4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #101

[INfisherman]

Different in a small way by model year where there were very little physical changes in the car's overall design, not like it was a large yellow school bus with flashing lights, but still a mid range White Elantra Sedan.

On grainy surveillance, which I believe the expert relied upon early on totally understandable, and then they found additional surveillance video which caused an expansion to the model year.

JMO

Wasn’t all that outlined in the PCA anyway? Not of any consequence. LE changes their focus as new info is gained. Nothing burger & pretty sure JH already ruled it as such during the Frank’s claims, no?

MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Wasn’t all that outlined in the PCA anyway? Not of any consequence. LE changes their focus as new info is gained. Nothing burger & pretty sure JH already ruled it as such during the Frank’s claims, no?

MOO

Agreed, nothing burger.

Desperate times call for desperate measures and the Defense here is desperate. IMO

 

[Boxer]

You forget. The LE’s own expert identified the year of Elantra as different from BK’s and was insisting on it. So, even the Elantra may not be the same. In any case all the Elantras are a model year.

"Though police had realized Kohberger, with his 2015 Elantra, was a person of interest by Nov. 29, they issued a news release on Dec. 7 asking for the public's help in finding a white 2011-13 Elantra. They suggested such a vehicle had been near the home early on Nov. 13 and that any occupants "may have critical information to share regarding this case."

It wasn't clear why police issued that request, but law enforcement agencies sometimes use such public statements to throw off suspects and keep them from learning they're under suspicion. Tips poured in and investigators soon announced they were sifting through a pool of around 20,000 potential vehicles."

Search for white Hyundai was key in Bryan Kohberger case

Police say cell phone records show Kohberger's phone near the murder scene at least 12 times before the night of the stabbings, starting in August.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[katydid23]

Yes, as I said in my earlier post, one might conclude the sheath was brought to the scene. And the most logical person to do that would have been the killer. That's not an airtight conclusion though.

I think it is as close to airtight as one gets. If a 'bloody object' is found under the body of a stabbing victim, then that bloody object was there during the altercation.

If that 'bloody object' was a sheath for a Kabar knife, then it is a very logical conclusion that it was left there during the assault by the perp.

And it certainly doesn't speak to the sheath being a part of the murder weapon.
MOO

It's not a 'part' of the murder weapon but it is a 'housing' for the weapon. It is an accessory of the weapon. And it would logically follow that the sharp knife was transported there in a sheath.

 

[jepop]

I was watching this case very closely during the first two weeks and the expert seemed to be sure

“A forensic examiner with the FBI determined the car to likely be a 2011-13 Hyundai Elantra, though subsequently said it could be a model as late as 2016, according to the affidavit.”

But the affidavit was written when they already identified BK, right?

P.S. I just looked into PCA. It just says “upon further review” without mentioning the date when it got changed to include 2016.

Idaho quadruple murder suspect and white Elantra sedan: The trail began with the car

Surveillance videos showing the white vehicle cruising the neighborhood of the murders were key to unraveling the gruesome mystery of who killed four University of Idaho students inside the house.

www.oregonlive.com

The Order on Franks I linked has additional details at pp17-18. So it's clear then that LE's expert wasn't "insisting on it" ( "it" being the initial date range prior to Nov 26th 2022, not a particular year for the vehicle at any time). Jmo

 

[INfisherman]

Agreed, nothing burger.

Desperate times call for desperate measures and the Defense here is desperate. IMO

Yeah, @jepop linked it above, starts on pg 17 on JH’s order. The nonsense about LE changing the range of the model years was ruled as not warranting a Frank’s hearing so that’s coming to trial, unless defense can find a way to weasel out of that. It won’t matter to a sensible jury either & time to stop beating those dead horses IMO.

Nothing to see there, move along.

MOO

 

[katydid23]

IMO - Has anyone else read the redacted text messages between DM & BF early on the morning of the murder? They seem to suggest BF saw someone too & it was clear from the messages they were both freaked out. After reading the messages, it is completely unclear why they didn’t call 911. MOO

I think for many college students, the worst thing they could imagine would be to invite the police into their party house. To call them to look into their roommates rooms in th middle of the night? That might be unthinkable.

