4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #97

[Justice101]

Sorry, when was the estimated trial date?

 

[Swansee]

@sunshineray , sorry I took a while to reply to your post in the last thread, but I'm still trying to wrap my head around why a federal grand jury was involved in this case.
AFAIK, those are for federal crimes, and FGJs don't seem to be used just because a suspect has crossed state lines to commit a crime, or a suspect is being arrested in a different state than where the crime happened.
As far as I could tell, the murders that do end up going to a FGJ either involve criminal organizations or took place on reservations.
Example
Example 2
Per Wikipedia, these are the types of crimes a FGJ typically deals with :
"mail fraud, aircraft hijacking, carjacking, kidnapping, lynching, bank robbery, child p**********, credit card fraud, identity theft, computer crimes, federal hate crimes, animal cruelty, violations of the Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), obscenity, tax evasion, counterfeiting, violations of the Espionage Act, violations of the Patriot Act (pre-2020), illegal wiretapping, art theft from a museum, damaging or destroying public mailboxes, electoral fraud, immigration offenses, and since 1965 in the aftermath of President John F. Kennedy's assassination, assassinating or attempting assassination of the President or Vice President." Source
What does any of that have to do with BK, or even the Idaho 4 case as a whole?

 

[sunshineray]

@sunshineray , sorry I took a while to reply to your post in the last thread, but I'm still trying to wrap my head around why a federal grand jury was involved in this case.
AFAIK, those are for federal crimes, and FGJs don't seem to be used just because a suspect has crossed state lines to commit a crime, or a suspect is being arrested in a different state than where the crime happened.
As far as I could tell, the murders that do end up going to a FGJ either involve criminal organizations or took place on reservations.
Example
Example 2
Per Wikipedia, these are the types of crimes a FGJ typically deals with :
"mail fraud, aircraft hijacking, carjacking, kidnapping, lynching, bank robbery, child p**********, credit card fraud, identity theft, computer crimes, federal hate crimes, animal cruelty, violations of the Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), obscenity, tax evasion, counterfeiting, violations of the Espionage Act, violations of the Patriot Act (pre-2020), illegal wiretapping, art theft from a museum, damaging or destroying public mailboxes, electoral fraud, immigration offenses, and since 1965 in the aftermath of President John F. Kennedy's assassination, assassinating or attempting assassination of the President or Vice President." Source
What does any of that have to do with BK, or even the Idaho 4 case as a whole?

Only one thing I can see that MIGHT even be connected on that list is the hacking (by password he I'm guessing set up?) to that woman's security systems cameras? Thanjs for that info Swansee, very curious now as to why a FGJ was convened for this.

 

[schooling]

Only one thing I can see that MIGHT even be connected on that list is the hacking (by password he I'm guessing set up?) to that woman's security systems cameras? Thanjs for that info Swansee, very curious now as to why a FGJ was convened for this.

@Swansee @sunshineray

This is all MOO as I'm not an expert of any kind and this is me going off of memory....

From what I remember reading, if evidence is carried from one state to another or the investigation involves organizations across states (or federally) then a Federal Grand Jury can be sought. It centralizes oversight and makes obtaining evidence (financial, phone, internet, etc) less reliant on state jurisdiction. MOO, JMO, IMO (did I miss any?)

So it was more of a strategy thing. Which I remember the defense trying to challenge? I think.....? MOO

MOO

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

Only one thing I can see that MIGHT even be connected on that list is the hacking (by password he I'm guessing set up?) to that woman's security systems cameras? Thanjs for that info Swansee, very curious now as to why a FGJ was convened for this.

I was thinking same - hacking systems or using spyware or installing some form of technology to spy / stalk? Or perhaps extricating someone's personal details from a secure database by nefarious methods or deception?

 

[cherrybier]

Sorry, when was the estimated trial date?

August 2nd I believe.

 

[PinkParis2052]

Sorry, when was the estimated trial date?

August 2nd I believe.

It's Aug 11, 2025.

 

[sunshineray]

@Swansee @sunshineray

This is all MOO as I'm not an expert of any kind and this is me going off of memory....

From what I remember reading, if evidence is carried from one state to another or the investigation involves organizations across states (or federally) then a Federal Grand Jury can be sought. It centralizes oversight and makes obtaining evidence (financial, phone, internet, etc) less reliant on state jurisdiction. MOO, JMO, IMO (did I miss any?)

So it was more of a strategy thing. Which I remember the defense trying to challenge? I think.....? MOO

MOO

Ahhh so the car, his, his clothes.

 

[PinkParis2052]

• 11/26/2024 STIPULATED MOTION TO SEAL DEFENDANT'S AMENDED MEMORANDUM AND EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF FRANKS HEARING

Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest
ETA Link

 

[Tricia]

Hey Everyone,
We need your help keeping Websleuths ad-free.
Subscribe to DNA Solves and make a monthly donation. Five dollars or whatever you can do is greatly appreciated. That's all you have to do to keep the obnoxious ads off of Websleuths.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR A MONTHLY DONATION TO DNA SOLVES
By subscribing and making a monthly donation, you will be helping the families finally get the answers they deserve.
Please do not discuss this on this thread. CLICK HERE if you would like to discuss further or have any questions.
Thank you,
Tricia Griffith
Manager/Websleuths.com

 

[jepop]

• 11/26/2024 STIPULATED MOTION TO SEAL DEFENDANT'S AMENDED MEMORANDUM AND EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF FRANKS HEARING

Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest
ETA Link

Next dates of interest, Dec 6th for State Responses to Mots to Suppress, (and Mot for Franks hearing? )then Dec 20th for Defense Responses to State's Responses.

Judge Hippler could rule on Motion for Franks Hearing any time after Dec 6th maybe? Guessing. But is separate technically from Mots to Suppress(?), which are scheduled to be heard on 23rd Jan next year (which is actually only about two months away/around nine weeks or so, already!).

