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

[Chloegirl]

I think most people posting on these many threads (some of whom are only lurking now or only check in once in a while) find no fault with the investigation.

That's just my perception, though. I don't see any flaws in the investigation and I work in forensics. There have been some extraordinary claims made about the DNA analysis, but given the facts we have, I think they knew exactly what they were doing.

The very fact that they brought in Amido black (appropriately) should be a more frequent point of discussion. Yet, every time we start to talk about the why of this decision, people get hung up on their being only "one" latent footprint. It's physically impossible for there to be only one latent footprint, but the others probably turned up with a more standard analysis (I don't think they used luminol - I think it was a similar product). When luminol turned up prints, the prints gradually faded (would love to know where they started - I assume at Xana's room).

So they went to Amido black to see if they could find the route taken by this Vans-wearing person as he went to the exit. That means they also have the gait impression of this killer, as well as his shoe size and overall foot impression (forensic footprint work is awesome and an entire subspecialty with experts in various places, one of whom will likely have already weighed in on what is known about the person from their footprint).

This information is, IMO, already in the hands of the Defense who would surely look carefully at it and file a motion if the shoe size was wildly off. It's not wildly off, IMO.

LE, FBI and other investigators/lab professionals are not prone to making tons of mistakes and I can't think of any publicly reported mistakes.

IMO.

I value your opinion and live locally. So this is encouraging to hear and sometimes I need more of that!!

 

[Chloegirl]

The state did not object to giving it to the defense. If the prosecution thinks the defense is not entitled to certain information they object to handing it over.

This was their response:

The State has responded that they are attempting to obtain this information. If it exists, the State will comply with this request upon receipt.

The defense knows that the audio exists. From the request:

The defense has been provided with a photograph of a DVD entered into evidence as Item 435,23M-0085 labeledas SW Audio. There is also a notation that this DVD was copied to county on 1/13/23.

Thank you for that sometimes I get caught up in all the cat & mouse behaviors. I wondered actually if it was deemed sensitive because investigators would be talking on it so that's good to know.

 

[Idaho transplant]

No matter how coincidental …car, gloves, living nearby, I can’t imagine thinking my brother would be guilty of multiple homicides ever. I’m curious what sort of childhood background could make a sister suspect this. Fire setting? Animal cruelty? Sadistic?

I tend to trust siblings’ judgement of each other, assuming no ulterior motives. Bryan seems uniquely manipulative, perverted and cruel. That can’t happen over night, I wouldn’t think. Gruesome case. Made more obscene by his chilling scholarship and academic erudition into killers like his alleged self.…as if he set it up deliberately with legal pitfalls so he can walk free after slaughtering a houseful of young innocents about to launch happy good lives.

His oldest sister is a family therapist, licensed in the state of New Jersey. She would have the qualifications to see signs from a psychological angle.

 

[Boxer]

BBM. Good points!

Another reason that footprint is such a compelling piece of evidence is that it was found in the same area as where the witness said she saw the masked man. Without the print, the defense would have gone after her testimony and try to taint it by questioning how much alcohol she had consumed that night.

JMO

MOO Apparently the footprint size did not exclude BK.

 

[10ofRods]

MOO Apparently the footprint size did not exclude BK.

I don't see how it could exclude him, as it would have been a great piece of exonerating evidence (if the footprint wasn't roughly the size of his). I bet they have more from it, though. Typical lift of a print (even a partial or latent one) will give many features of the gait and the bone structure of the foot. Close enough to rule out many other people and to create another circle of evidence that includes the defendant.

The other prints (the ones found earlier - either because they were obvious or with a luminol-like examination) should show even more.

And I'm also pondering the Ka-Bar knife purchase subpoenas. Sure looks as if they had receipts on BK for such a purpose. The list of evidence is substantial and we've only seen a little of it!

imo

 

[Sozo]

Thank you for that sometimes I get caught up in all the cat & mouse behaviors. I wondered actually if it was deemed sensitive because investigators would be talking on it so that's good to know.

It is certain that the investigators are talking on the recordings. It doesn't matter what they are talking about on it, be it sensitive or not, the defense has the right to listen to it.

It is not the defense nor the prosecution who decide what evidence they have to hand over to each other.
They have to follow the law. In this case the Idaho Criminal Rule.

