4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #86

[Nila Aella]

In Idaho (and other states) felony charges can be brought by a Grand Jury. It's up to the Prosecution to decide whether to go the route of PH or GJ. They don't have to explain or get the Defense's approval.

MOO

I have the opposite view about the state taking this to the GJ. MOO, BK has zero say in whether he's charged by criminal information/complaint or GJ indictment. That is solely the choice of the prosecution.

As always, all is jmo

Both snipped for focus

My original post:

Initially I did not see a difference between the two approaches except that the States approach seems safer for the Speedy Trial aspect of the case. After reading the filings again, I think there are multiple issues (GJ/Constitutional/speedy trial) and the Judge is having to weigh them against each other. JMO AND IANAL

IMO the State did wait a while before going to the GJ (for whatever reason) so I do believe the D has a valid issue there.

Curious how often Judges reconsider and adjust their Orders?

I realize the D does not have a say in GJ proceedings.
My post only pointed out that it was a while before the P did go to the GJ (for whatever reason). MOO

Even the prosecutor said: In the Motion to reconsider

As the Court noted in its recent order, this is complicated and unusual case posing unique challenges to the parties. The State is appreciative of the balancing that the Court must do in this case, and of the Court’s sensitivity to the needs of the parties.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/071723+Motion+to+Reconsider+Order+Staying+Time+for+Speedy+Trial.pdf

IMO, because it was a few months before the GJ: the D was now faced with preparing both for a trial and for reviewing the GJ materials to challenge the indictment with 73 days to do both. The transcript was not expected to be completed until 7/21. Per Judge Order:

the transcript of the proceedings will not be completed until July 21, 2023. It will then take the defense time to review all the material and determine if they wish to renew their Motion to Stay Proceedings pursuant to Idaho Code Section 2-213

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/070723+Order+Staying+Time+for+Speedy+Trial.pdf

 

[TL4S]

I was only referencing this case, not murder cases in general. All of the families have been interviewed. The Chapin family's views are unknown. Xana's mother chose LWOP, her father opted for the death penalty, as did the Goncalves and Maddie's family. If he is convicted, the families' majority opinion, the death penalty, should prevail. It is they, not society, who lost the ultimate. I would hope that the prosecution honors their choice. So far, they have.

Imo, the family should definitely be able to have a voice, but they are speaking from a very different place than the public, or especially the court. Imo, the court (and jury, supposedly) should not make decisions based from emotions, where families most likely would (see Marianne Bachmeier Marianne Bachmeier - Wikipedia).

 

[Nila Aella]

I had a look at the calendar starting from May 22nd when BK was arraigned. I figure Nov 6th is six months. At the moment Bk's trial is set for beginning on October 2nd. If 37 days is added you get a trial date begining on November 8th. I can see why the State doesn't want to risk it. I would guess that the good cause clause would definately be invoked if this ever became necessary but I can see why the state wants to do this by the book. As it stands now, if the defense decide to take those 37 days, by my calculations BK's trial would be scheduled to commence two days after the expiration of the speedy trial limit. Moo

EBM changed date to correct one.

Your post made me wonder about timing for Speedy Trial.
Is the Speedy Trial date the date that the trial has to start by? Can a trial in progress extend beyond the speedy trial date? Or does the Court schedule the trial so that it is completed before the Speedy Trial date?
MOO

 

[TL4S]

The idea that the families of victims should be strapped with the burden of deciding the fate of another person's life seems wrong on so many levels to me.

They are likely still processing their loss, grieving, and vulnerable to making haste decisions based on where they are in that grieving process. Why should the terrible act of another person force them into the position to become executioners themselves? Now they have to cope and live with that horror for the rest of their lives, as well?

What if one of the victim's grieving family members decided to do like Marianne Bachmeier and shoot BK dead in the courtroom? Should BK's parents then get to decide if their son's victim's grieving family member lives or dies?

 

[Twistinginthewind]

IMO, this is an interesting piece of the puzzle on whether BK has or doesn't have an alibi for the time of their murders. Even though his defense team has recently alluded to him not being in Moscow at the time, per MSM articles linked above, which would seem like an important component of an alibi if you ask me.

