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

[Cool Cats]

I wonder if BK proposes alternate theories to his defence team?

After all, if he didn't do it, who did? And since he's an 'innocent man' becoming precariously close to a DP sentence, who also happens to be an outstanding student of criminology, should he be solving this crime?

What with all the time he has on his hands and the inside info he's got that we wouldn't know about (prosecution evidence)?

Bryan is a "know it all" and intelligent "book wise." I can tell from the Pullman video of his traffic stop that he will talk your ear off and has all the answers and quick retorts and arguments.

I do not see him quietly sitting there listening to his counsel for more than a couple minutes before he pipes up his theories on the case and his ideas on defense - his arguments against LE's evidence against him.

He probably has all the answers to the evidence against him including this "surprise" evidence we are supposed to hear about at trial during defense questioning. This being his alibi.

2 Cents

Bryan Kohberger Update: Alibi revealed in new court document

The suspect's defense lawyers claim that their client was out for a nightly drive when four students were killed near the University of Idaho.

www.newsweek.com

"Mr. Kohberger was out driving alone," the defense team added. "Corroborating evidence may come from cross-examination of state's witnesses. Corroborating evidence may come from presentation of defense experts. Mr. Kohberger is aware of and will comply with his continuing duty to disclose information."

 

[pseudo_hum]

IMO, Bryan will not plea; he likes the attention. That is why I think he went back the next morning. He wanted to know about the reaction to his crime. He wanted to read about it and know only "he had all the answers".

 

[Justice101]

This is what I think too. It makes the most sense. He's all wired up probably listening to scans or news or whatever else he could not understanding why he's heard nothing about this so he got in his car and went to check it out. There was a break later too and I wondered (still do) if he then went to wherever he ditched the evidence to see if there was any police activity there. Of course there was none. But this is where I think he went.

Just my hunch.

Yeh, I think he drove by to see what all the commotion he had created. I don't think he went back for the sheath or he would have been seen on cameras in daylight looking in the rear parking lot.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Bryan is a "know it all" and intelligent "book wise." I can tell from the Pullman video of his traffic stop that he will talk your ear off and has all the answers and quick retorts and arguments.

I do not see him quietly sitting there listening to his counsel for more than a couple minutes before he pipes up his theories on the case and his ideas on defense - his arguments against LE's evidence against him.

He probably has all the answers to the evidence against him including this "surprise" evidence we are supposed to hear about at trial during defense questioning. This being his alibi.

2 Cents

Bryan Kohberger Update: Alibi revealed in new court document

The suspect's defense lawyers claim that their client was out for a nightly drive when four students were killed near the University of Idaho.

www.newsweek.com

"Mr. Kohberger was out driving alone," the defense team added. "Corroborating evidence may come from cross-examination of state's witnesses. Corroborating evidence may come from presentation of defense experts. Mr. Kohberger is aware of and will comply with his continuing duty to disclose information."

I'll bet he's arguing that he goes out driving alone nearly every night for many years and nobody else has been murdered on those nights so why are they now accusing him of this crime just because he was out driving as usual.

I don't think he will ever admit to anything or do a plea bargain. Anyhow what would he be pleading down to in the case of four brutal murders? It's not like he's ever going to see the outside world again.

JMO MOO

 

[Charlot123]

I'll bet he's arguing that he goes out driving alone nearly every night for many years and nobody else has been murdered on those nights so why are they now accusing him of this crime just because he was out driving as usual.

I don't think he will ever admit to anything or do a plea bargain. Anyhow what would he be pleading down to in the case of four brutal murders? It's not like he's ever going to see the outside world again.

JMO MOO

People hyperfixate on anything, including killing too.

What I want to know is, what websites served as the first trigger?

Laws protect against CSAM. Very poorly, IMHO, against indoctrination into suicidality or homicidality. We read of pro-suicidal groups. They should be illegal. It is sick. (I don't know what contributes into 20-30% rise in suicide since 2000, maybe them?)

Suicide

An overview of statistics for suicide. Suicide is a major public health concern. Suicide is among the leading causes of death in the United States. Based on recent nationwide surveys, suicide in some populations is on the rise.

www.nimh.nih.gov

I think that all sites that post morbid, gory visual information, everything perseverating on sadism or homicide should be outlawed. It is horrible, to steer vulnerable people in that direction. And i wonder how BK first got these ideas. He posted online about visual snow. Is it hard to progress from this to talking to someone online about anger, and maybe that someone asking, hey, have you ever thought of this ot that? Or am I seeing too much in it?

