4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #83

[Sundog]

@Chloegirl
Let me at him! I will debate him for sure! I so hope he doesn't think he's getting on the stand to defend himself. JMOO.
I hope he does take the stand.
Explain his actions.

I can't imagine his attorny will let him take the stand, although if he insisted, she wouldn't be able to stop him. In the trial phase, I think it is very unlikely that BK would take the stand.

If BK is found guilty and the prosecution has declared this to be a death-eligible case, however, I do wonder if BK will take the stand at the sentencing trial when the death penalty would be on the table. According to Idaho law, in a death penalty case a defendant can testify before the jury during the sentencing phase and offer mitigating information as to why he or she should not be sentenced to death. And if a defendant chooses to do this, there is no cross-examination allowed. So if things ever got this far, BK could take the stand with no questions asked by the prosecution in response to whatever he would present.

 

[10ofRods]

These laws apply to the court and prosecutor, but they don't specify whether the defence can file a motion to dismiss a case. The defence might bring a motion to dismiss in the US for lack of evidence or inappropriate procedure. However, motion to dismiss is typically granted at the discretion of the judge. I couldn't find an Idaho statute regarding defence initiated dismissals, so I think a lawyer knowledgeable with Idaho law may be ideal.

The way I understand it is that the State can dismiss charges, or the Court can dismiss charges (the Judge). So yes, the Defense has to put forth a motion although the Judge can dismiss on their own if the new evidence brought to them strikes them as exonerating. I've never seen that happen, though I bet it has happened at least a couple of times.

That's how I read the law in Idaho and it's also the way the law worked in other states where I've worked or lived. Court can decide to dismiss a case on its own, or upon motion from the Defense. If the Prosecution asks for dismissal, it should be granted because, well, without the Prosecution being certain of its case, there's no case.

IMO.

 

[jepop]

This warrant (from early Dec) is interesting to me. It only covers the week before the murders, but it's all of Moscow. It makes me think about how the white elantra was captured east of King Rd, heading back west on Styner and Indian Hills shortly before the murders. I wonder if LE was looking for the white elantra around town, or maybe at places the elantra was at the same time as the victims...etc. That's all just speculation. I don't think it was known yet by early Dec that BK's phone had utilized the same cellular resources as King Rd., mostly late night and early morning hours (when I'm assuming UPS would not be out). I'm really curious if LE found anything out through these videos. JMO.

Could be looking for white elantras around town. Seems a reasonable guess! Did you say warrant dated early December? I wonder if LE had the footage from Styner and/or Indian Hills drive that showed footage of elantra with only the one plate at that point? UPS truck probably got around and LE may have surmised there might be valuable footage, more recognisable in day time. You're right, no BK phone records at that point (23rd Dec for his phone warrants).. And knowing what we do about the 12 pre crime pings with 11 occuring late pm/early am hours, it would be interesting to know what LE found. In this case, clear footage of elantras especially if number plates visible would have been followed up by LE and eliminated, Imo. I suspect if LE were looking for white elantras, they didn't spot BK's (at least not in day time footage that may have revealed a number plate).Moo.

 

[North_Idaho_Nony]

You're right. These terms are sometimes used interchangeably, although they have different legal meanings.

"Exonerating" evidence exonerates a defendant. It proves innocence. It proves a defendant did not commit a crime. A strong alibi supported by video proof showing the defendant was elsewhere when the crime was committed is one example.

"Exculpatory" evidence is any proof that can prove a defendant's innocence, reduce their culpability, or reduce the crime's punishment. Even if the evidence doesn't prove the defendant's innocence, it can cast doubt on their guilt. Witness testimony disparities might cast doubt on the prosecution's account of the crime.

All exonerating evidence is also exculpatory, but not all exculpatory evidence is exonerating. While the former must unambiguously demonstrate the defendant's innocence, the latter just needs to raise a reasonable question about the defendant's guilt or lessen their accountability.

