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

[Megnut]

The State has adopted the Defense's language, presumably accepting the diagnosis of ASD, Level I, but not without seeking the data that backs this up.

We know how this works. AT found an expert who she hired TO pair BK with ASD, and it appears that this was achieved primarily by re-evaluating young BK by whatever means available.

BK is never going to be spared the DP for cognitive impairment which is why IMO AT is grouping all individuals with ASD, at all levels across the spectrum and pairing BK, who was likely not assessed for any other mental illness or personality defect/disorder (by design -- because that opens her up to a diagnosis of ASPD and the like, which has no exclusionary clause vis a vis the DP), with all of them, as if he has ASD Levels I, II, and III.

If her experts are admitted, I predict we'll learn that they met BK once, if that, or twice, if that, and one of them, on that day of trial. That she wasn't provided all of BK's records or asked to evaluate his mental and medical history, assess him globally or even render a diagnosis. AT is walking a very fine line.

If I hold up a chart and ask a person to show me how the dots connect (in support of a pattern I'm looking for), they will do that. I don't ask them if the dots could be connected in another way, if the data supports a different outcome, a better fitting diagnosis but a worse look for my client.

The State can and will, if need be and time and Court allow it, present a rebuttal witness to show how those same traits (the ones that apparently didn't result in an ASD diagnosis as a youngster) match other disorders better.

A mini trial over ASD vs ASPD, but I'm not seeing why the judge would allow it. They'd no legal basis (precedent) for either case to preclude the DP. It hasn't even been established that BK, as an adult, is Level 1, but he's assuredly not Level 3, with cognitive impairment, and/or with an IQ anywhere near the 70 threshold, which AT's language seems to slide him.

If BK functioned at that level, AT might have had feet stand on.

Here, she doesn't.

JMO

 

[Ghostwheel]

How are we certain that they didn't run all DNA (partial and complete) through at least Codis? I would assume they did.

They're not going to make an announcement about it, nor is it relevant if the other contributors have already volunteered to provide DNA (and are friends of people in the house). KG's boyfriend for example, has been cleared and likely gave DNA (and probably a lie detector test) and is therefore not a person of interest. Other boyfriends probably cooperated as well. Police and crime scene investigators already have their DNA on file to be ruled out.

The DNA on part of the weapon is highly significant, especially in context. I am guessing that the other males have phone data that also places them away from the crime scene (esp Murphy's other parent).

I agree with you that any unmatched DNA should have been run through Codis.

But there was this:
"At that point in time, we had already received Mr. Kohberger's name," the detective responded.

"And from what my understanding was, entering another DNA profile into CODIS would remove the previous one we had from the knife sheath," he said. "

New details in Bryan Kohberger case: Judge unseals transcripts from hearing in Idaho college murders

Here are some of the new details revealed from the transcript of the closed-door hearing

abc7chicago.com

 

[Baby baby Jane]

The affidavit IMO was deliberate -- a deliberate ploy to bolster the defense but provide a buffer so AT herself wasn't making the (unsupported) allegations and I think that played out in court. The judge called it out and AT was quick to remove herself from the seven-day detail, distancing herself from the document.

Buried under all of it, there's no data for BK's phone between roughly 3am and 5am because it was off, except for the incriminating fact that it was off precisely during the crime window, prior and post to which he was awake, driving around in his Elantra.

Worth the watch -- to see what AT does now. Will she cut Sy Ray loose, will the judge cut Sy Ray loose for her, will Sy Ray cut himself loose, or will AT double down and at what cost?

Judge warned them. He's not into theatrics.

Court of law. He expects professionalism.

Demands it.

It shows.

JMO

I was on jury for a case of assault where phone was off for few hours during assault at another location. The 29 y.o. Defendant claimed to “be bad with technology” … acted “simple guy not good with tech” imo a phone & on/off is hardly tech.

In the prior weeks - he had never switched it off, ever. It never even ran out of battery for more than a few minutes.

The pattern was important. The phone was never switched off, but only during the crime.

So, the off phone can be just as important to jury as a phone showing location.

IMO if he had let it the battery run out .. he could have said - didn’t realise, or my charger broke or I left my charger at X. That would be more challenge for jury because we’ve all done that.

 

[Baby baby Jane]

The State has adopted the Defense's language, presumably accepting the diagnosis of ASD, Level I, but not without seeking the data that backs this up.

