case, so far, only one person's DNA is there.

I suspect the defense will want extensive testing of that sheath, in the hopes of confusing the jury with bovine and possibly other human DNA left over from manufacture. However, the most recent user of the sheath (BK) will have likely deposited so much DNA on that sheath that very little other DNA would be found (perhaps none at all, depending on how the sheaths are made and packaged).

I think NewsNation should visit the Ka-Bar manufacturing plant and give us a look inside. The sheaths are apparently made in Mexico, according to the Ka-Bar site, so I would assume that would aid in figuring out who is a worker at Ka-Bar and who is not.

IMO. (Only partly joking).

 

[IDK]

Triplicate

 

[ktm44]

Yep, me too. And in the leather itself. Leather is a really good medium for capturing and preserving DNA, but of course, the procedure for obtaining the human DNA (separate from the bovine) is a bit more complicated than a swab would be. Although a swab could have turned up DNA on the leather, of course - all that's needed is one good sample to tie someone to an object. In this case, so far, only one person's DNA is there.

I suspect the defense will want extensive testing of that sheath, in the hopes of confusing the jury with bovine and possibly other human DNA left over from manufacture. However, the most recent user of the sheath (BK) will have likely deposited so much DNA on that sheath that very little other DNA would be found (perhaps none at all, depending on how the sheaths are made and packaged).

I think NewsNation should visit the Ka-Bar manufacturing plant and give us a look inside. The sheaths are apparently made in Mexico, according to the Ka-Bar site, so I would assume that would aid in figuring out who is a worker at Ka-Bar and who is not.

IMO. (Only partly joking).

The sheaths are fairly smooth leather, would there be a chance to find fingerprints on something like that as well? I don't wear mine on my belt because I find it bulky so when I do need it, I find I often pick it up by the loop for the belt and quite often carry it the same way.

 

[wary]

Why do you think it's only a "little" DNA on the sheath? How much DNA would it take to be considered a medium or large amount?

I'm just asking because a person sheds about 500,000,000 epithelial cells every day - with many of them rubbed off on things we use. It's very likely the DNA was deposited over time, each time the owner of the sheath opened and shut it. I figure the tiny groove around the edge of the snap (and the other half of the snap) would contain hundreds of thousands of epithelial cells in various stages of disintegration - but the DNA won't disintegrate. DNA lasts a very long time indeed. It is also very tiny. So there could thousands and thousands of chromosome bits on that sheath.

Half life of DNA is about 600 years, but there are bits of DNA that are much older. There would still be DNA on that sheath after 600 years, IMO, and some of it would be in the actual leather (where it is very hard to clean off). They likely will test the sheath again as part of ongoing discovery, now that a destructive test could be ordered by a judge (it wouldn't really destroy much of the sheath, but it isn't usually done without approval of a court, when there are opposing parties both wanting results).

There is no reason that even one of BK's chromosomal segments should be found on an object on the bed of the deceased victims, IMO.

And no, I don't believe that someone stole BK's knife (using gloves) and planted it.

IMO.

I suspect that some people are interpreting ‘a single source of DNA’ as indicating only one cell, instead of what I think it means—that it was the DNA of only one person, rather than being a mixed sample.

MOO, and I’m speaking in generalities, not directing it toward anyone in particular.

 

[10ofRods]

The sheaths are fairly smooth leather, would there be a chance to find fingerprints on something like that as well? I don't wear mine on my belt because I find it bulky so when I do need it, I find I often pick it up by the loop for the belt and quite often carry it the same way.

I would think they could find fingerprints on leather, but the DNA evidence should be convincing enough - and you're right, the next place to test would be the loop. I imagine they did look for fingerprints on that loop as well, makes sense. But I'll bet a lot of donuts that when they do test the leather on the interior of that loop, it will again be single source DNA - BK's.

