4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #91

[Cool Cats]

The reasons to demolish the house outweigh any emotional reasons for keeping it intact.

By the time it gets to trial, that house would become seriously problematic and the families would want it gone as an attraction, IMO.

Perhaps the Goncalves family will see one day that Kaylee was moving on from that house, that chapter of her life and the attachment to that house will no longer pull at them. JMO.

Yup.

Mr G said the University wants to forget about what happened yet they are working with Mr G to establish a scholarship in Kaylee's name.

The University paused demolition for the prosecution and defense, and respected their wishes.

Anne Taylor asked last January to pause the demolition and they did and held off until October.

UI President Scott Green said. "While we look forward to removing this grim reminder of this tragedy, we feel holding until October is the right thing to do."

Then the prosecution explained to the University that because of an October trial date there wasn't enough time for them to be finished with the house so demolition was paused again for 2 months.

Only after the prosecution and defense made it clear they would not need the house anymore did the University tear it down.

All this is respectful to the families.

Trial 'delayed indefinitely' for Kohberger allows FBI to return to King Road house, crime scene

"King Road house is one of the most critical pieces of evidence," says Goncalves family. Although the house was examined initially, FBI investigators seek more.

www.ktvb.com

 

[katydid23]

The house with future rental value and land value in that location would have been easily $1M.

I think your idea of a parking lot is a really good idea, maybe it could be an offsite library, or health or wellness spot. Something that brings something good out of a bad situation is what my main point was.

MOO

Even if they do just a parking lot, I think it would be nice to plant 4 nice trees , even without a big deal about it, maybe just a small metal engraving of the name on each tree, for memory sake.

 

[Cool Cats]

(snipped by me for focus)

I see a lot of people who think BK's innocent implying that breaking DM and/or BF on the stand is the key to a finding of Not Guilty.

I completely disagree.

I think any perceived 'bullying' is going to work against the defense. The defense has a delicate balancing act on their hands. The State's timeline and all of the evidence that hinges on it is largely dependent on what the two surviving roommates saw and heard.

Why do so many people think the defense is going to bully DM? Break DM? It is the other way around. Defense will be glad to get her off the stand. In my opinion.

Defense
You were in bed for the night, tired, you could have got the time wrong correct?
DM
No. I looked at my clock.
Defense
Can you say that the man you saw was in fact Mr Kohberger?
DM
No.
Defense
There are many people who could fit your description correct?
DM
Yes.
************
Prosecutor
Can you say the man you saw in the hallway that night wasn't Mr Kohberger?
DM
No. I cannot.

Prosecutor then shows DM and the jury this big blow up drivers license photo of BK.

Prosecutor
Mr Kohberger's 2022 drivers license shows him at 6 feet tall. How tall was the man you saw in the house from your statement to police?
DM
I said he was around 5' 10"
Prosecutor
How did you describe the man's eyebrows to police?
DM
Bushy
Prosecutor
In this photo of Mr Kohberger would you say his eyebrows look bushy?
DM
Yes.

 

[katydid23]

(snipped by me for focus)

I see a lot of people who think BK's innocent implying that breaking DM and/or BF on the stand is the key to a finding of Not Guilty.

I completely disagree.

I think any perceived 'bullying' is going to work against the defense. The defense has a delicate balancing act on their hands. The State's timeline and all of the evidence that hinges on it is largely dependent on what the two surviving roommates saw and heard.

I was talking to my cousin over the holidays, who was discussing this case, and saying he thought BK was innocent. I asked him more about it of course....and he admitted that he got most of his info from various TikTok's...

His main argument was that the 2 survivors stayed in the home all night w/out calling 911, until someone else called at noon the next day.

I agree that sounds suspicious, in itself. But there may be good explanations for each one's behaviour and reactions, and that would come out on the stand with questioning.

He did say that he expects the defense to heavily interrogate them and he thinks it will help the jury believe in BK's innocence. But I think he has other deeper beliefs/expectations about what will come out in the cross exams, but he hasn't followed many trials, if any---so I don't think he understands how limited the crosses might be.

