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

[MyBelle]

That's pretty much admitting BK will be found guilty.

Yes, it is. Perhaps he is refusing a plea deal?

JMO

 

[Justice101]

Yes, it is. Perhaps he is refusing a plea deal?

JMO

he may get one... but it might end up requiring a lot out of him like truthfully disclosing all information about the murders and life without parole.

 

[Boxer]

That's pretty much admitting BK will be found guilty.

Yes it is. The appeals!

Life without Parole seems like a good sentence, it's a death sentence, just slow. And no getting support from people who are purely against the DP.

(MOO It's fine to be against the DP - there are many reasons to be)

 

[DeDee]

Will the DTeam request a bond hearing since it seems the trial is not likely happening this year? Why doesn't AT know how LE came to identify BK as a suspect? Wasn't it the car, the phone the sheath and dna that led to BK being a suspect?

edit to add: how scary to think it would be possible for BK to be released from jail on bail

"The trial for Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of murdering four University of Idaho students, may not start until the summer of 2025. His defense attorney also said she still doesn't understand how Kohberger was identified as a suspect more than a year after his arrest. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy talks with attorney Mark Weaver, who has prosecuted death penalty cases, about the developments in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show that delves into the biggest stories in crime."

 

[Boxer]

Will the DTeam request a bond hearing since it seems the trial is not likely happening this year? Why doesn't AT know how LE came to identify BK as a suspect? Wasn't it the car, the phone the sheath and dna that led to BK being a suspect?

edit to add: how scary to think it would be possible for BK to be released from jail on bail

"The trial for Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of murdering four University of Idaho students, may not start until the summer of 2025. His defense attorney also said she still doesn't understand how Kohberger was identified as a suspect more than a year after his arrest. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy talks with attorney Mark Weaver, who has prosecuted death penalty cases, about the developments in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show that delves into the biggest stories in crime."

His car and geofence phone data should has triangulated him up the list.

 

[katydid23]

Just my opinion, but the media should have included the rest of the sentence. It might not have been as gasp worthy, but it would have at least been correct.

"A trial won't put an end to this case. This case will go on for 28 years if they do actually achieve a conviction."
- Jay Logsdon

1:20:40

That's true that he tagged the end of the 2nd sentence with " 'IF' they convict "
But the first sentence was a stand alone. His initial reaction was " A trial won't put an end to this case."

That does seem to imply that his first reaction was that it was going to be a guilty verdict. Then he walked it back with that explanation.

If he had opened with 'IF they do actually achieve a conviction---" it would have been more measured, IMO.

 

[maconrich]

That's true that he tagged the end of the 2nd sentence with " 'IF' they convict "
But the first sentence was a stand alone. His initial reaction was " A trial won't put an end to this case."

That does seem to imply that his first reaction was that it was going to be a guilty verdict. Then he walked it back with that explanation.

If he had opened with 'IF they do actually achieve a conviction---" it would have been more measured, IMO.

I agree he should have started the sentence with the if they do part. IMO I think he tends to have a bit of dramatic flair, but that whole bit came off funky. A lot of ifs were used by everyone: if it goes to trial, if there's a conviction, etc, but I don't remember anyone implying or indicating BK is guilty. Sentence structure does matter though, and he should and could have done better. IMHO.

 

[OnaZgSleuth]

Just my two cents about this sentence by the defense attorney. Do you think that, even if he is not convicted, the trial of public opinion and many people thinking that BK did it, will be over? I think that might be what he was initially thinking of and then added "if they convict". Because even if they do not convict him I believe that after the trial almost everyone will still be thinking of BK as the possible suspect. Unless and until there is somebody else who might be a viable suspect this trial will not end with or without conviction. JMO MOO

 

[Kemug]

Does anyone know if any members of BK's immediate family have visited him? I would think his father probably has. If so, I wonder what was said? And what he believes.

 

[Swansee]

Kemug,
I don't believe he's allowed to have visitors at all, aside from his lawyers, and apparently he's also allowed to see a priest once a week.
In any case, even if his parents or sisters did eventually visit, I can't think of any reason why this should be publicized. I'd imagine the last thing his family wants is a bunch of cameras hounding them.

 

[Boxer]

I agree he should have started the sentence with the if they do part. IMO I think he tends to have a bit of dramatic flair, but that whole bit came off funky. A lot of ifs were used by everyone: if it goes to trial, if there's a conviction, etc, but I don't remember anyone implying or indicating BK is guilty. Sentence structure does matter though, and he should and could have done better. IMHO.

MOO seems more than just awkward, he said what he thinks. There will be a conviction and then constant appeals, presuming he does get convicted-
He presumed it, then qualified.

 

[Justice101]

Will the DTeam request a bond hearing since it seems the trial is not likely happening this year? Why doesn't AT know how LE came to identify BK as a suspect? Wasn't it the car, the phone the sheath and dna that led to BK being a suspect?

edit to add: how scary to think it would be possible for BK to be released from jail on bail

"The trial for Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of murdering four University of Idaho students, may not start until the summer of 2025. His defense attorney also said she still doesn't understand how Kohberger was identified as a suspect more than a year after his arrest. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy talks with attorney Mark Weaver, who has prosecuted death penalty cases, about the developments in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show that delves into the biggest stories in crime."