This is making me think that if in fact BK wanted to claim that his knife had been stolen, this would be the time to do it (and he ought not to have waived his right to a fast prelim if he was going to claim that). The clock has actually run down, IMO, on whether he can reasonably claim to suddenly remember that his knife had been stolen.

I wouldn't be surprised if LE has figured out when and where he bought the knife, I sure hope so. I'm building a scenario for the prelim in my mind, and if I were the prosecutor, that'd be a wonderful piece of evidence to have.

I keep trying to think what the defense can even say about the situation, other than point out that no single piece of evidence gives certainty - the usual defense. I don't think that's going to work very well in this case, what with the various strands they already have.

JMO>

 

[10ofRods]

I suspect that some people are interpreting ‘a single source of DNA’ as indicating only one cell, instead of what I think it means—that it was the DNA of only one person, rather than being a mixed sample.

MOO, and I’m speaking in generalities, not directing it toward anyone in particular.

Yep, I think that's the case as well. There's no way there was just one cell, IMO. And in fact, I'd wager that they could go back and test the same snap many more times and still find only BK's DNA. And LE knows this and the investigators know this.

I also figure that the defense will hire its own forensic geneticist to test again - in the presence of prosecution technicians. And the result will be the same and will not exonerate BK. Indeed, will the defense even bother to try and disprove the DNA findings? What if there are dozens of other DNA "hits"?

I'm guessing the PD has advised BK to consider a plea deal, but he wants to go to trial.

IMO.

 

[kareylou]

IMO, we should not judge the parents actions or inactions while BK was growing up (about which we can only speculate) by the outcome. IIRC, he did have professional help with his issues while the parents were responsible for his medical care. Once he turned 18, he became the decider: the parents could not make him do anything he did not agree to do, and could not even speak to his professional providers about what should be done.

The parents parents obviously love and support him even now - as they should.

Sometimes our children respond to our love and support and to professional interventions. Sometimes, other influences and their own internal world of thoughts and feelings predominate - despite those interventions.

I was raised with the expectation that I would refrain from judging others, knowing my own human frailty. I have no doubt that BK's parents are flawed, as I am. As I hope to be forgiven my trespasses, I am inclined to forgive theirs - sight unseen.

Late reply, but thank you so much for this. I am the stepmom of a child (now adult) who has received counseling, specialized education, medication, and residential treatment since the age of 6. We love him dearly and have done our very best, but he is 22 now. We continue to pay for counseling twice a week, which is more than our rent. We are not even allowed to ask him whether he is still on his medication. We know he goes to counseling because we get the invoice. He says he’s “fine”.
There is only so much you can do when your child is an adult. And sadly, for some problems, there is no parenting strategy that will make the problem vanish. People recognize this with physical maladies but seem to think that brain maladies are curable by love and discipline.
He’s doing great on the surface. We were told never to assume that he could live independently, yet he is living in an apartment, keeping a job, and going to a trade school part time.
Thank God he came to us when the mental illness started. But is he being truthful with his counselor about medications or the degree of symptoms, including severe depersonalization? There is no way to know now that he is an adult. And yet if he harms himself or someone else, in addition to being heartbroken for him, I will never forgive myself.
Way too long on an old thread. Probably no one will see my long testimonial. But I had to write it out. I began weeping when I read the comment to which I am replying. Thank you, CGray

 

[Idaho transplant]

Yep, I think that's the case as well. There's no way there was just one cell, IMO. And in fact, I'd wager that they could go back and test the same snap many more times and still find only BK's DNA. And LE knows this and the investigators know this.

I also figure that the defense will hire its own forensic geneticist to test again - in the presence of prosecution technicians. And the result will be the same and will not exonerate BK. Indeed, will the defense even bother to try and disprove the DNA findings? What if there are dozens of other DNA "hits"?

I'm guessing the PD has advised BK to consider a plea deal, but he wants to go to trial.

IMO.

<modsnip - off topic> I don't agree that the PD will offer a plea deal, especially given some of the victim's families statements.