The changes in homicides are hard to analyze because of societal changes. But here we are.

Trends in Homicide: What You Need to Know - Council on Criminal Justice

This package of data and analysis examines long-term homicide trends in the U.S. It also explores possible explanations for the rise in murder seen in mid-2020 and, in most cities, its subsequent decline.

counciloncj.org

 

[Charlot123]

Yeh, I think he drove by to see what all the commotion he had created. I don't think he went back for the sheath or he would have been seen on cameras in daylight looking in the rear parking lot.

I think he was in some semi-dissociated state and came back to see if it really happened.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I think he was in some semi-dissociated state and came back to see if it really happened.

I believe he went back by to see if there was any LE presence there yet. He was anxious for his handiwork to be found IMO.

 

[Justice101]

I believe he went back by to see if there was any LE presence there yet. He was anxious for his handiwork to be found IMO.

Yeh, he saw nothing on social media. He saw nothing on breaking news. He probably didn't even hear anything on the scanners and may have likely thought that he had killed every single person in that house and that there was nobody left to call 911.

I think he gets excited by crime and wanted to see how many LE people his crime would draw.

Similar to some of us here, I'll bet he checked for updates on the case regularly maybe even HOURLY for the first several days. He probably felt fairly confident he would not be found out UNTIL the news conference stating they were looking for white Elantra... then he probably wet his bed.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

I believe he went back by to see if there was any LE presence there yet. He was anxious for his handiwork to be found IMO.

If he didn't see DM, he may have thought he'd intruded a house that only had the four occupants and therefore they were all passed away and nobody knew?

He may have considered going back after dark if there were still no signs of life in order to hunt for his sheath, wearing a 'clean' suit, then of course he would have the problem of the dog barking. But he must have surely considered... huh what if no-one's going to think these people are officially missing until maybe well into Monday? Then he could safely re-enter the property.

JMO MOO

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

Off topic posts are a violation of TOS.

It seems we are going to have to start handing out Warning Points and more if members keep derailing the thread with things that do not relate directly to the discussion of the case at hand.

Post accordingly.

Thank you.

 

[Love Never Fails]

IMO and from personal experience (knowing a victim) there's a propensity NOT to scream. And instead freeze up or pass out or even vomit. Left with very little time to calm down, assess, rationalize and properly process the situation they are in.

The idea that victims scream, fight back and/or run are seemingly (imo) common misconception that mostly happen in movies. And the lack of any of those actions are sometimes used to blame the victim (not saying that you're doing this). Asking "why didn't you scream?" and "why didn't you fight back?" or "why didn't you run or walk away?"

I am not a professional nor do I claim to be. Everything I stated above is IMO from my personal experiences. @10ofRods is way more equipped to answer this question (and she might have already done so)

When I san BTK interviewed he said the victims didn’t yell. Most would cry. One woman asked for a cigarette. One vomited. I am certain I would freeze up. I think you would be in shock. I kind of wished all would pass out and not feel anythiing. It breaks my heart that these monsters get a thrill out of killing.

 

[10ofRods]

Yeh, he saw nothing on social media. He saw nothing on breaking news. He probably didn't even hear anything on the scanners and may have likely thought that he had killed every single person in that house and that there was nobody left to call 911.

I think he gets excited by crime and wanted to see how many LE people his crime would draw.

Similar to some of us here, I'll bet he checked for updates on the case regularly maybe even HOURLY for the first several days. He probably felt fairly confident he would not be found out UNTIL the news conference stating they were looking for white Elantra... then he probably wet his bed.

You raise an interesting and relevant point. Those of us who do study crime, well, if it's still grad school or in the phase of wanting to "publish," we do pay attention to crime news. There was no criminology program at my uni, but various social science disciplines studied crime. And, we all paid attention to crime in the news. Probably more than most people. Years later, decades latter, I do still pay attention to crime news - and local crime is the first thing I check.

So yeah, he probably checked updates and had now created a situation where he, himself, was the topic of the update.

