4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #100

[Justice101]

I am glad to see the prosecution arguing that 'star gazing' needs to go in the woodchipper unless BK will testify.

I argued before that it is likely the case the defence cannot stand up this alibi without his testimony because no other witness can say where he was. A generic history of being in to star gazing (AKA lurking around at night) is not a specific alibi IMO

Maybe another one that was for the social media gallery, and interesting that AT has never backed it up.

IMO, the Defense has absolutely nothing to use as a defense. Nothing.

 

[girlhasnoname]

And let's not forget that he won some sort of contemporaneous debate contest is his youth. MOO.

Yes, I love to throw that out there any chance I can get. He was the winner in his Regional Extemporaneous Speech contest in High School. HAHAHA

His gift of BS and thinking fast on his feet has served him well over the years.

JMO

 

[Ghostwheel]

I remember it being a lone shoe print with none before or after AND it was invisible to the naked eye. I've wondered if the shoe print could have been applied like a rubber stamp to the floor. The shoe print was only found via extra testing with amido black after CSI had finished with the house and then was sent back out to the house for some reason - I assume LE was trying to verify what DM and/or BF had told them since they focused on the area outside of DM's bedroom door where she claimed the man she saw was. Was the area cleaned so thoroughly that no other print remained? Did they type the blood found on the shoe print and determine if it may have been that of one or more of the victims? It IS a very strange piece of evidence, IMO. I'm hoping we will eventually get an explanation for it.

All JMO.

They REPORTED one footprint, not necessarily the only one, IMO to corroborate that someone (maybe even just at some point in time) went in the direction of the sliding door from the vicinity of DM's door. It is impossible that there were ZERO other footprints visible or invisible to the naked eye in that house. IMO, it was in the PCA to legitimize DM's testimony.

I know defense is aware of what Prosecution has and they are trying to get it thrown out as "fruit of the poisonous tree" by trying to get the search warrants thrown out, so they are grasping at anything to do that. None of that would be important if there wasn't other things further down the road. I mean, if they could search his place till the cows came home and never come up with anything that could link him to killing someone, why would anyone care if the search warrants were valid? That is how I look at it.

Fixed typos

 

[imstilla.grandma]

He also asked that some testimony on neuropsychological and psychiatric evaluations of Kohberger be barred, arguing it's not allowable under state rules.

The other side:

Defense attorney Anne Taylor, meanwhile, asked the court for permission to file a lengthy court document that will include motions on a variety of things including improperly disclosed expert testimony, references to "touch" and "contact" DNA, and "witness identification by bushy eyebrows." The judge approved Taylor's request to file the long document, but it has not yet been released to the public

Idaho prosecutors seek to limit Bryan Kohberger's alibi evidence at murder trial

Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson asked a judge to limit any alibi evidence during Bryan Kohberger's trial in a court document released on Tuesday.

www.fox13seattle.com

“It has now been over two years since the homicides occurred (and since the defendant was charged) and it would be unrealistic at this late date to expect the state to effectively investigate and respond to any new or additional alibi-related disclosures,” Thompson said

She recalled he had “bushy eyebrows,” police wrote in a probable cause affidavitfor Kohberger’s arrest.

The defense aims to have that information in testimony from the roommate withheld from the jury, according to court filings not yet released to the public, but disclosed in an online case summary. Anne Taylor, Kohberger’s lead attorney, questioned the credibility of the eyewitness at a hearing last month, citing statements she gave to police about “not remembering” details of the night and “being drunk.”

Hippler, in a ruling last week against the defense, instead found the roommate’s accounts “remarkably consistent” over several interviews with police. Her statements “that her memories were fuzzy and dream-like and may have been affected by being tired or under the influence of alcohol do not call into question her reliability” based on how investigators disclosed the information, he wrote.

“The state doesn’t get to dictate how the defense presents their case,” Elcox said in a phone interview with the Idaho Statesman. “Of everything that’s public, there’s other blood that is not identified. It doesn’t really undercut that his DNA is there, but if you have somebody else’s blood there, that’s enough to say, ‘Look over here.’ ”

Idaho prosecution seeks to limit murder suspect Kohberger’s alibi, alternative evidence

Efforts by the defense to present arguments of other possible perpetrators would “result in undue delay, waste of time, (and) would be a needless presentation of cumulative evidence,” the prosecution said.

www.aol.com

 

[Megnut]

They REPORTED one footprint, none necessarily the only one, IMO to corroborate that someone (maybe even just at some point in time) went in the direction of the sliding door from the vicinity of DM's door. It is impossible that there were ZERO other footprints visible or invisible to the naked eye in that house. IMO, it was in the PCA to legitimize DM's testimony.

