4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #108

[girlhasnoname]

I think they will lean heavily on the lack of any evidence from the crime found in his car (and apartment if that's also the case). Even though we've seen it in other trials, a lot of people can't wrap their minds around there being no trace of the victims in that car, considering the scene.
JMO

Agree, but he did leave his DNA at the crime scene underneath Maddie (sheath). That is going to trump any world salad speculation AT can come up with as to why there wasn't DNA in his car.

He had a full face mask, overalls and shoe booties that he took off before getting back in his car. I think that is logical enough for the Jury to understand. Let's hope.

JMO

 

[Ghostwheel]

Being that BK apparently sat down in XK's room, could he have been half-witted enough to step out of his coveralls while still in the house? Stripped down to a body-conforming running suit, his shoes uncovered, walking out with his coveralls wrapped tightly around his knife....

It might explain the shoe tread, the "hand-vacuum". You wouldn't think he could be that stupid, but....

JMO

We discussed that a bit back. Why not? It would have been faster to strip down in the house and bundle everything up (in a bag even) than leaning against a car and trying to balance. Short of having the entire interior of the car covered with fairly heavy plastic, plus the door handle and his keys and, and and... he would be less likely to bring anything from the house into the car if he stripped before leaving.

 

[Odeto BJ]

I am trying to figure out the defense AT will present. Probably harp on the fact that the prosecution must present evidence that BK did the crime he is accused of, and all AT will be able to do is try to poke holes in it...I don't see the big government finding poor little BK to frame will work.

Any ideas for a viable defense for BK?

We recently heard indication that there was going to be "the knife" on display in the courtroom.
The search warrants for the PA house and the apartment in WA produced considerable returns. We know that click data was found on "his computer" presumably a desktop in his apartment or a laptop that went cross country in December; or both. There were also receipts and labels in his apartment that have evidentiary value.
We have seen only a little of what was found in the car; we do know that many of its components and surfaces were subjected to intense forensic examination, and AT has indicated in court that nothing establishing a connection with the victims or the specific crime was found.
My own conjecture: it they have the model of knife correct, and its grip is of stacked leather as is the original USMC version, then cleaning the minutiae out of that grip from such a crime would be near impossible. Therefore: the knife in the clear cabinet is not THE knife because those test results would definitely be subject to MIL's in the past few months if it was THE weapon.
Seems like the car and the clothes and the weapon are the missing elements. Still, there are all kinds of incontrovertibles that support BARD.
MOO: As it applies to the guilt phase, about the best that AT can do is sow confusion in a scatter gun fashion. For that, she seems uniquely qualified and wholly enthusiastic.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Being that BK apparently sat down in XK's room, could he have been half-witted enough to step out of his coveralls while still in the house? Stripped down to a body-conforming running suit, his shoes uncovered, walking out with his coveralls wrapped tightly around his knife....

It might explain the shoe tread, the "hand-vacuum". You wouldn't think he could be that stupid, but....

JMO

Someone who sat on the chair left a blood print. Do we know if it was BK? Could it have been Xana? How did someone get blood on the backside (back or butt, I dunno)?

What I think is likely is that there was blood in the car, blood in his apartment, blood in his shower, maybe blood in the drain. The print on the chair gives the giant lie to the idea that he was so smart that the only evidence he left was the DNA on the sheath. Assuming the scene was devoid of the killer's presence is what brings people to wonder if he deliberately left the sheath to taunt to to mislead, etc., which I don't subscribe to.

I think AT is fighting this hard because she knows just how much evidence there is to link her very unlikable client to those bloody rooms. Just my opinion...MOO...

 

[PunishThenForgive]

We discussed that a bit back. Why not? It would have been faster to strip down in the house and bundle everything up (in a bag even) than leaning against a car and trying to balance. Short of having the entire interior of the car covered with fairly heavy plastic, plus the door handle and his keys and, and and... he would be less likely to bring anything from the house into the car if he stripped before leaving.

True, and this would explain why he couldn’t attack Dylan, especially if he had bundled his knife inside his soiled kill suit (thus making it look like he was holding a vacuum cleaner).

But removing his kill suit inside the house would make him highly vulnerable. He didn’t know who else was in the house, with up to four bedrooms unchecked. What if someone had called 911, and he’s found by LE sitting in Xana’s room undressing? What if a male visitor had confronted him with a make-shift weapon? Unlike with Dylan, BK would have to attack (with his knife, fists or his own make-shift weapon), soiling his undergarments and possibly being killed himself. If he did survive, he’d have to strip naked to safely enter his car. Imagine being pulled over by police in that state.