(BBM):

"Accused University of Idaho killer Bryan Kohberger’s legal team has suggested they have evidence showing he was elsewhere at the time of four college students were murdered in their off-campus home last November, court records show.

Kohberger, through attorneys, has doubled down on his decision not to provide prosecutors with an alibi, despite their demands he do so, according to court papers released Tuesday."

Bryan Kohberger’s defense hints he was elsewhere at time of University of Idaho slayings

 

[Emilie D]

IMO, this is an interesting piece of the puzzle on whether BK has or doesn't have an alibi for the time of their murders. Even though his defense team has recently alluded to him not being in Moscow at the time, per MSM articles linked above, which would seem like an important component of an alibi if you ask me.

(BBM):

"Accused University of Idaho killer Bryan Kohberger’s legal team has suggested they have evidence showing he was elsewhere at the time of four college students were murdered in their off-campus home last November, court records show.

Kohberger, through attorneys, has doubled down on his decision not to provide prosecutors with an alibi, despite their demands he do so, according to court papers released Tuesday."

Bryan Kohberger’s defense hints he was elsewhere at time of University of Idaho slayings

So, the “I have an alibi but I’m not telling you what it is” defense? That’s what he’s going with?

 

[Twistinginthewind]

So, the “I have an alibi but I’m not telling you what it is” defense? That’s what he’s going with?

If so, it's a bit of "quelle bizarre" + "wot?" = "oh, right, unh hunh" x "can't make this stuff up" / "likely story".

Just sayin'. IMO.

 

[iamshadow21]

So, the “I have an alibi but I’m not telling you what it is” defense? That’s what he’s going with?

This is a game to him.

MOO

 

[Emilie D]

This is a game to him.

MOO

That’s what I think too. I honestly think his plan was to prove that he could commit the perfect murder.

 

[girlhasnoname]

The idea that the families of victims should be strapped with the burden of deciding the fate of another person's life seems wrong on so many levels to me.

They are likely still processing their loss, grieving, and vulnerable to making haste decisions based on where they are in that grieving process. Why should the terrible act of another person force them into the position to become executioners themselves? Now they have to cope and live with that horror for the rest of their lives, as well?

What if one of the victim's grieving family members decided to do like Marianne Bachmeier and shoot BK dead in the courtroom? Should BK's parents then get to decide if their son's victim's grieving family member lives or dies?

I see both sides of the argument T, nobody wins when something like this happens. I feel for all the families and I can't imagine them having to sit through this trial.

 

[wary]

IMO, this is an interesting piece of the puzzle on whether BK has or doesn't have an alibi for the time of their murders. Even though his defense team has recently alluded to him not being in Moscow at the time, per MSM articles linked above, which would seem like an important component of an alibi if you ask me.

(BBM):

"Accused University of Idaho killer Bryan Kohberger’s legal team has suggested they have evidence showing he was elsewhere at the time of four college students were murdered in their off-campus home last November, court records show.

Kohberger, through attorneys, has doubled down on his decision not to provide prosecutors with an alibi, despite their demands he do so, according to court papers released Tuesday."

Bryan Kohberger’s defense hints he was elsewhere at time of University of Idaho slayings

Notice that the defense ‘alludes,’ ‘suggests,’ ‘hints’ that BK was elsewhere. This makes it clear to me that they have absolutely no evidence that he *was* elsewhere, simply that they have to defend him, and it’s going to be extremely difficult to claim that he *was* there, but had no part in the murders.

MOO of course

 

[Sundog]

Families of Murder Victims. Having "the Final Say?"
Idaho transplant said:
".... I hope that whatever the outcome, it gives whatever comfort possible to the families of the victims. It is my believe that they, and only they, should have the final say" (sbm)


@Idaho transplant Interesting idea.
@10ofRods Yes, extreeemely possible that families of victims in MASS KILLING may have differing opinions about a def't's guilt & about appropriate sentencing.
Ditto for SERIAL KILLER, being tried in one trial for multiple victims.

