4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #104

[Fleur-de-lis]

This item was listed on the House return
Not on the car return.
JMO


View attachment 579053

Commonwealth v. Kohberger 682 MD 2022 | Cases of Public Interest | News & Statistics | Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania

I can't decipher quite a bit of that handwriting!

 

[iamshadow21]

I can't decipher quite a bit of that handwriting!

It's the line labelled 35.

 

[Arkay]

It's the line labelled 35.

I still think it may, possibly, perhaps, say “ID cards,” but I count seven other examples here of lower-case letter “d,” and it’s difficult to distinguish a “d” out of the word on line 35.

It could be, though, because IMO his other uses of lower-case “d” are not consistent with one another.

Or, it may be something inscrutable inside parentheses. Or it may be “10” instead of “ID.”

Very frustrating! I was famous in my school for being the one who could understand all the handwriting when grading essays, but I guess my skills have diminished since my retirement.

JMO and still uncertain.

 

[iamshadow21]

I still think it may, possibly, perhaps, say “ID cards,” but I count seven other examples here of lower-case letter “d,” and it’s difficult to distinguish a “d” out of the word on line 35.

It could be, though, because IMO his other uses of lower-case “d” are not consistent with one another.

Or, it may be something inscrutable inside parentheses. Or it may be “10” instead of “ID.”

Very frustrating! I was famous in my school for being the one who could understand all the handwriting when grading essays, but I guess my skills have diminished since my retirement.

JMO and still uncertain.

I think it is ID. The second character looks the same shape as the D in 'SSD' in the final line, the one that's right at the bottom edge.

MOO

 

[sunshineray]

I still think it may, possibly, perhaps, say “ID cards,” but I count seven other examples here of lower-case letter “d,” and it’s difficult to distinguish a “d” out of the word on line 35.

It could be, though, because IMO his other uses of lower-case “d” are not consistent with one another.

Or, it may be something inscrutable inside parentheses. Or it may be “10” instead of “ID.”

Very frustrating! I was famous in my school for being the one who could understand all the handwriting when grading essays, but I guess my skills have diminished since my retirement.

JMO and still uncertain.

The little "tail", upwards at the top, looks like the beginning for the downward stroke for the capital "D" to me.

 

[mrjitty]

If he wants to avoid the death penalty he should plead out.

This is descending in to farce.

 

[girlhasnoname]

If he wants to avoid the death penalty he should plead out.

This is descending in to farce.

I don't think BK cares one bit about the DP and the case passed farce in these latest rounds of hearings. WTH?? Poor little Bry Bry, he can't tie his shoes and writes his 5 upside down. Give me a break.

JMO

 

[Nila Aella]

IMO AT saying at last week’s hearing she hasn’t had time to go through all the discovery because reasons blah, blah..but Judge blah, blah…
Cue the world’s smallest violin. SMH.

I have reasons for being interested to know if AT had this issue in previous DP cases/high profile cases in the past. Due to RL haven’t had time to look up any of her other cases yet but I will when I have time.

IMO the discovery AT has seen/has had time to review looks really really bad for her client and wants to have all that stuff thrown out/excluded (flurry of motions). And proceeds to drop a bomb on the court at last week’s hearing about having a lead on some other potential suspect. How long is it going to take her to investigate said alleged lead and possibly put together an SODDI defense???
*Rhetorical question*

I understand there were mega terabytes/lots of discovery information to sift through but I’d think AT as an experienced, highly qualified DP Attorney knows better than anyone that that’s not at all uncommon in a case like this.

Judge: Complex litigation generally when your in the expert phase I mean thats not unusual

AT: I guess your honor I think its unusual when deadlines are blown by the State um or not adhered to by the State and our client pays the price for that. So I do think it is unusual, its unusual to receive discovery......

After all she’s defending the suspected murderer of not just 1, but 4 individuals! That alone should have told her there’d likely be voluminous amount of discovery in and in the interests of her client I’d think she would have hired/asked to hire more law clerks/Paralegals? to help out with discovery as the case progressed Perhaps she did and was denied extra help?

I’m really scratching my head over here folks about the fact she’s now responsible for managing/defending two DP cases and wondering how her client BK feels about that. I understand she’s in private practice now but perhaps she still works in a PD role/capacity because she’s the only qualified DP Attorney so the 2nd case was assigned to her/she had no choice? That actually would make more sense to me rather than her choosing to take on another DP case when she claims she doesn’t even have enough time to review discovery in the one she’s already been working for 2.5 years.
But the way the Judge questioned her about why she would take on more work on another DP case makes me think it wasn’t assigned to her/she chose to take on the other case. And I have the same question as the Judge, WHY would she do that when this case is complex and mega discovery some of which according to AT herself, still hasn’t been gone through/reviewed with 4 short months left until trial. IMO this complex case demands a lead Defense Attorney’s full, undivided attention from start to finish.