IMOO

 

[Megnut]

I don't think they're was blood in his car or apartment precisely because of his very simple countermeasures. I think he heeded his own paper, dressing the part-- half hot prowler, half crime tech in order to reduce the transfer principle into the crime scene and then shedding an outer layer to reduce the transfer principle out. Locard 101.

I believe he took additional steps with his car too. Like lining his trunk. Perhaps his seat. Multiple cleanings. As well, he might have doctored his license plate, a bit of cleverness that went unnoticed. He operated like his car was invisible... but then he seems to think HE is invisible.

But still managed to blaze a trail leading to and away from the crime scene.

JMO

 

[PunishThenForgive]

The first couple minutes, he plays a snippet from the recent hearing, the part where Hippler mentions "the knife" (and a display box). Split screen shows BK as Hippler says it.

BK looks like a goldfish sucking air.

Can't say what if anything it means but he sure seems hot under the collar.

JMO

(Snipped by me.)

We recently heard indication that there was going to be "the knife" on display in the courtroom.
The search warrants for the PA house and the apartment in WA produced considerable returns. We know that click data was found on "his computer" presumably a desktop in his apartment or a laptop that went cross country in December; or both. There were also receipts and labels in his apartment that have evidentiary value.
We have seen only a little of what was found in the car; we do know that many of its components and surfaces were subjected to intense forensic examination, and AT has indicated in court that nothing establishing a connection with the victims or the specific crime was found.
My own conjecture: it they have the model of knife correct, and its grip is of stacked leather as is the original USMC version, then cleaning the minutiae out of that grip from such a crime would be near impossible. Therefore: the knife in the clear cabinet is not THE knife because those test results would definitely be subject to MIL's in the past few months if it was THE weapon.
Seems like the car and the clothes and the weapon are the missing elements. Still, there are all kinds of incontrovertibles that support BARD.
MOO: As it applies to the guilt phase, about the best that AT can do is sow confusion in a scatter gun fashion. For that, she seems uniquely qualified and wholly enthusiastic.

My impression was that the two junior prosecuting attorneys were surprised by the remarks Hippler made about the knife during the pre-trial conference, as if they were each thinking, “I can’t believe he’s actually going there.”

Watch the first five minutes of this Gray Hughes video shared by @Megnut in the post quoted above and linked here to see what I mean (and check out the reaction of the Lady with Laptop behind the prosecutors, as well—it’s priceless):

Were Josh Hurwit and Ashley Jennings surprised because Hippler was revealing their pièce de résistance? Or because they were afraid people would THINK they had the murder weapon when they didn’t?

I don’t know about everyone here, but I thought it was pretty interesting that “knife” was the #1 entry on the search warrant return for the Kohberger family home. Was it THE KNIFE, or simply a knife? Why was it #1, and why didn’t LE provide additional descriptors, as they did with subsequent entries?

https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20230302/150419-dec.29,2022-searchwarrant(hyundaielantra),inventory,exhibits.pdf

I guess the defense is not the only one who might on occasion rely on innuendo when making their case. All’s fair in love and war, I guess. It’s just easier to spot when the other side does it.

At any rate, in the last thread, there was quite a bit of speculation about which knife Hippler referred to during the pre-trial conference. I still think it’s possible, though unlikely, that LE found a Ka-bar knife in Pennsylvania, whether the actual murder weapon or its replacement, or that they even found the murder weapon later, wherever BK hid or disposed of it.

I agree that Anne Taylor would try to suppress the murder weapon if LE did somehow find it, but would we necessarily know she had made such a motion? I just keep thinking about the surprises that prosecutors sometime reveal during court—the smoking guns we knew nothing about before trial, like the Snapchat video in the Murdaugh case, or the audio recording of the gunshots in another case I followed.

IMOO

 

[mickey2942]

Hey, congrats to our new "Websleuths Guardians" @MassGuy @Megnut @tlyca

 

[Megnut]

(Snipped by me.)


My impression was that the two junior prosecuting attorneys were surprised by the remarks Hippler made about the knife during the pre-trial conference, as if they were each thinking, “I can’t believe he’s actually going there.”

Watch the first five minutes of this Gray Hughes video shared by @Megnut in the post quoted above and linked here to see what I mean (and check out the reaction of the Lady with Laptop behind the prosecutors, as well—it’s priceless):

Were Josh Hurwit and Ashley Jennings surprised because Hippler was revealing their pièce de résistance? Or because they were afraid people would THINK they had the murder weapon when they didn’t?