Thanks for that explanation! IANAL, so I use them synonymously. Glad to learn the legal difference.

 

[Chloegirl]

I can't imagine his attorny will let him take the stand, although if he insisted, she wouldn't be able to stop him. In the trial phase, I think it is very unlikely that BK would take the stand.

If BK is found guilty and the prosecution has declared this to be a death-eligible case, however, I do wonder if BK will take the stand at the sentencing trial when the death penalty would be on the table. According to Idaho law, in a death penalty case a defendant can testify before the jury during the sentencing phase and offer mitigating information as to why he or she should not be sentenced to death. And if a defendant chooses to do this, there is no cross-examination allowed. So if things ever got this far, BK could take the stand with no questions asked by the prosecution in response to whatever he would present.

That sounds truly undelightful. I assume someone in this scenario would only want to play the system, engage in a game of cat and mouse or offer half truths. I would like clarity but I don't think we're going to get it. Folks in this scenario tend to dilude themselves, mislead the public, or some other odd outcome. I'm not sure if anything's going to be his fault. Frustrating for sure. IMO

 

[Sjöberg]

A lot of opinions seem to be of the sort that BK had a plan that he is now executing. That it all means something. Him staying silent, him saying this or that, him taking his phone along to a murder etc.

IMO, a lot of that is bias. We heard right of the bat that he is "a phd student in criminology" and now we think that he must be smart and there must be a grand plan. Had it been told that he's a loner who used to work as a fish cutter, the impressions would be different. As a fellow phd student (and on my last year, not first year) - a lot of phd students are not smart, and even if they are, this does not have to mean that they are smart about everything that they do.

I think he is just a sad guy who did a cruel and evil thing based on emotions. And fk-ed up. And did not really think as far as getting caught. And that his online masters degree has nothing to do with it other than indicate that he has had at least interest in (if not fantasies about) crimes for a while.

 

[katydid23]

ok. So we're discounting the NYT's article by Mike Baker:

"F.B.I. personnel worked with the profile that Othram had produced, according to two people familiar with the investigation, spending days building out a family tree that began with a distant relative.
By the morning of Dec. 19, records show, investigators had a name: Bryan Kohberger. He had a white Elantra. He was a student at a university eight miles from the murder scene."

Why are we discounting that article? Is there a supposed problem with Othram's work? They are a brilliant company---have recently successfully identified a huge backlog of formerly unidentified cold cases, many of them decades old.

 

[katydid23]

posted by wary:
I think the defense is looking for a possible alibi that won’t be contradicted by the evidence that the prosecution has collected. That’s going to take a lot of time and work—it’s nothing like just saying: “I was in such and such a place, doing such and such a thing.”

I think that is exactly what is going on. It seems like it is manufacturing an alibi instead of offering up the truth of the situation though.

 

[TL4S]

A lot of opinions seem to be of the sort that BK had a plan that he is now executing. That it all means something. Him staying silent, him saying this or that, him taking his phone along to a murder etc.

IMO, a lot of that is bias. We heard right of the bat that he is "a phd student in criminology" and now we think that he must be smart and there must be a grand plan. Had it been told that he's a loner who used to work as a fish cutter, the impressions would be different. As a fellow phd student (and on my last year, not first year) - a lot of phd students are not smart, and even if they are, this does not have to mean that they are smart about everything that they do.

I think he is just a sad guy who did a cruel and evil thing based on emotions. And fk-ed up. And did not really think as far as getting caught. And that his online masters degree has nothing to do with it other than indicate that he has had at least interest in (if not fantasies about) crimes for a while.

A lot of my own ideas about BK probably are indeed biased based on his education. But in my perspective, it has never really been about how intelligent he is, but how intelligent he thinks he is. Almost like he had something to prove, maybe.

Did he plan it out? I believe he did with the crime itself (not the court stuff), to some extent, but I don't think of it as a reflection of his intelligence as much as a reflection of his personality and motivation. That's just my best guess, though.