If the prosecution and the defense have disagreement over disclosing evidence it is because they interpret the law differently.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

For clarity are we talking about this investigation? The reason why I'm asking is this website is swinging back and forth between poking holes and saying impeccable. I'm going to guess it was somewhere in between (that's not the point) I want to make sure I'm understanding what was said.

It's not the website, per se. But there are a several posters who aren't on-board the impeccable train for a variety of reasons. There are others who believe it's sealed tight and a sure thing. Just depends on which posts you're reading (and sometimes, on what day). JMO.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

BBM. Good points!

Another reason that footprint is such a compelling piece of evidence is that it was found in the same area as where the witness said she saw the masked man. Without the print, the defense would have gone after her testimony and try to taint it by questioning how much alcohol she had consumed that night.

JMO

The print isn't going to stop the defense from raising doubt about her testimony. JMO.

 

[Boxer]

The print isn't going to stop the defense from raising doubt about her testimony. JMO.

Of course. But the print corroboates her statement.

 

[Cool Cats]

Yes. I’m talking about this investigation. That’s my opinion. This is one of the tightest and productive investigations I’ve seen. What they accomplished in the amount of time that they worked after the murders, and how they did it, was amazing to me. Beautiful work.

I’ve been on this site for 19-20 years which makes me think there’s a reasonable basis for my opinion. It seems that many of the sleuthers who’ve been here for a long time have a similar opinion.

Yes, long time sleuthers have seen a variety of murder cases, researched them, looked at the evidence and Motions and can compare them to this Case and see the overwhelming evidence against the defendant.

However, I think it is good to "poke holes" in the State's Case. The State is the one that has to prove the defendant committed the crimes charged. Good to discuss defense strategies and "who else could have done it."

But I would like to hear theories behind the "hole poking." To be able have discussions about it.

Like what is the theory behind this?

"Someone besides BK left the knife sheath, the sheath doesn't prove BK was in the house."

Or this:

"At first, the FBI was one year off on the year of the car so it can't be BK's car."

Or:

"The car photos don't show BK in the car so it's not his car."

But the defense cannot rule out that this is BK's car. They can't say this doesn't look like his car. The car photos actually show the jury how much the car photos look like BK's car.

Also, the defense cannot rule out BK's car by using the cell phone evidence. They can't say that BK's phone was nowhere near the white car on the videos because BK's phone pings on cell towers the white car was near. And the phone was "coincidently" turned off at time murders took place.

Also of note, videos show the car coming and going from the same town BK lives in.

"DM's description fits alot of people."

The defense can't rule out BK based on witness testimony. They can't tell the jury that the witness testimony does not match BK, just like they can't tell the jury the car on video doesn't match BK's car.

"BK was set up."

How? Why? By whom?

 

[North_Idaho_Nony]

I'm not shocked at that at all and I run into this exact problem all the time. It's the same with Yelp - menus change and listings need updating either by patrons using the apps or the owners or staff themselves. I just cross checked the HappyCow app with Mad Greeks online menu and they align. I also just checked the listing for Suchadas Thai and it also matches with their own homepage. As does La Casa Lopez and Breakfast Cub. Indian restaurants almost always have accidental vegan options so I wouldnt be surprised if the HappyCow listing is still accurate as long as the restaurant is still open. Should I check the rest?

Edited to add: if you look at my images you can see that none of the 8 restaurants listed in Moscow are designated as vegan. They are designated as meat with vegetarian/vegan options available on request.

Excellent points, MOO, & no need to check the rest for me. I have several vegan & vegetarian friends & we still manage to eat out together regularly in this area. I don’t have the app, but I think there may be places that might not show up?

None of my friends require different pots & pans as BK reportedly did, though, at least at home.

ETA: thanks for mentioning the app — I personally had no idea such a thing existed! I’m going to check it out when I travel because I often enjoy eating vegan.

 

[Sozo]

In the PCA they describe the shoe print as diamond-shaped pattern similar to the pattern of a Vans type shoe sole, so it is not a Vans shoe, or at least they were not sure of it right?

Why only similar why not say it is a Vans shoe, or any other specific shoe type?