AT: I know we discussed a sizable amount of recent discovery we had gotten, those issues prior to this Court taking over. We had talked about the way discovery was being received um early on in the case. We filed discovery request after discovery request in addition to talking about the mismatched way discovery was received. That has been put on the record. My hope was with the States discovery deadline, with that cut off date, that we'd be able to pull it together. My hope has been that until these new things have happened to shift us off the course we were on.

Getting more people to review the discovery doesn't cure the problem the D has encountered with the discovery being produced piecemeal and deadlines not being met.

AT explained the circumstances when she took SMs case.
The D has met their deadlines despite AT handling two cases.
Does the State have too many cases and is that why they are not meeting deadlines?
The State was not ready with the self authentication certifications.
What has the State been doing for 2.5 years?
JMO

Having said all that, IMO at last week’s hearing AT appeared to be not as confident as she seemed in earlier hearings,
imo got flustered and tripped up quite a few times.
As we know, the Judge called AT out and came down on her hard a couple times last week for reasons previously discussed which imo was warranted and did/does not look good for AT.

I thought she handled herself well.
JMO

Also, I noticed at the hearing last week as well as at the hearings in January, AT & BK didn’t sit next to each other and appeared to be not as ‘chummy’ for lack of a better word as they did in earlier hearings. What I mean by that is I noticed at earlier hearings they acknowledged/nodded and smiled at each other a few times, sat side by side etc., whereas at the past couple hearings they’ve sat apart and hardly acknowledge one another. It could be me but I sense something might be afoot/not working between AT & BK lately. Maybe he’s upset that she took on another DP case while still working on his case?? Anyway just some subtle little things I’ve noticed at the past couple hearings. I could be way off, they could be getting on just fine for all anyone knows.

Which just supports what the D argued about BKs presentation of ASD.
JMO

IMO at the very least, AT is employing delay tactics filing blizzard of motions, trying to stall or halt proceedings altogether.
Having said that, some future motions I could see being filed by AT are request for delay of trial

The motions she is filing are normal.
The only side that has mentioned a delay is the P.
During the last hearing, the D said that delaying the trial was not an acceptable remedy.
JMO

 

[Sachi]

Judge: Complex litigation generally when your in the expert phase I mean thats not unusual

AT: I guess your honor I think its unusual when deadlines are blown by the State um or not adhered to by the State and our client pays the price for that. So I do think it is unusual, its unusual to receive discovery......

AT: I know we discussed a sizable amount of recent discovery we had gotten, those issues prior to this Court taking over. We had talked about the way discovery was being received um early on in the case. We filed discovery request after discovery request in addition to talking about the mismatched way discovery was received. That has been put on the record. My hope was with the States discovery deadline, with that cut off date, that we'd be able to pull it together. My hope has been that until these new things have happened to shift us off the course we were on.

Getting more people to review the discovery doesn't cure the problem the D has encountered with the discovery being produced piecemeal and deadlines not being met.

AT explained the circumstances when she took SMs case.
The D has met their deadlines despite AT handling two cases.
Does the State have too many cases and is that why they are not meeting deadlines?
The State was not ready with the self authentication certifications.
What has the State been doing for 2.5 years?
JMO


I thought she handled herself well.
JMO

Which just supports what the D argued about BKs presentation of ASD.
JMO

The motions she is filing are normal.
The only side that has mentioned a delay is the P.
During the last hearing, the D said that delaying the trial was not an acceptable remedy.
JMO

He did looked alone and smaller in the courtroom as likely, the defense want him to appear as relative to ASD defense to death penalty - it’s not happenstance. Jmo

 

[Nila Aella]

He did looked alone and smaller in the courtroom as likely, the defense want him to appear as relative to ASD defense to death penalty - it’s not happenstance. Jmo

IMO Jurors notice everything.
Clothing, demeanor, delivery, attitude, reactions, interactions.
Of everyone in the courtroom.
Judge. Attorneys. Accused. Gallery. Witnesses.
JMO

 

[NCWatcher]

IMO Jurors notice everything.
Clothing, demeanor, delivery, attitude, reactions, interactions.
Of everyone in the courtroom.
Judge. Attorneys. Accused. Gallery. Witnesses.
JMO

Exactly. They do

It's amazing to hear what jurors sometimes say about courtroom participants when interviewed after the trial has ended.
MOO

 

[mrjitty]

Judge: Complex litigation generally when your in the expert phase I mean thats not unusual

AT: I guess your honor I think its unusual when deadlines are blown by the State um or not adhered to by the State and our client pays the price for that. So I do think it is unusual, its unusual to receive discovery......