Realistically, as you said, BK's education may have had absolutely no bearing on anything to do with the crimes. We don't have to believe his old professors and others about his being "brilliant," because who really knows. Even if, his common sense could be nil. It's just for me, personally, with his background in cloud-based forensics, I'm not ready to dismiss his education yet. This was what he wanted to do with the Pullman PD even, so it was seemingly a strong interest of his, imo. To imagine he was so stupid that he was oblivious of the things he learned and was interested in doesn't seem likely to me, either. I agree, he f'ed up. And I wouldn't be surprised if the only thing he's remorseful for is his mistakes. But f'ing up also doesn't equate to lack of intelligence or planning, imo.

I wonder if we'll ever find out what was going through his head in the days, weeks, and months going into the murders.

 

[Nila Aella]

Challenging a GJ indictment:

Federal Grand Jury Indictment Defense Strategies | JD Supra

Federal criminal cases can broadly be divided into four phases: (i) the government’s investigation, (ii) grand jury proceedings, (iii) pretrial...

www.jdsupra.com

1. Filing a Motion to Dismiss the Indictment

The first, and most direct, option for challenging a grand jury indictment is filing a motion to dismiss. Similar to grand jury subpoenas, grand jury indictments are subject to judicial review on various grounds. These grounds include:

• Excessive reliance on hearsay
• Grand juror bias or prejudice
• Prejudicial publicity of the government’s investigation or the grand jury proceedings
• Prosecutors’ failure to disclose false statements
• Prosecutors’ failure to present exculpatory evidence

2. Filing Other Pre-Trial Motions and/or Negotiating a Plea Deal

In addition to challenging the indictment itself, federal defendants can also challenge the government’s evidence, individual charges against them, and various other aspects of the government’s case. These challenges can be used to set the stage for a motion to dismiss, acquittal at trial, or plea deal negotiations. At this stage, defendants must carefully weigh their options with their defense counsel in light of the reality of the circumstances presented, and they must be able to rely on their defense counsel to strategically target a favorable result.

MOO

 

[Nila Aella]

Elantra vs Sentra

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.google.com

2011 Elantra

2011 Hyundai Elantra: First Drive Photo Gallery

View detailed pictures that accompany our 2011 Hyundai Elantra: First Drive article with close-up photos of exterior and interior features. (29 photos)

www.autoblog.com

2015: Elantra

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

MOO
ETA moscow press release

https://www.ci.moscow.id.us/DocumentCenter/View/24900/12-07-22-Stock-photos-of-white-2011-2013-Hyundai-Elantra

 

[maskedwoman]

Let me at him! I will debate him for sure! I so hope he doesn't think he's getting on the stand to defend himself. JMOO.

I hope he does. And they should totally have an assertive woman question him for the prosecution. I don't think he could stand it. MOOooo

 

[Nila Aella]

Why are we discounting that article? Is there a supposed problem with Othram's work? They are a brilliant company---have recently successfully identified a huge backlog of formerly unidentified cold cases, many of them decades old.

<modsnip - quoted post was off topic>

HE was identified on 29th November, but we do not know the precise evolution of the investigation that lead to him being primary suspect Imo. I would conjecture, that along with possible others, he became a POI on 29th November. By 23rd December LE had the PC to pull his phone records. Moo

ok. So we're discounting the NYT's article by Mike Baker:

"F.B.I. personnel worked with the profile that Othram had produced, according to two people familiar with the investigation, spending days building out a family tree that began with a distant relative.
By the morning of Dec. 19, records show, investigators had a name: Bryan Kohberger. He had a white Elantra. He was a student at a university eight miles from the murder scene."