 

[Dotta]

Yep, I think that's the case as well. There's no way there was just one cell, IMO. And in fact, I'd wager that they could go back and test the same snap many more times and still find only BK's DNA. And LE knows this and the investigators know this.

I also figure that the defense will hire its own forensic geneticist to test again - in the presence of prosecution technicians. And the result will be the same and will not exonerate BK. Indeed, will the defense even bother to try and disprove the DNA findings? What if there are dozens of other DNA "hits"?

I'm guessing the PD has advised BK to consider a plea deal, but he wants to go to trial.

IMO.

I suppose he might have handled the sheath carefully always wearing gloves
but...
Ooops!
The very first day (in the shop?) he excitedly opened it with bare hands.
Only once -
but his DNA happily nestled under the snap.

Provided, of course, that it was he who left it at the crime scene.

Well, this is my imagination again

JMO

 

[schooling]

How very passive-voice. You'd think someone, somewhere, might have written something down in a circumstance regarding hiring somebody, even if only an email to say, "not that guy, no way, lol. drinks tonight?" No? Oh well. We can't all be record keepers.

I don't see how it meaningfully affects the case. Considering his PhD it would make sense for him to seek out a LE internship. Also, if it did affect the case in anyway they would have likely cited the gag order. So hence the utter lack of desire to give any meaningful response.

 

[schooling]

Yep, I think that's the case as well. There's no way there was just one cell, IMO. And in fact, I'd wager that they could go back and test the same snap many more times and still find only BK's DNA. And LE knows this and the investigators know this.

I also figure that the defense will hire its own forensic geneticist to test again - in the presence of prosecution technicians. And the result will be the same and will not exonerate BK. Indeed, will the defense even bother to try and disprove the DNA findings? What if there are dozens of other DNA "hits"?

I'm guessing the PD has advised BK to consider a plea deal, but he wants to go to trial.

IMO.

They don't have to disprove them. They just have to introduce doubt. And with touch transfer DNA there's plenty of scientific 'doubt' to introduce. IMO. There are plenty of published research papers to back this doubt.

Besides scientific doubt, the defense will likely challenge the two survivors on whether or not they personally knew every single person that ever attended one of their parties. And if any parties were thrown without them being present. They'll never have to explicitly state that BK attended a party. Just imply.

Without the cellular and video from the PCA (and other pieces of evidence coming) I'd say that they had a sliver of a chance of introducing doubt on the DNA evidence alone. But the story that the totality of the evidence (thus far) tells makes the DNA the cherry on top and eliminates most of the criticisms of touch/transfer DNA.

We are talking astronomic levels of coincidences here.

 

[Montecore1]

I'd be shocked if she didn't change her name and slip into obscurity after the trial. She might finish her studies virtually, but I doubt she'll be back on campus. Too many people will likely want to befriend her just to hear the gory details. Media types may hound her to buy her story for their next big movie or book. Plus, it might be uncomfortable for her to interact with friends of the victims, especially given the online hate she's gotten for her actions. We may see something about her in 10 or 20 years if one of the tabloids decide to do a "10 years later..." memorial or something, but I suspect DM will intentionally avoid the spotlight, however she can, forever after this.

And I don't blame her one bit. She's been to hell (and not yet back) for something that was totally not her fault in any way, shape, or form.

MOO.

Agreed BS...her just attending a class or trying to sit down at a restaurant she would receive stares and whispers behind her back...I think the same for Bethany. Its really said.

 

[Helechawagirl]

Opinion:

Several of us are on the same page. His nocturnal habits didn't start at age 28+, when he moved to Pullman (where he annoys the neighbors with being awake and very active at night; even going running in the middle of the night). He's nocturnal.

And I asked yesterday where people think he got his money for heroin. It's not cheap. His parents gave him an allowance? He has had **no known jobs,** ever - until TA'ing. Journalists digging for more info on BK every day, but no employment history (because he had none). So where does the money for the heroin come from?