I tried to explain the rules and the barriers---I.E, they can only cross on subjects already brought up by prosecution. etc

And if they want to ask the survivors about them possibly selling drugs or arguing with the victims earlier that night, the defense would have to have prior approval by the court, and that could be hard to do for many reasons. [relevance, evidential value, etc]

And I agree about the potential for backlash if the defense gets too heavy handed and comes off as bullies. The survivors are going to be seen as victims unless the court somehow allows other evidence to come in, showing them to be dishonest or misleading in some way. JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

I was talking to my cousin over the holidays, who was discussing this case, and saying he thought BK was innocent. I asked him more about it of course....and he admitted that he got most of his info from various TikTok's...

His main argument was that the 2 survivors stayed in the home all night w/out calling 911, until someone else called at noon the next day.

I agree that sounds suspicious, in itself. But there may be good explanations for each one's behaviour and reactions, and that would come out on the stand with questioning.

He did say that he expects the defense to heavily interrogate them and he thinks it will help the jury believe in BK's innocence. But I think he has other deeper beliefs/expectations about what will come out in the cross exams, but he hasn't followed many trials, if any---so I don't think he understands how limited the crosses might be.

I tried to explain the rules and the barriers---I.E, they can only cross on subjects already brought up by prosecution. etc

And if they want to ask the survivors about them possibly selling drugs or arguing with the victims earlier that night, the defense would have to have prior approval by the court, and that could be hard to do for many reasons. [relevance, evidential value, etc]

And I agree about the potential for backlash if the defense gets too heavy handed and comes off as bullies. The survivors are going to be seen as victims unless the court somehow allows other evidence to come in, showing them to be dishonest or misleading in some way. JMO

Yes, the survivors are victims and will have to live with the actions of BK for the rest of their life. Survivors guilt and PTSD are just a couple of things that come to mind.

Also, they've been blasted and slandered all over the internet. What these girls, especially DM, are continuing to go through is unthinkable. I think the Defense will need to walk a very tight line in questioning them. Heavy handed and accusatory lines of questioning are going to backfire on them in a big way IMO.

I don't know why people can't understand the actions of DM, unless they've never lived in off campus housing. What DM did was perfectly normal and exactly what I would have done in the exact same circumstances. No way did her mind ever consider there was a homicidal maniac in their house killing her roommates. It just wouldn't even enter the brain.

I feel so bad for her and BF and hope this case moves forward and they slap BK in a cell for the rest of his miserable days so they can begin to get on with their lives. You know they have got to be terrified of having to testify and seeing BK in Court. I have nothing but sympathy for them, BK is the one that brought this carnage and mayhem to their college home, not anything DM or BF did.

MOO

 

[Swansee]

I was rewatching Bryan Entin's interview with KG's parents and noticed something I had previously missed.
Discussing the investigators' return to the house and why they need to do new scans, the exchange just after the 30:40 timestamp goes like this:

"Kristi: And I mean the stuff they're doing now, is it the same stuff they did before and they're just doing it again, or brand new stuff? I don't know what they're doing, I don't know what they did before, I don't know what they're doing now.
Steve: They didn't do the under."

Did I hear what Steve said correctly?
Is Steve referring to LIDAR type scans of the property? Or a faro of a basement? I didn't think there was a basement.
What is "the under"?

 

[Chloegirl]

Yes, the survivors are victims and will have to live with the actions of BK for the rest of their life. Survivors guilt and PTSD are just a couple of things that come to mind.

Also, they've been blasted and slandered all over the internet. What these girls, especially DM, are continuing to go through is unthinkable. I think the Defense will need to walk a very tight line in questioning them. Heavy handed and accusatory lines of questioning are going to backfire on them in a big way IMO.

I don't know why people can't understand the actions of DM, unless they've never lived in off campus housing. What DM did was perfectly normal and exactly what I would have done in the exact same circumstances. No way did her mind ever consider there was a homicidal maniac in their house killing her roommates. It just wouldn't even enter the brain.

I feel so bad for her and BF and hope this case moves forward and they slap BK in a cell for the rest of his miserable days so they can begin to get on with their lives. You know they have got to be terrified of having to testify and seeing BK in Court. I have nothing but sympathy for them, BK is the one that brought this carnage and mayhem to their college home, not anything DM or BF did.

MOO

I don't know about you, each of you, but when something disturbs me throughout the night even if it's not something I can explain or talk myself into perceiving as murder, eventually my body needs to sleep. I can imagine things might have been disturbing and confusing and maybe not so much kept them up but sort of a continual pattern, where many times they had to say stop making noise in the past. This time it turned out to be a lot more than just noise. But their bodies were agitated and needed to rest and eventually succumbed to an 8-hour sleep cycle 4:30am-12:30pm.