I don’t know about everyone here, but I thought it was pretty interesting that “knife” was the #1 entry on the search warrant return for the Kohberger family home. Was it THE KNIFE, or simply a knife? Why was it #1, and why didn’t LE provide additional descriptors, as they did with subsequent entries?

View attachment 589543

https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20230302/150419-dec.29,2022-searchwarrant(hyundaielantra),inventory,exhibits.pdf

I guess the defense is not the only one who might on occasion rely on innuendo when making their case. All’s fair in love and war, I guess. It’s just easier to spot when the other side does it.

At any rate, in the last thread, there was quite a bit of speculation about which knife Hippler referred to during the pre-trial conference. I still think it’s possible, though unlikely, that LE found a Ka-bar knife in Pennsylvania, whether the actual murder weapon or its replacement, or that they even found the murder weapon later, wherever BK hid or disposed of it.

I agree that Anne Taylor would try to suppress the murder weapon if LE did somehow find it, but would we necessarily know she had made such a motion? I just keep thinking about the surprises that prosecutors sometime reveal during court—the smoking guns we knew nothing about before trial, like the Snapchat video in the Murdaugh case, or the audio recording of the gunshots in another case I followed.

IMOO

Perhaps he completed his replacement purchase. Just not necessarily thru Amazon. Or did a better job hiding the purchase, but not the knife.

Pretty damning to be looking for a Kbar before anyone knew about a knife/sheath. Pretty compelling if he was in possession of a duplicate weapon at arrest.

 

[Ghostwheel]

True, and this would explain why he couldn’t attack Dylan, especially if he had bundled his knife inside his soiled kill suit (thus making it look like he was holding a vacuum cleaner).

But removing his kill suit inside the house would make him highly vulnerable. He didn’t know who else was in the house, with up to four bedrooms unchecked. What if someone had called 911, and he’s found by LE sitting in Xana’s room undressing? What if a male visitor had confronted him with a make-shift weapon? Unlike with Dylan, BK would have to attack (with his knife, fists or his own make-shift weapon), soiling his undergarments and possibly being killed himself. If he did survive, he’d have to strip naked to safely enter his car. Imagine being pulled over by police in that state.

IMOO

All valid points, but as I said before, this could contribute to why he didn't stop even if he saw DM. No longer covered.

Again, just a thought. To me, easier to strip in the house than walk out on the street in bloody coveralls that a camera might pick up or someone could see passing by and try to get out of them without getting anything on yourself or your vehicle while standing next to you car. If you are already stripped except for the mask and maybe gloves, easy saunter out, roll the mask up and you are any student coming out of a house, dropping a bag in your trunk and motoring on at warp speed. JMO, though. I can't walk and chew gum, though I can tie my laces. I certainly could not stand at a car and try and roll off bloody coveralls and not fall over.

 

[Chloegirl]

(Snipped by me.)


My impression was that the two junior prosecuting attorneys were surprised by the remarks Hippler made about the knife during the pre-trial conference, as if they were each thinking, “I can’t believe he’s actually going there.”

Watch the first five minutes of this Gray Hughes video shared by @Megnut in the post quoted above and linked here to see what I mean (and check out the reaction of the Lady with Laptop behind the prosecutors, as well—it’s priceless):

Were Josh Hurwit and Ashley Jennings surprised because Hippler was revealing their pièce de résistance? Or because they were afraid people would THINK they had the murder weapon when they didn’t?

I don’t know about everyone here, but I thought it was pretty interesting that “knife” was the #1 entry on the search warrant return for the Kohberger family home. Was it THE KNIFE, or simply a knife? Why was it #1, and why didn’t LE provide additional descriptors, as they did with subsequent entries?

View attachment 589543

https://www.pacourts.us/Storage/media/pdfs/20230302/150419-dec.29,2022-searchwarrant(hyundaielantra),inventory,exhibits.pdf

I guess the defense is not the only one who might on occasion rely on innuendo when making their case. All’s fair in love and war, I guess. It’s just easier to spot when the other side does it.

At any rate, in the last thread, there was quite a bit of speculation about which knife Hippler referred to during the pre-trial conference. I still think it’s possible, though unlikely, that LE found a Ka-bar knife in Pennsylvania, whether the actual murder weapon or its replacement, or that they even found the murder weapon later, wherever BK hid or disposed of it.