The posters were discussing the dates: not the lab.
Dates related to determination of Person of interest (11/29) and Suspect (12/19).
Comparing the PCA to the new article by Mike Baker.
JMO

 

[maskedwoman]

By staying mute I think the defense (and BK) chose to not acknowledge (through silence) the proceedings so far. That is essentially what was communicated by AT in Court on 9th June Imo. Asserting innocence by stating "not guilty" would mean acknowledging through words that the arraignment was a correct proceeding. It is odd because defense then gave notice that an alibi defense will be filed. So muteness at arraignment is largely meaningless, Imo, with little practical application. For all practical purposes the defense continues to comply with the court processes. Moo

spelling edit.

I continue to wrestle with the whole standing silent thing. I understand that he had the right to do it and it doesn't make him any more or less guilty. No problem. But if the judge is going to enter a NG plea on his behalf, I just don't don't understand why the defendant doesn't just say NG and move on.

Google gave me nothing but a general explanation, or articles about BK. Nothing about the benefits of standing silent, beyond it possibly helping him should a plea negotiation occur later on. But defendants can change their plea from not guilty to guilty at any time, so I still don't understand. A few attorneys have said that by standing silent, the defendant is not accepting that the proceedings are valid. But the proceedings are going ahead whether the defendant accepts them or not so, again, what's the point?

I would greatly appreciate if anyone else has, or has found, found better information on this approach. Thanks!!

 

[Nila Aella]

I continue to wrestle with the whole standing silent thing. I understand that he had the right to do it and it doesn't make him any more or less guilty. No problem. But if the judge is going to enter a NG plea on his behalf, I just don't don't understand why the defendant doesn't just say NG and move on.

Google gave me nothing but a general explanation, or articles about BK. Nothing about the benefits of standing silent, beyond it possibly helping him should a plea negotiation occur later on. But defendants can change their plea from not guilty to guilty at any time, so I still don't understand. A few attorneys have said that by standing silent, the defendant is not accepting that the proceedings are valid. But the proceedings are going ahead whether the defendant accepts them or not so, again, what's the point?

I would greatly appreciate if anyone else has, or has found, found better information on this approach. Thanks!!

I think they mean the proceedings up until the point of entering a plea.
I was thinking the probable cause and the grand jury indictment.
I also read something about plea negotiations - since the death penalty has not been officially sought yet.
JMO and IANAL

 

[Chloegirl]

A lot of opinions seem to be of the sort that BK had a plan that he is now executing. That it all means something. Him staying silent, him saying this or that, him taking his phone along to a murder etc.

IMO, a lot of that is bias. We heard right of the bat that he is "a phd student in criminology" and now we think that he must be smart and there must be a grand plan. Had it been told that he's a loner who used to work as a fish cutter, the impressions would be different. As a fellow phd student (and on my last year, not first year) - a lot of phd students are not smart, and even if they are, this does not have to mean that they are smart about everything that they do.

I think he is just a sad guy who did a cruel and evil thing based on emotions. And fk-ed up. And did not really think as far as getting caught. And that his online masters degree has nothing to do with it other than indicate that he has had at least interest in (if not fantasies about) crimes for a while.

Maybe you are right. He just derailed his train of life. Likely because his state of mind wasn't sustainable. I find myself wanting things to make sense and they often don't. I sometimes have too much empathy for others, try to understand or learn something, and if this is his headspace it may not make sense to anyone but him. I do wonder how others should proceed if they see signs like this, how do you help someone not become as you say a sad guy willing to take others out because of his own pain. Sort of leaves us nowhere.

 

[schooling]

Why do you say that? Everything in the list there is stuff we already knew, or could easily infer, about the elantra?

On another note, I'm finding it hard to join in conversation about this article without having access. Whilst I appreciate the OPs summary, I would prefer to read and draw my own inferences. Especially in regard to this item of the summary

"By the morning of December 19, investigators ID'd BK as a POI."