I was initially confused by them not calling 911, but once you tell yourself okay that person's left and it's now quiet and I don't know maybe he was a friend of theirs, then you sleep. I'm not sure why this is so difficult for people to accept other than the extreme circumstances. Your body just takes over and sleeps. In the weirdest of ways it shows they didn't know what was transpiring, because they would have never been able to sleep. JMOO

 

[Chloegirl]

I was rewatching Bryan Entin's interview with KG's parents and noticed something I had previously missed.
Discussing the investigators' return to the house and why they need to do new scans, the exchange just after the 30:40 timestamp goes like this:

"Kristi: And I mean the stuff they're doing now, is it the same stuff they did before and they're just doing it again, or brand new stuff? I don't know what they're doing, I don't know what they did before, I don't know what they're doing now.
Steve: They didn't do the under."

Did I hear what Steve said correctly?
Is Steve referring to LIDAR type scans of the property? Or a faro of a basement? I didn't think there was a basement.
What is "the under"?

Good catch, and we're not going to talk about "tunnels" here. But could easily refer to the first floor? Or was he trying to say the word LIDAR not under? JMOO

 

[Swansee]

Oh definitely agree with you about no tunnels, I really didn't mean to reference that ( If anything, I wonder if such scans could be used to rule them out should that hypothesis come up at some point in court).
I was thinking perhaps, more along the lines of looking for a potential buried murder weapon or some other underground stash spot.

 

[Gemmie]

I was rewatching Bryan Entin's interview with KG's parents and noticed something I had previously missed.
Discussing the investigators' return to the house and why they need to do new scans, the exchange just after the 30:40 timestamp goes like this:

"Kristi: And I mean the stuff they're doing now, is it the same stuff they did before and they're just doing it again, or brand new stuff? I don't know what they're doing, I don't know what they did before, I don't know what they're doing now.
Steve: They didn't do the under."

Did I hear what Steve said correctly?
Is Steve referring to LIDAR type scans of the property? Or a faro of a basement? I didn't think there was a basement.
What is "the under"?

I listened several times and heard:

KG: I don't know what they are doing now.
SG - They are doing 3D rendering.

 

[Swansee]

Aha!
Now that you say it, I can hear it... that makes a lot more sense! Thank you @Gemmie !

 

[x_files]

Is that what you think was the original intention? No one has discussed this really everybody seems to skim right over that concept. Maybe I should not say everyone. But we go from there to the incel conversation and then linger on murder motive. Just trying to follow your post intention. JMOO

I always wondered if BK originally planned to B&E and sexually assault a victim, then leave undetected versus murdering her and the others.
Perhaps she ripped his mask off and recognized him or he flew into a rage.
Also, if there were other unsolved rapes during that time. B&E with sexual assaults never solved.

 

[iamshadow21]

I always wondered if BK originally planned to B&E and sexually assault a victim, then leave undetected versus murdering her and the others.
Perhaps she ripped his mask off and recognized him or he flew into a rage.
Also, if there were other unsolved rapes during that time. B&E with sexual assaults never solved.

He was still wearing the mask as he was leaving. Would someone really take the time to find it in the dark room, replace it, and then continue stalking the home?

MOO

 

[x_files]

I was talking to my cousin over the holidays, who was discussing this case, and saying he thought BK was innocent. I asked him more about it of course....and he admitted that he got most of his info from various TikTok's...

His main argument was that the 2 survivors stayed in the home all night w/out calling 911, until someone else called at noon the next day.

I agree that sounds suspicious, in itself. But there may be good explanations for each one's behaviour and reactions, and that would come out on the stand with questioning.

He did say that he expects the defense to heavily interrogate them and he thinks it will help the jury believe in BK's innocence. But I think he has other deeper beliefs/expectations about what will come out in the cross exams, but he hasn't followed many trials, if any---so I don't think he understands how limited the crosses might be.