But even w a SINGLE DEATH, family members may hold vastly different beliefs, esp'ly re sentencing and death penalty. Sometimes they express those opinions in MSM interviews but not in victims impact stmts at trial.
imo, FWIW..

If the jury finds BK guilty, then at the sentencing phase the family members may give impact statements, but according to Idaho Code, they are not allowed to discuss their views on whether or not BK should get the death penalty. If they do, the judge will advise the jury not to take their remarks into consideration.

 

[jepop]

Your post made me wonder about timing for Speedy Trial.
Is the Speedy Trial date the date that the trial has to start by? Can a trial in progress extend beyond the speedy trial date? Or does the Court schedule the trial so that it is completed before the Speedy Trial date?
MOO

Wondered about that too.I read it as trial has to commence within six months. Doesn't matter if it's still going after the six months since arraignment mark. The ICR says something like the State must bring the defendant to trial within six months unless defendant waivers on application. Key words are bring to trial by Imo. In the case of BK, I recall AT and/or State suggesting the trial could potentially go for up to for six weeks. Some trials can take much longer than that I suppose, plus jury deliberations aren't and shouldn't be under any time pressures. Moo

 

[Emilie D]

If so, it's a bit of "quelle bizarre" + "wot?" = "oh, right, unh hunh" x "can't make this stuff up" / "likely story".

Just sayin'. IMO.

I was hoping the sarcasm was read in my post but this...this is awesome.

 

[Justice101]

So, the “I have an alibi but I’m not telling you what it is” defense? That’s what he’s going with?

No, their plan is to discredit the eyewitnesses. Totally NOT an alibi... just badger the "witnesses" who can't identify him anyway.

The defense has absolutely nothing. They are grasping at straws.

 

[Balthazar]

I'm trying to figure out how an accidental transfer could occur in regards to the defense's own emphasis above on "an investigation that spans hundreds of members of law enforcement and apparently at least one lab."

As stated by defense themselves in the above document, on Nov 20 the ISP lab located the DNA on the sheath and performed STR analysis. At that point as of Nov 20, the DNA information from that sheath is now in the official system--no one can come and accidentally or deliberately put BK's DNA on that sheath.

So, that leaves us with before those test results were processed and in the system. The only recorded interaction between BK and a member of Idaho law enforcement was on August 21 during his stop for not wearing a seat belt by Latah County Sheriff Deputy Corporal Duke. There is no written report for that stop, and a request for body cam footage from that encounter was denied (this statement comes from about half way down in this article https://www.tri-cityherald.com/news/state/article275083811.html, and no I'm not confusing it with the Oct 14 WSU stop), so we don't know what physical interaction if any occurred.

If there is the smallest chance that somehow that CPL Duke somehow got BK DNA on his/her hands from perhaps handling BK's driver's license, I'm sure it could easily be verified whether or not that officer was present at the processing of the crime scene and the evidence. Though that would assume CPL Duke then transferred that DNA from their hands to their uniform shortly after the stop and it somehow stayed there until they were present at the crime scene and in the vicinity of the sheath. But it only transferred into the snap of sheath, not the broader flat surfaces.

Or we could say that after CPL Duke theoretically got BK's DNA on their hands from his driver's license, Duke immediately came in direct contact with an item of evidence at a crime scene and transferred BK's DNA to it. This item was then taken to the Meridian, ID ISP lab for processing. And that tiny bit of now twice transferred BK touch DNA is transferred a third time to a work surface/piece of equipment in that lab and evades cleaning until the lab receives the knife sheath and begins checking it for DNA. Then it transfers a fourth time to the clasp of the sheath.

I can't think of any other way in which a member of ISP could be connected to accidental transfer of BK touch DNA. Washington state law enforcement would have had no direct involvement at that point, right? According to the PCA, WSU police didn't even come up with BK's name/auto until Nov 29th. The WSU officer who stopped him for the intersection stuff wouldn't have any means of transferring DNA from that encounter to the ISP lab.

He applied for an internship with the police in Pullman and was interviewed for the job. I would assume his DNA was on the application (and envelope if it was mailed), his resume and if the interview was in person, his DNA might be all over the location of the interview.