We know how this works. AT found an expert who she hired TO pair BK with ASD, and it appears that this was achieved primarily by re-evaluating young BK by whatever means available.

BK is never going to be spared the DP for cognitive impairment which is why IMO AT is grouping all individuals with ASD, at all levels across the spectrum and pairing BK, who was likely not assessed for any other mental illness or personality defect/disorder (by design -- because that opens her up to a diagnosis of ASPD and the like, which has no exclusionary clause vis a vis the DP), with all of them, as if he has ASD Levels I, II, and III.

If her experts are admitted, I predict we'll learn that they met BK once, if that, or twice, if that, and one of them, on that day of trial. That she wasn't provided all of BK's records or asked to evaluate his mental and medical history, assess him globally or even render a diagnosis. AT is walking a very fine line.

If I hold up a chart and ask a person to show me how the dots connect (in support of a pattern I'm looking for), they will do that. I don't ask them if the dots could be connected in another way, if the data supports a different outcome, a better fitting diagnosis but a worse look for my client.

The State can and will, if need be and time and Court allow it, present a rebuttal witness to show how those same traits (the ones that apparently didn't result in an ASD diagnosis as a youngster) match other disorders better.

A mini trial over ASD vs ASPD, but I'm not seeing why the judge would allow it. They'd no legal basis (precedent) for either case to preclude the DP. It hasn't even been established that BK, as an adult, is Level 1, but he's assuredly not Level 3, with cognitive impairment, and/or with an IQ anywhere near the 70 threshold, which AT's language seems to slide him.

If BK functioned at that level, AT might have had feet stand on.

Here, she doesn't.

JMO

IMO … AT is going to focus on “outward appearance” of someone w ASD. How might they LOOK which is why no assessment.

She’s not going to allow any deeper than his “behavioral appearance” of possible ASD

Edited this to mean “behavioral appearance”.

Obviously not that ASD have bushy eyebrows !!!

(I do have ASD close relative, by the way)

 

[Megnut]

I was on jury for a case of assault where phone was off for few hours during assault at another location. The 29 y.o. Defendant claimed to “be bad with technology” … acted “simple guy not good with tech” imo a phone & on/off is hardly tech.

In the prior weeks - he had never switched it off, ever. It never even ran out of battery for more than a few minutes.

The pattern was important. The phone was never switched off, but only during the crime.

So, the off phone can be just as important to jury as a phone showing location.

IMO if he had let it the battery run out .. he could have said - didn’t realise, or my charger broke or I left my charger at X. That would be more challenge for jury because we’ve all done that.

Precisely.

Patterns of cellphone habits.

And we learned the phone was OFF, and at 90% battery, so there goes any organic explanation.

You're right -- absence of evidence IS evidence.

Damning evidence, at that.

JMO

 

[Ghostwheel]

IMO … AT is going to focus on “outward appearance” of someone w ASD. How might they LOOK which is why no assessment.

She’s not going to allow any deeper than his “appearance” of possible ASD

I'll take stereotypes for $500 please.

 

[Baby baby Jane]

I'll take stereotypes for $500 please.

I corrected my post… to focus on “behavioral appearance” which is why was trying to say. Sorry if caused offence.

 

[Miss Poovy]

The affidavit IMO was deliberate -- a deliberate ploy to bolster the defense but provide a buffer so AT herself wasn't making the (unsupported) allegations and I think that played out in court. The judge called it out and AT was quick to remove herself from the seven-day detail, distancing herself from the document.

Buried under all of it, there's no data for BK's phone between roughly 3am and 5am because it was off, except for the incriminating fact that it was off precisely during the crime window, prior and post to which he was awake, driving around in his Elantra.

Worth the watch -- to see what AT does now. Will she cut Sy Ray loose, will the judge cut Sy Ray loose for her, will Sy Ray cut himself loose, or will AT double down and at what cost?

Judge warned them. He's not into theatrics.

Court of law. He expects professionalism.

Demands it.

It shows.

JMO

I’m not sure she has a whole lot to work with . . . In fairness to the people of Idaho. Wrong post, sorry!

 

[Miss Poovy]

If a witness is subpoenaed, and refuses to testify, they can be held in contempt of court, resulting in fines, jail time, or both. And BK's family can be compelled to testify. Were BK married, his spouse could not be compelled to, due to spousal privilege, but parent/child privilege is limited to certain instances, and only when the child is a minor. No privilege exists for other family members, including siblings. JMO

They may be compelled to testify & may not be cooperative. Sometimes the judge allows for the subpoenaed witness to be tried as a “hostile witness”.