In academia, "draw" is a big deal. I am guessing you are right that he did indeed check frequently. Oddly, that would be a kind of experimental approach to criminology (which does not usually use broad experiments, and that's interesting too).

He's interested in how things play out - for himself. Like Ted Bundy, he may have thought that he was one of the ones who could get away with it (as Ted thought, early on - and was right; Bundy is famous because he totally went beyond what anyone would consider "getting away with it"). I personally (and I know others disagree) think this is a brain issue in the perp. I'm not exonerating them or anything like that - I just think we need more research in the area (and, that we already have enough to draw some conclusions).

IMO

 

[iamshadow21]

You raise an interesting and relevant point. Those of us who do study crime, well, if it's still grad school or in the phase of wanting to "publish," we do pay attention to crime news. There was no criminology program at my uni, but various social science disciplines studied crime. And, we all paid attention to crime in the news. Probably more than most people. Years later, decades latter, I do still pay attention to crime news - and local crime is the first thing I check.

So yeah, he probably checked updates and had now created a situation where he, himself, was the topic of the update.

In academia, "draw" is a big deal. I am guessing you are right that he did indeed check frequently. Oddly, that would be a kind of experimental approach to criminology (which does not usually use broad experiments, and that's interesting too).

He's interested in how things play out - for himself. Like Ted Bundy, he may have thought that he was one of the ones who could get away with it (as Ted thought, early on - and was right; Bundy is famous because he totally went beyond what anyone would consider "getting away with it"). I personally (and I know others disagree) think this is a brain issue in the perp. I'm not exonerating them or anything like that - I just think we need more research in the area (and, that we already have enough to draw some conclusions).

IMO

The thing is... It's that kind of curiosity and ability to separate yourself emotionally from things that can help someone really excel in certain fields. It's easy to see why humans have that ability in our population, how it is beneficial in people who lead, in people who make advances in science, who perform well under pressure.

I don't know how well we'll ever understand how it goes wrong, just that it does sometimes, and the results can be someone who sees other humans as disposable, as prey, as things to be pulled apart for their curiosity and gratification.

I have no idea whether, if found guilty, BK will be one who talks to psychologists and such to give insights into his thinking, or one who maintains a stubborn wall of silence. I think he could go either way. I see the arrogance and narcissism that could lead him to brag, but the cunning that could keep him quiet, at least until appeals are done with. No idea at all.

MOO

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

If someone in BK's situation were to get the DP, how long would they be on 'death row'?

Would agreeing to 'tell all, honestly and openly', and be studied by scientists (for example neurologists and psychiatrists) and psychologists or therapists etc be something that could keep a person alive for longer?

 

[Justice101]

If someone in BK's situation were to get the DP, how long would they be on 'death row'?

Would agreeing to 'tell all, honestly and openly', and be studied by scientists (for example neurologists and psychiatrists) and psychologists or therapists etc be something that could keep a person alive for longer?

In reality in America, getting on death row is more or less just a life sentence.

There are so many appeals and counter appeals that it drags out forever. For example, there are 2300 people on death row but there were only 18 people executed in the entire USA in 2022. That is 0.8%

In reality, it might be just better to save the money on appeals and just have all on death row changed to life without parole. That's what I'd do from a practicality standpoint...not counting how I really feel about the issue.

 

[Cool Cats]

If someone in BK's situation were to get the DP, how long would they be on 'death row'?

Would agreeing to 'tell all, honestly and openly', and be studied by scientists (for example neurologists and psychiatrists) and psychologists or therapists etc be something that could keep a person alive for longer?

Death Row | Idaho Department of Correction

www.idoc.idaho.gov

Three executions have occurred since Idaho enacted a new death penalty statute in 1977.
There are 8 people on death row.

Here is how long they have been there....

2017
2004
2004
1996
1993 - only female
1992
1986
1983

"Would agreeing to 'tell all, honestly and openly', and be studied by scientists (for example neurologists and psychiatrists) and psychologists or therapists etc be something that could keep a person alive for longer?"

No, if Bryan was on death row and allowed himself to be "studied" and "interviewed" it would have to be done before his execution. Only a court order or the governor can stop an execution..... 2 Cents

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Thanks for the above info.