I love how the defense attorney is hung up on how BK got identified as a suspect.

If that's all he's got as a defense.... they are in big trouble.

 

[katydid23]

I love how the defense attorney is hung up on how BK got identified as a suspect.

If that's all he's got as a defense.... they are in big trouble.

Yup. They are still hoping to throw out the Genetic Search process, hoping to then nullify DNA altogether in this case. Dream On....

 

[Cool Cats]

Does anyone know if any members of BK's immediate family have visited him? I would think his father probably has. If so, I wonder what was said? And what he believes.

Not really necessary to go all that way when they have video visits on their tablets they can rent....2 Cents

 

[Cool Cats]

Kemug,
I don't believe he's allowed to have visitors at all, aside from his lawyers, and apparently he's also allowed to see a priest once a week.
In any case, even if his parents or sisters did eventually visit, I can't think of any reason why this should be publicized. I'd imagine the last thing his family wants is a bunch of cameras hounding them.

He should be allowed visitors just like everyone else. The only time inmates are not allowed visitors is for disciplinary reasons. He can video visit on a rented tablet...2 cents

 

[Justice101]

Yup. They are still hoping to throw out the Genetic Search process, hoping to then nullify DNA altogether in this case. Dream On....

Yeh, what does it matter how he got identified?? Would they rather have had a friend of a friend of a friend offer a tip that he thought BK did it?

It doesn't matter how a suspect is identified? it doesn't.

 

[Boxer]

Yeh, what does it matter how he got identified?? Would they rather have had a friend of a friend of a friend offer a tip that he thought BK did it?

It doesn't matter how a suspect is identified? it doesn't.

If the investigation breaks the law, it does. Too fine a point on what makes evidence inadmissable is wrong but so are illegal searches.
AT hopes to find a violation of procedure or something to make a federal case about in the DNA search between the Idaho State Police and Ortham Labs.

 

[10ofRods]

I love how the defense attorney is hung up on how BK got identified as a suspect.

If that's all he's got as a defense.... they are in big trouble.

They are in big trouble but that's only my opinion. Further, everything about the Defense strategy seems to telegraph "we expect a conviction." IMO.

But even more than that, I don't think he's been offered a plea deal. At all. I'm basing that on random impressions about the Latah County DA and looking over his career. I'm basing it on what I believe about both Latah County and Idaho-Wide community feelings. IOW, it's a hunch.

That's why he "stood silent." (Protesting the general state of things and his limited options). That's why they are not only doing but talking about their pre-trial stance of preparing for years of appeals. It's a DP case. They have every write to chew it over and slow it down - and they will.

IMO, the Defense is trying to force the State to the table, and bring about a plea bargain.

What I'd like to know (and have no clue, either for Idaho or any other state that has special provisions for DP cases), whether if the DP is off the table, does BK retain this death penalty qualified team? All of them? Wouldn't these attorneys be under pressure to go use their skills so devotedly in other actual DP cases? Is that third lawyer on the team to handle the situation, if that happens?

I would welcome opinions! And any insights. Or counter-arguments.

 

[10ofRods]

He should be allowed visitors just like everyone else. The only time inmates are not allowed visitors is for disciplinary reasons. He can video visit on a rented tablet...2 cents

The truth is, we simply don't know if he's allowed visitors. We do know that AT & Co. went to court to get some measure of input/control over what mail he gets, as in, mail addressed to BK is apparently diverted to his attorney's office and then somehow, they use their judgment about what he actually gets.

He does get video visits, is my understanding. Last time anyone checked, he had credit on his commissary account (there's some portal or app that allows people to see this or to donate to inmates - but I don't know what it's called - I know it's linked to the Latah County Jail webpage somewhere, possibly in a FAQ).

IOW, he's leading a fairly normal life for a grad student (long hours holed up alone, text-based relationships, lots of reading). The teaching part of grad life is often over after just 2 years. He probably isn't missing that, as it sounds like he didn't enjoy it. He can even take certain courses online at most jails (for free). He's basically living a similar life to what he had before - just with no control over where he eats, and...no social contact to speak of. Would love to know if he was chatty with his family or just hung out online most of the time.

And he doesn't get to do long night runs, or drive around in his car while having a stretch of insomnia.

IMO.

 

[wendy44]

If the investigation breaks the law, it does. Too fine a point on what makes evidence inadmissable is wrong but so are illegal searches.
AT hopes to find a violation of procedure or something to make a federal case about in the DNA search between the Idaho State Police and Ortham Labs.

Yup. They are still hoping to throw out the Genetic Search process, hoping to then nullify DNA altogether in this case. Dream On....

Have they received all of the discovery that was provided to the judge in December regarding the IGG? If so, it's interesting they're still saying they don't know how he was identified as a suspect--indicates they found nothing to show it was the IGG that came first and that avenue for throwing out the DNA is cut off?