The vans shoe pattern is in my opinion very distinct and unique and easily identifiable, even if the pattern they found was a small part of a whole shoe sole. Not to mention if there were more shoe prints. More and bigger shoe sole patterns easier identification be it any type of shoe not just Vans.

Based on this can we assume they were not able to identify what kind of shoe was it? If yes how so? They had time and tools for it.

 

[10ofRods]

In the PCA they describe the shoe print as diamond-shaped pattern similar to the pattern of a Vans type shoe sole, so it is not a Vans shoe, or at least they were not sure of it right?

Why only similar why not say it is a Vans shoe, or any other specific shoe type?

The vans shoe pattern is in my opinion very distinct and unique and easily identifiable, even if the pattern they found was a small part of a whole shoe sole. Not to mention if there were more shoe prints. More and bigger shoe sole patterns easier identification be it any type of shoe not just Vans.

Based on this can we assume they were not able to identify what kind of shoe was it? If yes how so? They had time and tools for it.

I'm sure they eventually id'ed the shoe print. But it's not something that the average PD level detective does. It's best to send the print to a specialist or two. Two different kinds (ones that analyze the foot that was inside the shoe and the other uses a database of shoe soles to get the model of the shoe).

The PCA was drawn up fairly rapidly, and I'm guessing it would take a couple of months for those two analyses of the print to come back.

No mystery there, to me. But I'd be very surprised if the Grand Jury was not given the shoe and foot print analysis.

IMO.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

The print isn't going to stop the defense from raising doubt about her testimony. JMO.

While it is probably correct that the defense will attempt to raise doubt on many aspects of her statement, the fact that a person with blood on their shoes did stand in the place that she said she saw a man is indisputable.

Did anyone say the defense wouldn't question her?

 

[MyBelle]

I'm sure they eventually id'ed the shoe print. But it's not something that the average PD level detective does. It's best to send the print to a specialist or two. Two different kinds (ones that analyze the foot that was inside the shoe and the other uses a database of shoe soles to get the model of the shoe).

The PCA was drawn up fairly rapidly, and I'm guessing it would take a couple of months for those two analyses of the print to come back.

No mystery there, to me. But I'd be very surprised if the Grand Jury was not given the shoe and foot print analysis.

IMO.

BBM. I'm looking forward to expert witnesses spilling all the details at trial.

JMO

 

[Balthazar]

In the PCA they describe the shoe print as diamond-shaped pattern similar to the pattern of a Vans type shoe sole, so it is not a Vans shoe, or at least they were not sure of it right?

Why only similar why not say it is a Vans shoe, or any other specific shoe type?

The vans shoe pattern is in my opinion very distinct and unique and easily identifiable, even if the pattern they found was a small part of a whole shoe sole. Not to mention if there were more shoe prints. More and bigger shoe sole patterns easier identification be it any type of shoe not just Vans.

Based on this can we assume they were not able to identify what kind of shoe was it? If yes how so? They had time and tools for it.

Just out of curiosity, I started wondering if there are fake Vans shoes and sure enough, there are! 3 Ways to Tell if Your Vans Shoes Are Fake - wikiHow
Who would ever think someone would make fakes of shoes that cost as little as $32? But apparently they do. And they copy the Vans sole as well.

I don't think the writer of the PCA meant it is definitely not a Vans brand shoe, only that the pattern was like a Vans shoe, but leaving wiggle room in case it turns out to be some other brand of shoe such as a fake Vans shoe. OR, depending on the level of detail visible, maybe they knew it was a fake Vans shoe and this is part of the evidence. So next, they would be looking at where you could buy a fake Vans shoe. So I decided to see where you could buy fake Van's.

Counterfeit Vans Canvas Authentic Shoes | Consumer Alert

How to identify fake Vans Canvas Authentic Shoes

thecounterfeitreport.com

 

[girlhasnoname]

Of course. But the print corroboates her statement.

As does her overall description: 5 10 or taller, thin but athletic build, bushy eyebrows. Yep, yep and yep.

MOO

 

[NCWatcher]

His oldest sister is a family therapist, licensed in the state of New Jersey. She would have the qualifications to see signs from a psychological angle.