AT: I know we discussed a sizable amount of recent discovery we had gotten, those issues prior to this Court taking over. We had talked about the way discovery was being received um early on in the case. We filed discovery request after discovery request in addition to talking about the mismatched way discovery was received. That has been put on the record. My hope was with the States discovery deadline, with that cut off date, that we'd be able to pull it together. My hope has been that until these new things have happened to shift us off the course we were on.

Getting more people to review the discovery doesn't cure the problem the D has encountered with the discovery being produced piecemeal and deadlines not being met.

AT explained the circumstances when she took SMs case.
The D has met their deadlines despite AT handling two cases.
Does the State have too many cases and is that why they are not meeting deadlines?
The State was not ready with the self authentication certifications.
What has the State been doing for 2.5 years?
JMO


I thought she handled herself well.
JMO

Which just supports what the D argued about BKs presentation of ASD.
JMO

The motions she is filing are normal.
The only side that has mentioned a delay is the P.
During the last hearing, the D said that delaying the trial was not an acceptable remedy.
JMO

She has a 100% losing hand - that's why she keeps filing a gazillion motions trying to put sand in the gears. Now it seems like she will actually have to go to trial this year

While I agree filing so much is typical for a well defended client in a high profile case, I'd suggest it is far from normal in 99% of cases across the US. But of course no one follows those cases.

IMO

 

[SteveP]

IMO Jurors notice everything.
Clothing, demeanor, delivery, attitude, reactions, interactions.
Of everyone in the courtroom.
Judge. Attorneys. Accused. Gallery. Witnesses.
JMO

While I would not want them to be influenced by everything they notice, I would always prefer a juror that notices everything to a juror that notices nothing. A juror that notices everything is probably also listening carefully to everything! JMO

 

[Tragg]

She has a 100% losing hand - that's why she keeps filing a gazillion motions trying to put sand in the gears. Now it seems like she will actually have to go to trial this year

While I agree filing so much is typical for a well defended client in a high profile case, I'd suggest it is far from normal in 99% of cases across the US. But of course no one follows those cases.

IMO

Kohberger is very likely to be found guilty, I agree.

But I would suggest that death penalty cases represent much less than one percent of criminal cases filed in the US. States like Idaho require that attorneys who are assigned to represent people facing the DP to meet rigorous qualification standards. I think you will find that the very few defense attorneys who meet these standards share experiences, legal theories, trial and appeal tactics and strategies - and would all file motions similar in kind and volume in a death penalty case.

They do this not to throw sand in the prosecution's gears, but to be able to assure the defendant, the appellate courts, and the people that if the state kills a person as the penalty for murder, the process was scrupulously fair and the conviction was not a mistake.

I disagree with many of AT's arguments and I expect the judge will rule for the prosecution in all significant respects, but nothing she has done is out of bounds in a legal sense. I am glad that when BK is convicted, his death penalty will be upheld on appeal.

 

[Warwick7]

Judge: Complex litigation generally when your in the expert phase I mean thats not unusual

AT: I guess your honor I think its unusual when deadlines are blown by the State um or not adhered to by the State and our client pays the price for that. So I do think it is unusual, its unusual to receive discovery......

AT: I know we discussed a sizable amount of recent discovery we had gotten, those issues prior to this Court taking over. We had talked about the way discovery was being received um early on in the case. We filed discovery request after discovery request in addition to talking about the mismatched way discovery was received. That has been put on the record. My hope was with the States discovery deadline, with that cut off date, that we'd be able to pull it together. My hope has been that until these new things have happened to shift us off the course we were on.

Getting more people to review the discovery doesn't cure the problem the D has encountered with the discovery being produced piecemeal and deadlines not being met.

AT explained the circumstances when she took SMs case.
The D has met their deadlines despite AT handling two cases.
Does the State have too many cases and is that why they are not meeting deadlines?
The State was not ready with the self authentication certifications.
What has the State been doing for 2.5 years?
JMO


I thought she handled herself well.
JMO

Which just supports what the D argued about BKs presentation of ASD.
JMO

The motions she is filing are normal.
The only side that has mentioned a delay is the P.
During the last hearing, the D said that delaying the trial was not an acceptable remedy.
JMO

In my own opinion.....
When we move or duplicate selected text without posting more of the hearing we get only fragments to prove our points.

Up above I see selected texts from the hearing. These assume the prosecution has been delinquent and mismatched.

If that's all I read I would think that's the case. But, it's not.

I may not have access to the transcript of the hearing, but, I have posts from this thread of the hearing.