What if everything was OK and now the police are in the house looking around? These kids are underaged, drunk and possibly stoned or high on other illegal substances. If the police showed up for no good reason, the roommates could be arrested or fined, and could lose scholarships, etc.

I am not surprised they didn't want to call at 4:30 am. They were drunk as well, imo. They were not thinking clearly and were frightened and confused. But calling the police to come over is a drastic step for a 19 yr old.

 

[mrjitty]

The Order on Franks I linked has additional details at pp17-18. So it's clear then that LE's expert wasn't "insisting on it" ( "it" being the initial date range prior to Nov 26th 2022, not a particular year for the vehicle at any time). Jmo

it’s not lost on me that AT intentionally tried to mislead the Court and the public about those emails. MOO

 

[Kemug]

Will be pretty hard for her to testify with BK right there in a suit with no restraints.

No restraints? No handcuffs or ankle shackles? I would also have a couple of armed guards, and maybe BK behind glass or bars.

 

[Kemug]

I'm way behind, son please forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but maybe it's as simple as they only locked their doors when they weren't in their rooms?

I would guess that today students all over Idaho, or even all over the country, are locking themselves into their rooms.

 

[Boxer]

Per the Franks rulung posted by Jepop, FBI expert opened the date range 11/26, BKs Elantra came to attention by WSU police 11/29.

 

[Nila Aella]

in what way was the mixed blood sample allowed to sit?

BP testimony: LE knew about the blood sample B before BKs name was given by LE to LE as a tip.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022125-Transcript-Redacted-hearing-held-Jan23-2025.pdf

JMO

we know if was compared to things. We don’t know what has been done with it in the last 2 years.

We don't.
Hopefully the P will address this in their response.
JMO

IGG was run on a sample from the murder weapon. You seem to be advocating every sample in the investigation should now be run through Codis and IGG?
The investigative resourcing of that becomes prohibitive IMO.

Yes. 3 blood samples. Comparisons and CODIS.
JMO

Just one point. As the sample is mixed we don’t even know if a testable single profile could be developed to run?

BP testimony IGG hearing 1/23/25

Q. If I told you the lab report showed Unknown Male B came from a blood spot on the handrail going between the second and the first floor, does that help jog your memory? A. Yes, ma'am.
Q. Why did you not pursue that person?
A. At that point in time, we had already received Mr. Kohberger's name, and from what my understanding was, entering another DNA profile into CODIS would remove the previous one we had from the knife sheath. So if memory serves, the discussion was we'll hold off, we'll stay with the one from the knife sheath; if we need to, we can address the Unknown Male B at a later time.
Q. I want to make sure I understand your testimony. Were you not aware of Unknown Male B until after December 19th when you knew Bryan Kohberger's name?
A. No, ma'am. I was aware of that before, yes.
https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01...anscript-Redacted-hearing-held-Jan23-2025.pdf

JMO

 

[Ghostwheel]

You forget. The LE’s own expert identified the year of Elantra as different from BK’s and was insisting on it. So, even the Elantra may not be the same.

I forget nothing. They also modified the car year when they studied it closer to see the differences in the Elantra. Its subtle and you have to really study it to see it. But it doesn't matter what the "expert" said. The images would show the specifics. It's still quite a reach. IMO.

 

[Ghostwheel]

 Rsbm
A. At that point in time, we had already received Mr. Kohberger's name, and from what my understanding was, entering another DNA profile into CODIS would remove the previous one we had from the knife sheath. So if memory serves, the discussion was we'll hold off, we'll stay with the one from the knife sheath; if we need to, we can address the Unknown Male B at a later time.
Rsbm

This has never made sense to me. When we think CODIS, most people think National database, but usually is is only the individual state database from what I know.(each has its own. Local index laboratories upload DNA profiles to the state indexes, and state index laboratories upload DNA profiles to the national index, which is maintained by the FBI. The laboratories at each level of the hierarchy decide which profiles will be uploaded to the next level.)
There are no limitations on how many samples you can send through CODIS per case. I'm wondering how the Idaho CODIS works if that is a limitation. ( I worked on the CA CODIS in the early 2000s. It didn't talk well with the national db)

https://oig.justice.gov/reports/FBI/a0126/final.pdf

 

[Ghostwheel]

I hope I am not reposting it. It just popped up in my Google news today.