I know defense is aware of what Prosecution has and they are trying to get it thrown out as "fruit of the poisonous tree" by trying to get the search warrants thrown out, so they are grasping at anything to do that. None of that would be important if there wasn't other things further down the road. I mean, if they could search his place till the cows came home and never come up with anything that could link him to killing someone, why would anyone care if the search warrants were valid? That is how I look at it.

IIRC the latent footprint might not support exiting to the slider. Based on representation, it is pointed differently.

I think AT was trying to make the case that it doesn't support DM's recollection thst the figure she saw was moving toward the slider.

But it's really not a discrepancy (if it's even true). He may have stood outside her door once and he may have walked past it once. No lie. Both true.

So curious to see what the State's evidence is, minus the Defense's spin.

JMO

 

[SteveP]

Yes, I love to throw that out there any chance I can get. He was the winner in his Regional Extemporaneous Speech contest in High School. HAHAHA

His gift of BS and thinking fast on his feet has served him well over the years.

JMO

...and that is one reason why, although I am sure that his attorneys will vehemently advise against it, BK may be pompous enough to think he can bs his way through testimony and cross examination on the witness stand, at trial. I think he sees this whole thing as some kind of game, a chess game, and I think he considers himself a grand master. I believe that he probably thinks that he is smarter than any of the attorneys representing him or the state, and he certainly is smarter than any potential juror he may have to convince of his innocence.

I do not really think that he would take the stand, but I would not bet money that he would not. JMO

 

[Megnut]

...and that is one reason why, although I am sure that his attorneys will vehemently advise against it, BK may be pompous enough to think he can bs his way through testimony and cross examination on the witness stand, at trial . I believe that he probably thinks that he is smarter than any of the attorneys representing him or the state, and he certainly is smarter than any potential juror he may have to convince of his innocence.

I do not really think that he would take the stand, but I would not bet money that he would not. JMO

If he does testify, it won't serve him well. AT has the unhappy task of trying to humanize BK (especially at sentencing). If BK speaks, he'll undo any good will AT can buy. I don't think he's capable of coming off as a sympathetic character. IMO the jury is less likely to feel any kind of sorry for him and more likely to be feel creeped. I think he can't not be condescending.

JMO

 

[SteveP]

If he did testify, it don't serve him well. AT has the unhappy task of trying to humanize BK (especially at sentencing). If BK speaks, he'll undo any good will AT can buy. I don't think he's capable of coming off as a sympathetic character. IMO the jury is less likely to feel any kind of sorry for him and more likely to be feel creeped. I think he can't not be condescending.

JMO

I completely agree, but I'm not sure AT or anyone else can convince him of that.

 

[mickey2942]

Waiting for BK to show up for the trial with waxed and trimmed eyebrows. Not a "bushy" One in sight.

 

[Megnut]

Waiting for BK to show up for the trial with waxed and trimmed eyebrows. Not a "bushy" One in sight.

While sitting at the Defense table on a floor chair.

JMO

 

[fcavanaugh]

...and that is one reason why, although I am sure that his attorneys will vehemently advise against it, BK may be pompous enough to think he can bs his way through testimony and cross examination on the witness stand, at trial. I think he sees this whole thing as some kind of game, a chess game, and I think he considers himself a grand master. I believe that he probably thinks that he is smarter than any of the attorneys representing him or the state, and he certainly is smarter than any potential juror he may have to convince of his innocence.

I do not really think that he would take the stand, but I would not bet money that he would not. JMO

I am on the same page as you leaning more toward BK not taking the stand.

Actually, something I can envision to be more likely than him taking the stand, is at some point him telling AT and company to step aside aka fires his Defense Team to represent himself. You know BK being the smartest man in any room and all

IMHOO

 

[Ghostwheel]

IIRC the latent footprint might not support exiting to the slider. Based on representation, it is pointed differently.

I think AT was trying to make the case that it doesn't support DM's recollection thst the figure she saw was moving toward the slider.

But it's really not a discrepancy (if it's even true). He may have stood outside her door once and he may have walked past it once. No lie. Both true.