• Judge Hippler called Sy Ray a conspiracy theorist.
• Hippler said: "Counselor, you've made some serious accusations without providing any evidence.
• AT whined that there was hundreds of hours of street traffic to look through, and it wasn't all labeled w/specifics, so she has to try and look at each one to see when and where...
• So is she saying the state should have looked at each one and put a label w/date and location?
• Judge just said AT had taken on a new DP case since this one began - he asked why she would take this additional case on when she was already overwhelmed with BK’s.
• In spite of Hippler giving them repeated opportunities, the defendant has yet to establish alibi data.They have not given a response —no alibi notices.
• Judge—I think the issue is about your responsibility to produce an alibi...If you are going to use one.
• AT is arguing with the judge over the years of the Elantra and HE reminds her that the witness expanded the year range. She says they only changed the years  after BK was identified, but the judge answered her, "that's not true." Then Hipper says: I don't think that's consistent with the facts.
• Judge--"What's the evidence of that, counsel?"
AT--"One evidence has been in the practice that I've learned from people that worked--"
Judge--"You're, you're giving me that testimony now?"
AT--"I'm not giving you testimony, I'm answering the court's questions."
Judge--"Okay. But you've made some serious accusations against the state of hiding evidence. And yet you've provided no factual basis. Zero. That that evidence existed. For them to be able to obtain it. In December."
--------------------------------------

I'll stop here....

 

[Warwick7]

IMO Jurors notice everything.
Clothing, demeanor, delivery, attitude, reactions, interactions.
Of everyone in the courtroom.
Judge. Attorneys. Accused. Gallery. Witnesses.
JMO

As they should. Or else we would have jurors with blindfolds on and only "hearing" the trial.

 

[NCWatcher]

As they should. Or else we would have jurors with blindfolds on and only "hearing" the trial.

Don't think I agree. I once heard a juror say (when explaining her vote to acquit) "the prosecutor seemed mean and I wasn't sure he proved his case." That didn't lead me to have confidence in that jury verdict! The statement suggested to me the perceived demeanor/"meanness" of the prosecutor received more weight than the evidence. I've also heard fellow jurors say pretty outlandish things about the appearance of attorneys on both sides during deliberations. So even warnings from the judge to consider only the evidence aren't effective.

MOO

 

[Warwick7]

Don't think I agree. I once heard a juror say (when explaining her vote to acquit) "the prosecutor seemed mean and I wasn't sure he proved his case." That didn't lead me to have confidence in that jury verdict! The statement suggested to me the perceived demeanor/"meanness" of the prosecutor received more weight than the evidence. I've also heard fellow jurors say pretty outlandish things about the appearance of attorneys on both sides during deliberations. So even warnings from the judge to consider only the evidence aren't effective.

MOO

Ok...

 

[Nila Aella]

In my own opinion.....
When we move or duplicate selected text without posting more of the hearing we get only fragments to prove our points.

Up above I see selected texts from the hearing. These assume the prosecution has been delinquent and mismatched.

I was responding to what was said in a specific post by providing the D answer during the hearing.
I linked the hearing for anyone interested in listening to the whole dialogue.
JMO

If that's all I read I would think that's the case. But, it's not.

I may not have access to the transcript of the hearing, but, I have posts from this thread of the hearing.

• Judge Hippler called Sy Ray a conspiracy theorist.

IMO SR is not a conspiracy theorist.
JMO

• Hippler said: "Counselor, you've made some serious accusations without providing any evidence.
• AT whined that there was hundreds of hours of street traffic to look through, and it wasn't all labeled w/specifics, so she has to try and look at each one to see when and where...

At the end of the hearing the Judge mentioned that maybe it would be appropriate for the State to certify that there was not exculpatory evidence.
JMO

• So is she saying the state should have looked at each one and put a label w/date and location?
• Judge just said AT had taken on a new DP case since this one began - he asked why she would take this additional case on when she was already overwhelmed with BK’s.

He did, and I posted AT response to that.
JMO

• In spite of Hippler giving them repeated opportunities, the defendant has yet to establish alibi data.They have not given a response —no alibi notices.
• Judge—I think the issue is about your responsibility to produce an alibi...If you are going to use one.

As I understand it, there are no witnesses except the experts.
JMO

• AT is arguing with the judge over the years of the Elantra and HE reminds her that the witness expanded the year range. She says they only changed the years  after BK was identified, but the judge answered her, "that's not true." Then Hipper says: I don't think that's consistent with the facts.

I agree with both of them. I think the D and the Judge were saying two different things. IMO AT did not explain this well.
JMO

• Judge--"What's the evidence of that, counsel?"
AT--"One evidence has been in the practice that I've learned from people that worked--"
Judge--"You're, you're giving me that testimony now?"
AT--"I'm not giving you testimony, I'm answering the court's questions."

Judge--"Okay. But you've made some serious accusations against the state of hiding evidence. And yet you've provided no factual basis. Zero. That that evidence existed. For them to be able to obtain it. In December."

To be continued IMO.
Agent B will be questioned under oath.

JMO

 

[Warwick7]

It's a little long, but very interesting. Also he does the Bro AI thing again. Lol! It's a little different than last time, but funny!!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1911594710923460863