Idaho student killings: Three-person mixture of unknown DNA found under fingernails of Madison Mogen, filing shows | CNN

A three-person mixture of unknown DNA was found under a 21-year-old University of Idaho student’s fingernails after she and three other students were killed at an off-campus home in November 2022, a new filing reveals.

amp.cnn.com

If I understand correctly, the defense insists on the DNAs found under MM’s fingernails tested, and the prosecution doesn’t think it is necessary?

I read this:
"the defense asked that the DNA evidence be kept from the jury in Kohberger’s upcoming death penalty trial because jurors could believe the DNA is Kohberger’s, and according to the defense, it is not."
And
"The document shows there was preliminary testing done on the fingernail clippings and a “likelihood ratio” was calculated that according to the defense, proved to be inconclusive. The motion states testing did provide a “likelihood ratio for Mr. Kohberger” from the analysis but any conclusion is redacted in the filing.

It would prejudice Kohberger in that it might allow the jury to infer that the inconclusive data would mean that his DNA might be present in the sample, the defense argued."

Not that the defense wanted it tested. Or did I misread what you wrote?

 

[mrjitty]

This has never made sense to me. When we think CODIS, most people think National database, but usually is is only the individual state database from what I know.(each has its own. Local index laboratories upload DNA profiles to the state indexes, and state index laboratories upload DNA profiles to the national index, which is maintained by the FBI. The laboratories at each level of the hierarchy decide which profiles will be uploaded to the next level.)
There are no limitations on how many samples you can send through CODIS per case. I'm wondering how the Idaho CODIS works if that is a limitation. ( I worked on the CA CODIS in the early 2000s. It didn't talk well with the national db)

https://oig.justice.gov/reports/FBI/a0126/final.pdf

Probably just an example of a passing comment being misconstrued. For me, it is really foreign to try to load on so much meaning when investigators are focussed on catching a killer in the investigative phase and make decisions based on their own experience and procedures.

Investigators had a break in the case by finding DNA on the murder weapon. They clearly did not believe, after preliminary work, that the blood on the bannister had any relevance to the case. There can be any number of reasons why that was. In another recent case I followed, these kinds of loose ends were tied up as part of trial strategy.

What is odd to me is investigators played this all absolutely right and got their man. So why complain they didn't divert resource to false trails?

Of course those trails might have to be closed off as part of the trial strategy. But that may happen even years later with how slow this stuff plays out post indictment.

moo

 

[pseudo_hum]

Probably just an example of a passing comment being misconstrued. For me, it is really foreign to try to load on so much meaning when investigators are focussed on catching a killer in the investigative phase and make decisions based on their own experience and procedures.

Investigators had a break in the case by finding DNA on the murder weapon. They clearly did not believe, after preliminary work, that the blood on the bannister had any relevance to the case. There can be any number of reasons why that was. In another recent case I followed, these kinds of loose ends were tied up as part of trial strategy.

What is odd to me is investigators played this all absolutely right and got their man. So why complain they didn't divert resource to false trails?

Of course those trails might have to be closed off as part of the trial strategy. But that may happen even years later with how slow this stuff plays out post indictment.

moo

Agreed. IMO, the brutality of the crime suggests the utmost urgency for apprehension Those first few hours must have been overwhelming.

 

[Nila Aella]

The Order on Franks I linked has additional details at pp17-18. So it's clear then that LE's expert wasn't "insisting on it" ( "it" being the initial date range prior to Nov 26th 2022, not a particular year for the vehicle at any time). Jmo

Agent Imel preferred 2011-13.

Franks Order
Page 18:

What the email chain shows is that, on November 26, 2022, Agent Imel directed the FBI to "open up" their search to "2011-2016." Exh. D9 at Bates 15580. In doing so, he discussed the changes to the Hyundai Elantra in 2014 and 2017 and stated that he wanted a "better shot ofthe vehicle's front fog lights and rear reflectors." He further added, "rather not leave anything out better safe than sorry." Five minutes later he sent another email stating "yea I see the change in 2014 and [I'm] not really a fan of the 2014 much prefer the 2011 2013 but wanted to lay that out have a good night. Will keep looking and send any new info I can come up with." Jd.