 

[arielilane]

Dumb question: Can a witness refuse to testify (if they are not the defendant)?

Excellent question, so many factors play into your question.

If a witness is subpoenaed, and refuses to testify, they can be held in contempt of court, resulting in fines, jail time, or both. And BK's family can be compelled to testify. Were BK married, his spouse could not be compelled to, due to spousal privilege, but parent/child privilege is limited to certain instances, and only when the child is a minor. No privilege exists for other family members, including siblings. JMO

I'll add to your list that the witness can also assert the Fifth Amendment right to refuse to give testimony.

 

[Megnut]

They may be compelled to testify & may not be cooperative. Sometimes the judge allows for the subpoenaed witness to be tried as a “hostile witness”.

And the Defense could stipulate that, in the matter of Amazon, BK's searches and purchases were his alone, because ultimately no one (read: no juror) is going to believe they weren't BK's, and right on down the line. If BK's family has to be called to testify IMO, it'll only be because the Defense forced them to. Same way we see trials stretched beyond everyone's yawn with chain of custody testimony, every last hand, every swab, when by stipulation, much of that could be compressed.

The State has its case but IMO it's always the Defense who sets the pace/length of the trial. This judge wants both sides to work together, to find agreement.

Like we see with the mixture of DNA under MM nails. It has virtually no evidentiary value and there's really no good reason to waste the jury's time with it.

Chess moves.

What would AT rather? BK with a full gallery behind him, his family lined up like a Norman Rockwell painting, giving the appearance of their support and his innocence? Or them on the stand, testifying for the State that they searched for no knives, purchased no knives on the family Amazon account?

Weak argument anyway. BK may be better served by the optics (family support) and stipulate to evidence his family members would otherwise be called to give.

JMO

 

[MeadowMuffin]

Excellent question, so many factors play into your question.

I'll add to your list that the witness can also assert the Fifth Amendment right to refuse to give testimony.

I suppose if this happens the state can say something like "Miss Kohberger, I am quoting your statement to LE the morning your brother was arrested , and you stated that he bought a KaBar knife from Amazon, and he did in fact show it to you. Would you like to see this in order to refresh your memory?" Or something like that. It gets her statement in and she doesn't have to say anything, as it would have been admitted into evidence. IANAL obviously! IMO. What say you?

 

[Megnut]

Whether BK is or is not on the spectrum, at least now we know why he might wear Vans.

:/

 

[Sachi]

That was me - and thank you for answering my question!

 

[MeadowMuffin]

I just want to throw this in here before I forget.
Regarding BK not having fine motor movements.
I would think it requires fine motor movements to put heroin on a spoon, heat it up, use a syringe and needle to draw it up and especially to inject yourself with it. Especially when using drugs for any length of time and veins get harder to find.

BK's drug use

Jeremy Saba, a neighbor two houses from Kohberger’s childhood home, was part of that group and introduced Kohberger to heroin, Baylis, Casey and Thomas Arntz said. Saba and Kohberger can be seen together in a photo that Saba posted on Facebook in August 2016 — four months after Saba was arrested and charged with a DUI and misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia. He later pleaded guilty to both charges, according to Pennsylvania court records.


“I didn’t like him personally because he got my boy into heroin,” Baylis said by phone, mentioning his falling out with Kohberger for several years over his drug issues. “I think drugs goofed him pretty bad. He was having a time. He’d tell me, ‘I’m clean now, I’m totally clean now,’ and he’d have bleeding track marks” on his arms.

 

[Teche]

https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/032425-Defendants-Reply-States-Resp-Defs-Motion-Strike-Death-Penalty-RE-Autism-Spectrum-Disorder.pdf

from the defense:

" Very early in his education he was treated as a child with special needs, evaluated psychologically, and provided with instructional support. He was observed as “rocking” in the classroom, inattentive, and he had poor fine motor skills. He received reading support, speech therapy, reminders to stay on tasks, more time for homework, and organizational support. "

Those accommodations could fall under either a 504 plan or an IEP.

I lean towards 504 instead of 1508 (IEP). To be identified “special needs” would require testing with a diagnosis. Unless SPED has changed.