I think, it's possible that at around this time, LE may have been close to getting probable cause for AT&T BK account phone records (warrants granted 23rd DEc). But how do we infer the precise process and timing from 29th November onwards of LE's narrowing down of BK as POI? He was identified on Nov 29th, we know that much. Moo

Moo

I’m mostly referring to one thing. The Nissan Sentra

Its is a super specific car model. 1 of hundreds. 1 of dozens of Nissans. Does not resemble an Elantra in any meaningful way. I don’t think we’ve ever seen it reported out before that article.

You’re right about the rest. Inferred and a reporter creating a narrative around known facts.


Also, use the Pocket app or your browsers build in reader mode to bypass the paywall.

 

[Cool Cats]

A lot of opinions seem to be of the sort that BK had a plan that he is now executing. That it all means something. Him staying silent, him saying this or that, him taking his phone along to a murder etc.

IMO, a lot of that is bias. We heard right of the bat that he is "a phd student in criminology" and now we think that he must be smart and there must be a grand plan. Had it been told that he's a loner who used to work as a fish cutter, the impressions would be different. As a fellow phd student (and on my last year, not first year) - a lot of phd students are not smart, and even if they are, this does not have to mean that they are smart about everything that they do.

I think he is just a sad guy who did a cruel and evil thing based on emotions. And fk-ed up. And did not really think as far as getting caught. And that his online masters degree has nothing to do with it other than indicate that he has had at least interest in (if not fantasies about) crimes for a while.

He wasn't a PHD in criminology anymore. He "flunked" out of the program. To get your PHD you have to successfully complete your time as TA. He bombed out of his TA program.

I wouldn't say he wasn't smart enough mentally, I would say he couldn't hack the pressure emotionally. Being TA is a people job in 3 ways. Students, co-workers and your bosses - your professor and other department heads.

A people intensive job like that requires common sense and people skills. It was just too much for BK to navigate.

BK was imploding and I will be surprised if this isn't brought up at trial. There will definitely be a trial unless BK un-mutes himself and pleads guilty.

BK is smart enough to know his mute stance would draw lots of attention and commentary and it has, just look at all the discussions here about it. BK loves watching himself on TV according to jail sources so he loves watching everyone debate his mute stance.

Opinion only

 

[Nila Aella]

I’m mostly referring to one thing. The Nissan Sentra

Its is a super specific car model. 1 of hundreds. 1 of dozens of Nissans. Does not resemble an Elantra in any meaningful way. I don’t think we’ve ever seen it reported out before that article.

You’re right about the rest. Inferred and a reporter creating a narrative around known facts.


Also, use the Pocket app or your browsers build in reader mode to bypass the paywall.

? the source for the Nissan information. Would be interesting to know IMO.
I am not so keen on the UPS angle - mainly because the sealing of the UPS search warrant does not specify right to fair trial. IMO it would specify 6th ammendment if they found an elantra related to this prosecution on the UPS video.
Maybe what is important is what they didn't find on the UPS video? JMO

 

[schooling]

A lot of opinions seem to be of the sort that BK had a plan that he is now executing. That it all means something. Him staying silent, him saying this or that, him taking his phone along to a murder etc.

IMO, a lot of that is bias. We heard right of the bat that he is "a phd student in criminology" and now we think that he must be smart and there must be a grand plan. Had it been told that he's a loner who used to work as a fish cutter, the impressions would be different. As a fellow phd student (and on my last year, not first year) - a lot of phd students are not smart, and even if they are, this does not have to mean that they are smart about everything that they do.

I think he is just a sad guy who did a cruel and evil thing based on emotions. And fk-ed up. And did not really think as far as getting caught. And that his online masters degree has nothing to do with it other than indicate that he has had at least interest in (if not fantasies about) crimes for a while.

Please quantify “a lot…”

The guy drove his own car to the crime scene and did a legal 3 point turn in full view of a neighbor’s camera…before hastily speeding off with his DNA left inside of the house.

And I agree with you in that this isn’t a John Grisham novel. There is no grand reveal or twist. It’s nothing more than a lesson in Dunning Kruger 101 for BK.

That’s what my opinion and Occam’s Razor tells me anyway.