 

[gremlin444]

He applied for an internship with the police in Pullman and was interviewed for the job. I would assume his DNA was on the application (and envelope if it was mailed), his resume and if the interview was in person, his DNA might be all over the location of the interview.

1) With Pullman, WA...not Idaho. WA police had nothing to do with the processing of crime scene or evidence found at the crime scene. The sheath was not sent to a Washington lab, and no evidence from WA that could have somehow been contaminated with BK DNA from the interview/application would have been sent to the ISP lab.
2) The meeting was remote:

Pullman police interviewed Bryan Kohberger for job months before Idaho murders

Bryan Kohberger had an online interview with Pullman's chief of police in April 2022, months before he allegedly murdered four students in Idaho.

www.king5.com

Idaho Murders: What We Know

A man who was studying for a Ph.D. at a nearby university is accused in the stabbing deaths of four undergraduates at the University of Idaho.

www.nytimes.com

Idaho murder suspect had a job interview with the police department that later helped arrest him, report says

Bryan Kohberger was among four applicants for a job with the Pullman Police Department, which helped arrest him several months later.

www.insider.com

3)Applications were submitted digitally through the WSU professor in charge of setting up the partnership, Dr. Makin. There's an article behind a paywall that I'm trying to get access to that has that info.

 

[Boxer]

I agree. I don't see it being something that would help the state in it's case.

The jury may wonder why BK used a knife to kill multiple people when he had access to a gun. JMO.

I'm not putting too much stock in an article written in 2015, almost 10 years old. DNA technology changes constantly and continuously and so does the skill set of the scientists and technicians who collect and analyze that data.

JMO

The study was "a few pairs of people" how does that get into Nature?

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Notice that the defense ‘alludes,’ ‘suggests,’ ‘hints’ that BK was elsewhere. This makes it clear to me that they have absolutely no evidence that he *was* elsewhere, simply that they have to defend him, and it’s going to be extremely difficult to claim that he *was* there, but had no part in the murders.

MOO of course

Good observations, @wary.

It's a "smoke and mirrors" defense strategy, IMO, which apparently arose out of a failed "spaghetti" defense strategy.

For reference, "smoke and mirrors" as defined in Wikipedia, means (BBM):

"Smoke and mirrors is a classic technique in magical illusions that makes an entity appear to hover in empty space. It was documented as early as 1770 and spread widely after its use by the charlatan Johann Georg Schröpfer, who claimed the apparitions to be conjured spirits. It subsequently became a fixture of 19th-century phantasmagoria shows. The illusion relies on a hidden projector (known then as a magic lantern) the beam of which reflects off a mirror into a cloud of smoke, which in turn scatters the beam to create an image.

The phrase "smoke and mirrors" has entered common English use to refer to any proposal that, when examined closely, proves to be an illusion."

Smoke and mirrors - Wikipedia

 

[ilovewings]

Good observations, @wary.

It's a "smoke and mirrors" defense strategy, IMO, which apparently arose out of a failed "spaghetti" defense strategy.

For reference, "smoke and mirrors" as defined in Wikipedia, means (BBM):

"Smoke and mirrors is a classic technique in magical illusions that makes an entity appear to hover in empty space. It was documented as early as 1770 and spread widely after its use by the charlatan Johann Georg Schröpfer, who claimed the apparitions to be conjured spirits. It subsequently became a fixture of 19th-century phantasmagoria shows. The illusion relies on a hidden projector (known then as a magic lantern) the beam of which reflects off a mirror into a cloud of smoke, which in turn scatters the beam to create an image.

The phrase "smoke and mirrors" has entered common English use to refer to any proposal that, when examined closely, proves to be an illusion."

Smoke and mirrors - Wikipedia

It is really simple: if someone has an alibi they are going to come right out with it, 'hey, I was at my sister's house, check it out , you will see".

The defense is playing games-because DA DA- he has no alibi

As I said upthread: if someone has an alibi, why would they keep it a secret? they wouldn't- no one wants to spend one day in jail they don't have to spend.

The more so called strategy the defense has to use, the more guilty he looks.