Sounds like a lot of money, time, and effort is spent legally arguing DP after conviction and perhaps that could be better directed elsewhere, if it were considered life without parole.

I do wonder if someone like BK, if guilty, would be the sort who wishes to be scrutinised and go down in history for future generations of students to study just like he's been studying others. JMO MOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

People hyperfixate on anything, including killing too.

What I want to know is, what websites served as the first trigger?

Laws protect against CSAM. Very poorly, IMHO, against indoctrination into suicidality or homicidality. We read of pro-suicidal groups. They should be illegal. It is sick. (I don't know what contributes into 20-30% rise in suicide since 2000, maybe them?)

Suicide

An overview of statistics for suicide. Suicide is a major public health concern. Suicide is among the leading causes of death in the United States. Based on recent nationwide surveys, suicide in some populations is on the rise.

www.nimh.nih.gov

I think that all sites that post morbid, gory visual information, everything perseverating on sadism or homicide should be outlawed. It is horrible, to steer vulnerable people in that direction. And i wonder how BK first got these ideas. He posted online about visual snow. Is it hard to progress from this to talking to someone online about anger, and maybe that someone asking, hey, have you ever thought of this ot that? Or am I seeing too much in it?

The changes in homicides are hard to analyze because of societal changes. But here we are.

Trends in Homicide: What You Need to Know - Council on Criminal Justice

This package of data and analysis examines long-term homicide trends in the U.S. It also explores possible explanations for the rise in murder seen in mid-2020 and, in most cities, its subsequent decline.

counciloncj.org

Some people are just Evil, by nature or nature is an old debate. BK may have never been influenced by anything he saw on the net, maybe he searched out his own twisted material that filled some big, dark hole inside of him. Maybe he didn't search for those things at all, but could actively draw on his own imagination.

Anything's possible IMO.

 

[girlhasnoname]

(2 Cents not stating as fact)

The State actually may have already offered Bryan a plea deal but the public wouldn't know about this. If it has happened we don't know about it because I believe Bryan would have turned it down and insists he can't plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit. Nothing in his apartment or car, no connection to the victims and so forth.

Both defense and prosecution can reach out for a plea deal and I do not think Anne Taylor has reached out for a plea deal because I think Bryan tells her he didn't do it. I think he wants her to do everything she can, including trying to get the case dismissed.

Bottom line....I think there is not going to be a plea deal for Bryan simply because he says he is innocent and will not plead guilty.

Can you picture him standing up in court with the families in the gallery and admitting to the world that he killed 4 people plus is guilty of burglary? He would have to plead guilty 4 X's to 4 charges.

No I cannot picture BK admitting to the world anything to do with these murders. He is too arrogant and self assured (he's the smartest guy in the room according to him and a lot of the people in class and the few friends he did have), although on the other hand, socially, he is a complete square peg trying to fit into a round hole.

MOO

 

[maskedwoman]

The thing is... It's that kind of curiosity and ability to separate yourself emotionally from things that can help someone really excel in certain fields. It's easy to see why humans have that ability in our population, how it is beneficial in people who lead, in people who make advances in science, who perform well under pressure.

I don't know how well we'll ever understand how it goes wrong, just that it does sometimes, and the results can be someone who sees other humans as disposable, as prey, as things to be pulled apart for their curiosity and gratification.

I have no idea whether, if found guilty, BK will be one who talks to psychologists and such to give insights into his thinking, or one who maintains a stubborn wall of silence. I think he could go either way. I see the arrogance and narcissism that could lead him to brag, but the cunning that could keep him quiet, at least until appeals are done with. No idea at all.

MOO

That's an fascinating question about whether BK will want or need to be understood. I have always wondered what makes the difference between someone who wants or needs their crimes to be "understood" versus killers who don't care at all about that.

The other day, I caught the tail end of a program on ID. The confessed killer was suspected of more murders, but they didn't have the evidence to charge him for those. The guy's wife had stood by him through it all. He said he wanted to talk to the FBI's profilers and psychologists to understand why he did the things he did. The detectives told him the FBI wouldn't the interested in him because he was not a serial killer. They said he sat there a minute, looked at his wife, then proceeded to confess to the other murders so the FBI would talk to him! Blew my mind at first, but I was very impressed that the detectives recognized a need of his that they could exploit.