 

[SteveP]

Whether BK is or is not on the spectrum, at least now we know why he might wear Vans.

I wear Skechers Slip-ins, but I promise I can tie my shoe-laces. I just can no longer reach my feet to do it! I do think that Vans are popular shoes, mostly with younger, skater types perhaps, but they are basically a comfortable shoe for everyday wear too. I do think BK did wear Vans, because although some are, many are not lace-ups. And the bloody shoe print at King Road house had a waffle-pattern sole resembling that of a Vans sneaker. JMO

ETA...added comment about Vans.

 

[Cool Cats]

Mitigation in Capital Cases | Capital Punishment in Context

capitalpunishmentincontext.org

Purpose of Mitigation​

As mitigation has become recognized as a critical part of a capital trial, defense attorneys have turned to mitigation specialists to investigate defendants' backgrounds. Mitigation specialists examine defendants' family history, medical history, educational and employment background, and any other element of an individual's life that may convince the jury to return a sentence other than death.

With this information, they assist defense counsel in presenting a coherent case for mitigation. The role of the mitigation specialist is so central to a client's defense that the American Bar Association includes them in their guidelines on the defense in death penalty cases: "The defense team should consist of no fewer than two attorneys…an investigator, and a mitigation specialist."

"A mitigation specialist is also an indispensable member of the defense team throughout all capital proceedings. Mitigation specialists possess clinical and information-gathering skills and training that most lawyers simply do not have. They have the time and the ability to elicit sensitive, embarrassing and often humiliating evidence (e.g., family sexual abuse) that the defendant may have never disclosed.

They have the clinical skills to recognize such things as congenital, mental or neurological conditions, to understand how these conditions may have affected the defendant’s development and behavior, and to identify the most appropriate experts to examine the defendant or testify on his behalf."

 

[mmeynstyn]

Crediting @Boxer for the observation that BK wasn't in a suit but was in collegiate wear for the hearing.

Witness re-branding.

Suit = professional, strong-shouldered

He'll be in Garanimals for trial. Maybe a little bib in case he drools and his head lolls to the side.

AT needs him to look small, weird, unathletic, uncoordinated, incapable of thought and action.

Shameless.

Don't even get me started on the gross, misguided, backwards stereotyping. Commence with outrage over what she's doing.

The judge is looping in my head, "is that before his doctoral program?

How low will she go?

JMO

Yes, and I noticed his chair was not lowered as low as it was in the previous hearing. It was still lower than the adjacent, smiling attorney, but not ridiculously so. IMO, the defense must be reading what we've been discussing.

 

[Cool Cats]

Bryan Kohberger has autism. His attorneys say the diagnosis should remove death penalty

His attorneys argued that there is an “unconscionable risk” he’ll be executed because of a neurological disorder rather than culpability.

www.yahoo.com

Kohberger’s disorder has a “significant impact” on his life, according to a comprehensive neurological evaluation conducted by Rachel Orr, a New Hampshire-based neuropsychologist.

The filing said that Kohberger exhibits “all the core diagnostic features” of autism, such as lifelong issues interacting with people. This includes a diminished ability to understand people’s reactions and difficulty identifying the emotional or mental state of others or how to respond appropriately.

Regarding Kohberger, Taylor said he displays “extremely” rigid thinking, lingers on specific topics, processes information on a “piece-meal basis,” and struggles to plan ahead, which affects their attorney-client relationship and ability to prepare for trial.

He also “demonstrates little insight into his own behaviors and emotions,” she added.

“No matter how helpful Mr. Kohberger may wish to be, it is simply not possible for him to aid counsel in a way that someone without the deficits accompanying autism spectrum disorder would be able to,” Taylor wrote.

Kohberger’s speech is “awkward,” Taylor said. Orr said that his tone and cadence are abnormal, his interactions lack fluidity, and “his language is often overinclusive, disorganized, highly repetitive, and oddly formal,” according to the filing.

He’s easily distracted by sounds or activity, often needs questions repeated and uses abrupt matter-of-fact phrases that could be considered rude, the filings said. He also has exhibited compulsions around hand-washing and other cleaning behaviors since childhood.

“These symptoms of Mr. Kohberger’s autism spectrum disorder will alienate him from the jury and significantly hamper his ability to make a persuasive showing of innocence or of mitigation,” Taylor said.