These emails demonstrate that it was Agent Imel's decision to open the date range to 2011-2016, despite his "prefer[ence]" for 2011-2013. Exhibit A accurately captures this decision by stating that the specialist initially believed it was a 2011-2013 but opened it up to 2011-2016 upon further review. While Exhibit A did not call out that Agent Imel preferred narrower time frame, Defendant has not shown this omission to be exculpatory and material. Exhibit A is replete with evidence linking Defendant's vehicle and cell phone to Suspect Vehicle 1. Considered as a whole, it cannot be reasonably concluded that Agent Imel's "preference" for a narrower date range would have derailed the magistrate's finding of probable cause had it been included.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/021925-Order-Defedants-Moton-Franks-Hearing.pdf

SAIs extension of the year range was Nov 26th. Why were they not, internally, looking for the expanded range? Why did the Nov 29th WSU discovery not become known until after Dec 19th?

SAI Stating he wanted a better shot of the fog lights and rear reflectors.

The recent 1112 images on Queen do not show fog lights nor rear reflectors IMO.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-12-RE-Make-Model-Suspect-Vehicle.pdf

BP listed the main images in testimony:
So the first one was from 1112 King Road. It was a surveillance camera, an exterior surveillance camera on a house that was immediately to the northeast of 1122 King Road. There was some footage from a Linda Lane camera, I forget the address off the top of my head. There was footage from the A&W, which is at the corner of Lauder and South Main, or Highway 95. There was footage from an address on Indian Hills. There was also footage from a Ridge Road camera. And that's how we referred to them was basically by those names.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022125-Transcript-Redacted-hearing-held-Jan23-2025.pdf

Which one, if any, showed fog lights and reflectors?
Maybe the 451 Paradise stills or screenshots from Ridge Road ?

MIL car ID
Email Nov 23

There is no continuous footage linking the vehicle at the 1112 King road footage and that from Ridge road. Additional surveillance footage depicts vehicles, but not identifiable vehicles.

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-12-RE-Make-Model-Suspect-Vehicle.pdf

JMO

 

[jepop]

I read this:
"the defense asked that the DNA evidence be kept from the jury in Kohberger’s upcoming death penalty trial because jurors could believe the DNA is Kohberger’s, and according to the defense, it is not."
And
"The document shows there was preliminary testing done on the fingernail clippings and a “likelihood ratio” was calculated that according to the defense, proved to be inconclusive. The motion states testing did provide a “likelihood ratio for Mr. Kohberger” from the analysis but any conclusion is redacted in the filing.

It would prejudice Kohberger in that it might allow the jury to infer that the inconclusive data would mean that his DNA might be present in the sample, the defense argued."

Not that the defense wanted it tested. Or did I misread what you wrote?

I believe the defense did have the finger nail DNA independently tested to rule out BK conclusively. @wendy44 posted about that and attached the links to relevant motion.
Agree that they want it excluded as perceived as prejudicial to their client which is fair enough and don't see why that motion will not be granted. Moo, the state is unlikely to oppose it.
Jmo

 

[jepop]

Probably just an example of a passing comment being misconstrued. For me, it is really foreign to try to load on so much meaning when investigators are focussed on catching a killer in the investigative phase and make decisions based on their own experience and procedures.

Investigators had a break in the case by finding DNA on the murder weapon. They clearly did not believe, after preliminary work, that the blood on the bannister had any relevance to the case. There can be any number of reasons why that was. In another recent case I followed, these kinds of loose ends were tied up as part of trial strategy.

What is odd to me is investigators played this all absolutely right and got their man. So why complain they didn't divert resource to false trails?

Of course those trails might have to be closed off as part of the trial strategy. But that may happen even years later with how slow this stuff plays out post indictment.

moo

I agree with this re passing comment. Idk, but others would have additional knowledge and understanding of Codis upload guidelines so am waiting to see what comes out of MIL hearing. Depending on that, assume there will be state witness testimony at trial if this is even going to be an issue of import. Hippler will make the appropriate decisions regarding what and what isn't admissible evidence. In the meantime, no more tea leaf reading for me!