I'm not sure how much extra "sleuthing" we can do of family members beyond MSM claims. But I would not assume having training in counseling necessarily gives a person the ability to see the dynamics in her own family from an objective viewpoint, especially if the training was very recent. Recent training also means the person must practice under supervision. IMO the supervision requirement could explain the job loss that appeared unfair on the surface (unfair to me anyway.)

The whole Dateline story about the sister being suspicious seems to come from unnamed sources so I'm a bit skeptical. The accounts include the information that the sister expressed her opinion to her family "loudly." Not sure what to make of that for lots of reasons (including in terms of family dynamics.) And the accounts seem to say her suspicions were based on the kind of car he drove and his wearing gloves at the house. (While the gloves are definitely odd, my first thought wouldn't be a person wearing gloves at a family home killed someone the month before.) Further, stories report the search of the car that the sister instigated found nothing. No surprise IMO-- what expertise does a counselor have to find that sort of evidence? And the dad had ridden across the country in the car. If the car had lots of visible blood inside it, he'd have to have been in a lot of denial not to see that. And LE didn't seem to see blood at the traffic stops either.

Many stories say nothing was found because police observed BK using bleach to clean his car.
Example of bleach claim Bryan Kohberger’s sister feared he was involved in Idaho murders

Besides being a possible violation of the gag order, I can't imagine LE really said something so silly. How does someone "observe" the use of bleach while doing covert surveillance? Was BK observed walking out of the house carrying a big bottle clearly labeled "bleach?" If he was, are we sure it was bleach in the bottle? Or was the covert observer so close he/she smelled bleach? And both watched and smelled the use of bleach to try to destroy evidence? Kind of doubt that.

Can someone point me to evidence we have that BK used bleach? I know some talking heads (usually former FBI agents) have opined he might have and maybe he did, but do we know that he did? I can't find anything except talking heads saying he could have and anonymous LE bleach claims used as a reason the sister's search was fruitless.
JMO

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Yes, long time sleuthers have seen a variety of murder cases, researched them, looked at the evidence and Motions and can compare them to this Case and see the overwhelming evidence against the defendant.

However, I think it is good to "poke holes" in the State's Case. The State is the one that has to prove the defendant committed the crimes charged. Good to discuss defense strategies and "who else could have done it."

But I would like to hear theories behind the "hole poking." To be able have discussions about it.

Like what is the theory behind this?

"Someone besides BK left the knife sheath, the sheath doesn't prove BK was in the house."

Or this:

"At first, the FBI was one year off on the year of the car so it can't be BK's car."

Or:

"The car photos don't show BK in the car so it's not his car."

But the defense cannot rule out that this is BK's car. They can't say this doesn't look like his car. The car photos actually show the jury how much the car photos look like BK's car.

Also, the defense cannot rule out BK's car by using the cell phone evidence. They can't say that BK's phone was nowhere near the white car on the videos because BK's phone pings on cell towers the white car was near. And the phone was "coincidently" turned off at time murders took place.

Also of note, videos show the car coming and going from the same town BK lives in.

"DM's description fits alot of people."

The defense can't rule out BK based on witness testimony. They can't tell the jury that the witness testimony does not match BK, just like they can't tell the jury the car on video doesn't match BK's car.

"BK was set up."

How? Why? By whom?

I like this, Cool Cats, as it's a pretty neat list of many things that inclusively relate to BK.

And as thorough as those are who try to poke holes in each piece of evidence presented - none of their scenarios are personally inclusive to BK.

There are so many statements that are backed with demonstrations of connections to him that have been presented that it seems almost a comedy to try to excuse/nullify each one by claiming that 'maybe it was . . .' or 'maybe is wasn't . . .' or 'that doesn't prove . . .'

At this point, if I have nothing solid like 'his car was here - not there' or 'his friend said they were out picking up girls' or 'his phone was stolen' - then I have no reason to question the other evidence that has been gathered.

IMHO, we have enough evidence gathered specifically connected to BK that require too many 'maybes' to dispel. MOOooo!

Edited to add very loud moo,

 

[Balthazar]

So thinking about some of the various receipts listed:

Walmart Fights Lawsuit to Keep Selling ‘Copycat’ Vans Shoes

Walmart is fighting to keep selling Vans look-alike shoes, arguing that taking the shoes off its shelves would cost it “tens of millions of dollars.”

topclassactions.com