So curious to see what the State's evidence is, minus the Defense's spin.

JMO

But based on what representation? That it isn't pointing directly towards the slider? To me, because it can't be the only print in the house, it could be parallel right in front of her door and the person could still have headed to the slider. There could be five more that doubled back to her door, but the only one that mattered was the one that showed there was someone wearing that shoe print that actually passed near her door, where she could see him. In others words, yes, Virginia, there was a person wearing that shoe print that was in the vicinity of the door, ergo DM could see him, ergo her testimony that she saw him is reasonable, ergo her testimony that she saw him leaving toward the slider is also reasonable.

I don't disagree with what you think about AT at all, btw. It just doesn't hold water due to the location of DM's door, IMO of course. The footprint is supporting DM's testimony that this person existed and that she could see him.

 

[Diddian]

Waiting for BK to show up for the trial with waxed and trimmed eyebrows. Not a "bushy" One in sight.

Yeah. Amazing that AT thinks the "bushy eyebrow" description by eyewitness should be considered unreliable, but apparently AT herself thinks the defendant's eyebrows are so distinctively "bushy" that they've been consistently groomed (to be less bushy) since she assumed responsibility for his defense.

I take that as "so bushy that AT fears anyone - 100% of those individuals who might be in a pool of potential jurors ultimately reduced to number 12 - would consider them a distinguishing feature."

And if that is true, then it is also likely true that someone who consumed alcohol HOURS BEFORE witnessing the bushy-eyebrowed-and-masked-man-dressed-in-black in her home saw them and considered them distinctive.

 

[Arkay]

And I don't necessarily disagree with her. BK probably WAS west and south of Moscow and in/near Wawaiwai Park. He was just also right by 1122.

My thoughts as well.

Unless I’ve been wrong all my life, moving vehicles….move.

I, too, think he likely roamed around the area beforehand. Was he trying to summon up the “courage” he thought he needed? Was he waiting for what his idiosyncrasies told him was the “right” moment to strike? Did he entertain a moment of second thoughts?

Or did he just circle closer and closer to his object of desire until he closed the loop?
Whether that object was one of the girls, or the house as a proxy for a life he felt he’d never have?

I know the word “alibi” literally means “elsewhere.” Doesn’t an alibi carry no weight if there is NOTHING to confirm the suspect was elsewhere?

There has still been nothing made public that gives ANY credibility to his alibi, except Bryan saying so. Vouching for oneself is hardly proof.

JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

MSN

Defense for Idaho quadruple murder suspect Bryan Kohberger may cite autism to try to strike death penalty option

His defense recently filed a motion “to Strike Death Penalty RE: Autism Spectrum Disorder,” summaries of court documents show. A “Motion to Redact or Seal Newly Filed Records” was also entered “in Support of their Motion to Strike Death Penalty RE: Autism Spectrum Disorder Under Seal.”

As of early Wednesday morning, the full documents were not publicly available online. And it was not immediately clear whether Kohberger has been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder or if the defense was seeking a diagnosis.

 

[wendy44]

BBM

I believe you are mistaken about the alibi. The alibi was that BK was West and South of Moscow the entire night. She also stated he went to Wawaiwai Park which is out of cell-range.

Bryan Kohberger's alibi ripped apart in Idaho prosecutors' 'temper tantrum'

Idaho student murders suspect Bryan Kohberger's "alibi" that he was driving around looking at "the moon and stars," is too vague, according to prosecutors.

www.fox13seattle.com

All, JMO.

How can this be true though if his phone started reporting to the network again at 4:48am near Blaine, Idaho, which is East of Moscow?
JMO

 

[Megnut]

My thoughts as well.

Unless I’ve been wrong all my life, moving vehicles….move.

I, too, think he likely roamed around the area beforehand. Was he trying to summon up the “courage” he thought he needed? Was he waiting for what his idiosyncrasies told him was the “right” moment to strike? Did he entertain a moment of second thoughts?

Or did he just circle closer and closer to his object of desire until he closed the loop?
Whether that object was one of the girls, or the house as a proxy for a life he felt he’d never have?

I know the word “alibi” literally means “elsewhere.” Doesn’t an alibi carry no weight if there is NOTHING to confirm the suspect was elsewhere?

There has still been nothing made public that gives ANY credibility to his alibi, except Bryan saying so. Vouching for oneself is hardly proof.