I agree that Anne Taylor would try to suppress the murder weapon if LE did somehow find it, but would we necessarily know she had made such a motion? I just keep thinking about the surprises that prosecutors sometime reveal during court—the smoking guns we knew nothing about before trial, like the Snapchat video in the Murdaugh case, or the audio recording of the gunshots in another case I followed.

IMOO

Fabulous musings. #1 KNIFE. Dare we hope? JMOO

 

[LetsSolvIt]

Hey, congrats to our new "Websleuths Guardians" @MassGuy @Megnut @tlyca

Yes, congrats! Three well respected members, for sure!

But what does Websleuth Guardian mean? I also noticed “badges” on some folks. What’s all this about? Did I miss The Memo?

 

[Gemmie]

Yes, congrats! Three well respected members, for sure!

But what does that mean? I also noticed “badges” on some folks. What’s all this about? Did I miss The Memo?

Soon.

 

[LetsSolvIt]

Soon.

Congrats to you, to @Gemmie !!

 

[Fleur-de-lis]

Horribl

Yes.

Final animation, video 20 minutes

ETA at 17:50 he runs the animation without commentary, only the suggestion of violence, but still very creepy, eerie, real

Horrible! So scary! Hope the prosecution can show something similar.

 

[PunishThenForgive]

The close of his high school career and the years that followed, Kohberger’s friends said, were marked by a marijuana habit graduating into a heroin addiction.

Read more at: https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article272531864.html#storylink=cpy

There may have been speculation about this here in the early days after BK’s arrest, but how do you think BK funded his “marijuana habit” and heroin addiction back in PA?

We know he was arrested at age 19 for stealing his sister’s phone to fund his heroin addiction.

Source: Idaho murders suspect was arrested in 2014 over sister's iPhone

I imagine him breaking into homes to steal, but there’s no record that he was caught that I know of.

Of course, he may have been a juvenile when he started needing extra money.

I suppose such break-ins are low priority and that few resources are expended to solve them. In that case, we shouldn’t be surprised that LE apparently found no evidence linking BK to prior crimes in PA once he was identified as the suspect in the Idaho murders.

Anyway, the subject of one of the videos that Dateline claimed BK watched was hot prowler extraordinaire, the Original Nightstalker (aka the Golden State Killer, Joseph DeAngelo).

DeAngelo wasn’t identified until 2018, so he may have been an early, mysterious role model for BK. If so, how fitting that BK, too, was eventually identified the same way—by investigative genetic genealogy.

IMOO

 

[Boxer]

We discussed that a bit back. Why not? It would have been faster to strip down in the house and bundle everything up (in a bag even) than leaning against a car and trying to balance. Short of having the entire interior of the car covered with fairly heavy plastic, plus the door handle and his keys and, and and... he would be less likely to bring anything from the house into the car if he stripped before leaving.

The point of wearing coveralls to commit a crime is so as to not to leave DNA at the scene, just like a crime investigator also wears them so as not to leave their DNA at a scene. The coveralls are removed outside of the scene.

 

[PunishThenForgive]

All valid points, but as I said before, this could contribute to why he didn't stop even if he saw DM. No longer covered.

Again, just a thought. To me, easier to strip in the house than walk out on the street in bloody coveralls that a camera might pick up or someone could see passing by and try to get out of them without getting anything on yourself or your vehicle while standing next to you car. If you are already stripped except for the mask and maybe gloves, easy saunter out, roll the mask up and you are any student coming out of a house, dropping a bag in your trunk and motoring on at warp speed. JMO, though. I can't walk and chew gum, though I can tie my laces. I certainly could not stand at a car and try and roll off bloody coveralls and not fall over.

Same here! I also wonder how he would do all this undressing at his car if he parked close to the back patio instead of up the incline, behind the house. Anyone driving to the next door apartments might see him.

I hope we find out everything at trial. This whole experience of wanting to know exactly what happened, being a bit obsessed about it over the past 2.5 years, helps me almost understand the tragic hero of the (original) Franco-Dutch film, The Vanishing. At least I don’t have to perish at the hands of a sociopathic chemistry professor to have my questions answered.

 

[Ghostwheel]

The point of wearing coveralls to commit a crime is so as to not to leave DNA at the scene, just like a crime investigator also wears them so as not to leave their DNA at a scene. The coveralls are removed outside of the scene.

That is the theory. I'm not sure the theory might not fall apart in a mass murder scenario. Similar to leaving the knife sheath behind. And leaving a shoe print that had at some point been through blood behind. (Assuming it was the killers)

 

[PunishThenForgive]

DBM