I tried to explain the rules and the barriers---I.E, they can only cross on subjects already brought up by prosecution. etc

And if they want to ask the survivors about them possibly selling drugs or arguing with the victims earlier that night, the defense would have to have prior approval by the court, and that could be hard to do for many reasons. [relevance, evidential value, etc]

And I agree about the potential for backlash if the defense gets too heavy handed and comes off as bullies. The survivors are going to be seen as victims unless the court somehow allows other evidence to come in, showing them to be dishonest or misleading in some way. JMO

TikTok is filled with CLOUT CHASERS, and MISINFO.
Anything for a like, click, or follow.
Absolute garbage. Shocked some accounts are allowed to exist.

 

[x_files]

He was still wearing the mask as he was leaving. Would someone really take the time to find it in the dark room, replace it, and then continue stalking the home?

MOO

Not sure...if his mask slipped killed Maddie first then her friend came in to see what all the noise was and she was next...it would depend on the order of who was killed first.
If he was leaving and didn't want anyone else to ID him, especially as he LEFT the sliding glass door. Conceal ID from passersby, security cameras.

 

[iamshadow21]

Not sure...if his mask slipped killed Maddie first then her friend came in to see what all the noise was and she was next...it would depend on the order of who was killed first.
If he was leaving and didn't want anyone else to ID him, especially as he LEFT the sliding glass door. Conceal ID from passersby, security cameras.

I think anyone who enters a dark house at 4am with a twelve inch KA-BAR isn't that worried about people inside identifying him. I think the mask was more about preventing spreading his DNA. I don't think he killed because someone saw his face.

Maddie and Kaylee were sleeping in the same bed, as far as we know. There's no indication Maddie was alone.

MOO

 

[x_files]

I think anyone who enters a dark house at 4am with a twelve inch KA-BAR isn't that worried about people inside identifying him. I think the mask was more about preventing spreading his DNA. I don't think he killed because someone saw his face.

Maddie and Kaylee were sleeping in the same bed, as far as we know. There's no indication Maddie was alone.

MOO

Did LE ever release any info on who they thought was killed first? If not I guess we wait until trial.
I'm going through every possible motive and scenario, ultimately he killed four people and if he beelined directly upstairs first he didn't have to go back down and kill Xana and her boyfriend, so...I tend to lean towards how he planned the killing.

 

[ktm44]

Just as many felt the death penalty shouldn't be invoked just because the families request it, the house shouldn't remain just because the families request it either.

HOWEVER, the U of ID knew what it was doing buying that property. IMO, they bought it with one intention and one intention only -- to get rid of it. And ya, I can buy it was partly to help their students heal, but the driving force, IMO, is that it's bad for business. And that's fine, they have to look after their own interests and all that, but I for one am not feeling bad for them. If they didn't want to be put in this situation, they shouldn't have bought it.

JMO.

I think too much attention is being paid to trauma intervention versus closure. Closure I get. Get rid of the house and close this chapter of U of ID's and Moscow's history following trial. But the trauma doesn't go away just because the house is gone. The symbolic reminder goes away, which may be helpful to some students, but for others, the healing impact of the demo is way overblown, IMO.

I agree with both statements and if I’m not mistaken, it was said early on that the death penalty was legally a decision made by the prosecution and not something the victim’s families would control although they may be asked their opinion. If the prosectution and defence teams have no futher need for the house and they have both indicated that to be fact, the property then reverts back to the legal owner, who is legally able to do what they feel is best.

The house was donated to the university and not something they purchased and I don’t believe they anticipated the house becoming a morbid tourist attraction that would require 24/7 security to protect public safety and to prevent pieces of the notorious house for sale on ebay.

 

[Wallendo]

I doubt the survivor's testimony will be very important in this case. For one survivor, she can roughly establish the time of the crime and a bushy eyed man in a mask. We don't know anything about what the other survivor saw or heard (other than rumors).

The defense has access to their police interviews and statements. Most likely they will emphasize points they feel are beneficial to their case. They will also likely emphasize that neither witness got a good look at the perpetrator. Unless one or both change their stories from earlier statements, there is no need or benefit to grilling either witness.

 

[katydid23]

I always wondered if BK originally planned to B&E and sexually assault a victim, then leave undetected versus murdering her and the others.
Perhaps she ripped his mask off and recognized him or he flew into a rage.
Also, if there were other unsolved rapes during that time. B&E with sexual assaults never solved.

IDK. He took a pretty big knife for someone who was not planning to use it on anyone.

If he was just planning to rape someone, there are hundreds of potential victims he could have taken on that were alone. JMO