JMO

And he can't vouch for himself unless he takes the stand.

AT will have to back-door it. Question the expert witnesses: can you be SURE based solely on THIS photo that this is even a 2015 Elantra? So you're saying it COULD be a 2013?

It's the best she can do.

JMO

 

[Megnut]

My thoughts as well.

Unless I’ve been wrong all my life, moving vehicles….move.

I, too, think he likely roamed around the area beforehand. Was he trying to summon up the “courage” he thought he needed? Was he waiting for what his idiosyncrasies told him was the “right” moment to strike? Did he entertain a moment of second thoughts?

Or did he just circle closer and closer to his object of desire until he closed the loop?
Whether that object was one of the girls, or the house as a proxy for a life he felt he’d never have?

I know the word “alibi” literally means “elsewhere.” Doesn’t an alibi carry no weight if there is NOTHING to confirm the suspect was elsewhere?

There has still been nothing made public that gives ANY credibility to his alibi, except Bryan saying so. Vouching for oneself is hardly proof.

JMO

I think there was activity at the house and that's why he didn't go in sooner and had to loop. Just think how quickly he might have been in and out of that house if KG hadn't been there and XK hadn't been hungry. In at 3:15, out by 3:18.

Scary.

JMO

 

[fcavanaugh]

My thoughts as well.

Unless I’ve been wrong all my life, moving vehicles….move.

I, too, think he likely roamed around the area beforehand. Was he trying to summon up the “courage” he thought he needed? Was he waiting for what his idiosyncrasies told him was the “right” moment to strike? Did he entertain a moment of second thoughts?

Or did he just circle closer and closer to his object of desire until he closed the loop?
Whether that object was one of the girls, or the house as a proxy for a life he felt he’d never have?

I know the word “alibi” literally means “elsewhere.” Doesn’t an alibi carry no weight if there is NOTHING to confirm the suspect was elsewhere?

There has still been nothing made public that gives ANY credibility to his alibi, except Bryan saying so. Vouching for oneself is hardly proof.

JMO

I agree with your thoughts Arkay, you make some very good points.

Just jumping off your post, I don’t think phone cell data alone can confirm a suspect’s alibi either as perps have been known to leave their phone at a different location making it appear they were elsewhere at the specific time in question.

It’s like the perp who leaves his phone at home while going off to commit a crime in the middle of the night/wee hours. If there is no one else/a person/witness at home with them at the time in question, how can their alibi of I was at home sleeping at the time be valid just because their phone location shows at the home i.e., there’s no witness to back the alibi up.
So the above scenario is not a valid alibi, nor is I like to stargaze and/or I was out driving around the Moscow area and just happened to shut my phone off during the time of the murders, if there is no footage of another Elantra just driving around the area at the time and of course we know the stars can’t be called to confirm/testify to support alibi.

IMO, BK doesn’t have a valid alibi at all. He and his DT are trying their best though to manufacture one.

IMHOO

 

[Cool Cats]

I agree with your thoughts Arkay, you make some very good points.

Just jumping off your post, I don’t think phone cell data alone can confirm a suspect’s alibi either as perps have been known to leave their phone at a different location making it appear they were elsewhere at the specific time in question.

It’s like the perp who leaves his phone at home while going off to commit a crime in the middle of the night/wee hours. If there is no one else/a person/witness at home with them at the time in question, how can their alibi of I was at home sleeping at the time be valid just because their phone location shows at the home i.e., there’s no witness to back the alibi up.
So the above scenario is not a valid alibi, nor is I like to stargaze and/or I was out driving around the Moscow area and just happened to shut my phone off during the time of the murders, if there is no footage of another Elantra just driving around the area at the time and of course we know the stars can’t be called to confirm/testify to support alibi.

IMO, BK doesn’t have an alibi at all. He and his DT are trying their best though to manufacture one.

IMHOO

Yup. A cell phone didn't drive his car.
Last I knew, cell phones can be turned off then left anywhere.

So his alibi could actually backfire.

If the defense's cell expert says that BK's phone data proves he wasn't near King Rd at 4:00 am, then how do they prove that BK was with his cell phone?

You can't be separated from your cell phone?

BK couldn't turn off and leave his cell phone far away from King Rd ?

His cell phone can drive his car? Is this a new Musk invention?

2 Cents