IMO.

If someone can post his employment history, I'd be much obliged.

He was a security guard at a local school for awhile. Several posts about it. He helped save someone’s life—kinda.

 

[Helechawagirl]

But surely he knew he wasn't meeting the requirements of his PIP and that things were shaky?

You bring up a really interesting issue. What if BK thought he could get away with everything (bad TA-ing; mass murder).

What if, inside his mind, all of his transgressions were equal - and not only that, but that whatever an individual sets their mind on, no matter how narcissistic and self-serving, it's still a viable plan as long as it fulfills its own "reasonable" goals?

Because Rational Choice Theory is according to Prof B, one of his favorite theories. In this theory, here is a category of criminal who is completely rational. Indeed the theory claims that serial killers and mass murderers should be understood (at least on the first pass) as rational actors who have an illegal or immoral goal - but set about to accomplish it in the most logical and rational manner possible.

I keep thinking about that. Prof B also mentions Script Theory (where a criminal labors over a plan - but thinks of it as a kind of script or movie; in which the ending is decided by themselves)

A Knife Sheath, Phone Pings and Trash: The Hunt for a Killer in Idaho (Published 2023)

On the night four college students were killed, a roommate saw a man clad in black walk through the home. It took a cross-country investigation to find a suspect.

www.nytimes.com

He was being taught (and perhaps rewarded for) using these theories. Rational Choice Theory is particularly scary, because it was intended for economic theorists, when people are in a rational state of mind about markets. It wasn't intended for criminals who decide that their reasonable premise is (for example) that there are too many people, or too many people of a certain type, and it's up to them to devise a rational plan to fix it. All of their choices are thereby reasoned.

Simply stated, it's the ruination of logic by asserting that all premises are equal (and leaving morality or ethics out, altogether, IMO).

This whole case mesmerizes me because it puts into play some ideas that I know people have, but takes them to their bloodiest conclusions. IMO.

I believe BK is not stupid; but I also think he's quite mad (but thinks he's rational - as most crazy people do).

IMO

Interesting.

 

[Beth11311]

Late reply, but thank you so much for this. I am the stepmom of a child (now adult) who has received counseling, specialized education, medication, and residential treatment since the age of 6. We love him dearly and have done our very best, but he is 22 now. We continue to pay for counseling twice a week, which is more than our rent. We are not even allowed to ask him whether he is still on his medication. We know he goes to counseling because we get the invoice. He says he’s “fine”.
There is only so much you can do when your child is an adult. And sadly, for some problems, there is no parenting strategy that will make the problem vanish. People recognize this with physical maladies but seem to think that brain maladies are curable by love and discipline.
He’s doing great on the surface. We were told never to assume that he could live independently, yet he is living in an apartment, keeping a job, and going to a trade school part time.
Thank God he came to us when the mental illness started. But is he being truthful with his counselor about medications or the degree of symptoms, including severe depersonalization? There is no way to know now that he is an adult. And yet if he harms himself or someone else, in addition to being heartbroken for him, I will never forgive myself.
Way too long on an old thread. Probably no one will see my long testimonial. But I had to write it out. I began weeping when I read the comment to which I am replying. Thank you, CGray

Sending you so much love. I read your testimony, and I too became teary-eyed. My child is young, just turned 11, but we are dealing with some pretty serious mental-emotional stuff and just as you said - people recognize physical maladies but think the mental ones can be easily fixed. I find the opposite to be true. Mental health is a lifelong battle, and I fear very much for my sweet child who has the unlucky genetics and propensity for what I too do battle with each and every damn day. I hope your stepson is doing well, thank you for all of the love and care you clearly provided (and continue to provide).

 

[Beth11311]

He was a security guard at a local school for awhile. Several posts about it. He helped save someone’s life—kinda.

Can you expound on that? How did he help save someone’s life? And when was he a security guard at a school?! Yikes….