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2024/100924-Redacted-Order-Governing-Proceedings-Notice-Setting.pdf

ETA link

 

[Balthazar]

It could agree, my point is it's not really damning if he had a bag of weed on him.

Agree.

 

[Balthazar]

Maybe this is silly, but I did wonder if the Defense did that on purpose. They've been complaining about receiving massive amounts of unlabeled, disorganized, snowglobe-style discovery. It did cross my mind that maybe their "mistake" was done purposefully, to give the judge a taste of the kind of situation they themselves are in. The judge's reply is almost word for word the kind of complaint AT had been making: there's no way to comb through all this unlabeled stuff in a timely way. JMO and speculation of course!

I believe its was done intentionally by the defense to demonstrate something to the Judge. For example, in the email thread, are there subtle differences in what appears at first glance to be identical emails but on detailed inspection are not identical at all?

JMO.

 

[GRT]

This is an afterthought I had, and maybe someone brought it up in the 90-plus threads we have on this case, but if so, I haven't seen it.

Is it known if any of the murdered students had an Alexa device in their rooms that may have captured some audio of the killing?

 

[PinkParis2052]

This is an afterthought I had, and maybe someone brought it up in the 90-plus threads we have on this case, but if so, I haven't seen it.

Is it known if any of the murdered students had an Alexa device in their rooms that may have captured some audio of the killing?

If they did have an Alexa, Alexa requires a "wake word" which means you have to say "Alexa" and then state your request and it doesn't record 24/7 but it's listening all the time for the "wake word". IMO.

 

[Bahshudc]

Murderer jailed for life after Alexa recordings bring him to justice

Daniel White, 36, kicked open his wife Angie White's locked bedroom door and strangled her before cutting her throat with a Stanley knife in October last year.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Murder solved by Amazon Alexa, but only because he used the wake word.

 

[schooling]

If they did have an Alexa, Alexa requires a "wake word" which means you have to say "Alexa" and then state your request and it doesn't record 24/7 but it's listening all the time for the "wake word". IMO.

They'd also have to be opted into allowing Amazon to retain and use the commands issued to the Echo device. Amazon uses the recordings to check for accuracy and to train their machine learning models (MOO).

Otherwise your audio is immediately disposed of after the it's processed on their servers.

I'm pretty sure the 'Allow Amazon' retention feature is on by default for most of their devices. So you'd have to know to go in there and manually turn it off.

 

[Balthazar]

The email thread that Judge Hippler is complaining about is proof of something for the requested Frank's Hearing.

A Franks Hearing is a hearing in which the defense must prove that LE lied in order to obtain a warrant.

I believe AT gathered the proof of a lie from the testimony of BP shown here:

There is much about BP's testimony on that particular day which gave me pause, however, it became clear to me that AT was nailing down his testimony under oath starting at about 16:00. I believe the key question comes at 16:30. I think everyone here is aware that attorneys never ask questions in a courtroom unless they already know the answer. AT is no exception.

I'm not sure why the judge would want the defense to limit the evidence shown to him when the defense is clearly exposing an electronic email "paper trail." The situation may be that ALL of the emails read in their totality ARE the evidence. In the hearing I linked, BP claimed he received an email from the FBI car identification agent saying the Elantra model might date 2011 - 2016 instead of the original 2011-2013.

BP replied:
17:18
BP: that it would have been his his input as an expert in vehicle identification

BP claimed the FBI car expert decided that a 2014 - 2016 Elantra could be mistaken for a 2011-13 Elantra. Take a look at these pictures:

white 2011 Elantra:

2011 Pearl White Hyundai Elantra GLS #84042946 Photo #6 | GTCarLot.com - Car Color Galleries

gtcarlot.com

white 2015 Elantra:

%VEHICLE_SEARCH_PAGE_KEYWORDS_CAP_FIRST_LETTER% Vehicles for Sale in %CITY%, %STATE% | %DEALER_NAME%

Search %VEHICLE_SEARCH_PAGE_KEYWORDS% vehicles for sale in %CITY%, %STATE% at %DEALER_NAME%. We're your auto dealership serving %DEALER_GEO_ONE%, %DEALER_GEO_TWO%, and %DEALER_GEO_THREE%.

www.mygalleriachevrolet.com

If you ignore the wheels and just compare the two car bodies, it quickly becomes apparent that a 2015 Elantra could NEVER be confused with a 2011 Elantra, most especially NOT by an FBI car expert. Not even in the dark.

We will learn more at the forthcoming Jan. 23 Motion Hearing.

All JMO.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Hmm, we actually agree on a lot other than that I will believe the Amazon k-bar (and coveralls) purchase when I see that in court documents. Obviously, if he did buy it and it's disappeared, that's going to be a tough one for him to get out of, as I wrote. I guess I didn't write clearly. Or sometimes people read too fast. Happens to me too!
Of course we can all speculate!
For me personally, the recent discovery that the "has anyone else been arrested" statement was actually bogus has put a massive dent in any assumptions I had previously made through media reports. I really did believe that one. Thankfully, the trial is only seven months away now.

Maybe this is silly, but I did wonder if the Defense did that on purpose. They've been complaining about receiving massive amounts of unlabeled, disorganized, snowglobe-style discovery. It did cross my mind that maybe their "mistake" was done purposefully, to give the judge a taste of the kind of situation they themselves are in. The judge's reply is almost word for word the kind of complaint AT had been making: there's no way to comb through all this unlabeled stuff in a timely way. JMO and speculation of course!

If the Defense did this on purpose, they really shot themselves in their own foot with Judge Hippler. It appears he doesn't suffer foolishness period and a Death Penalty High Profile Case would be the last place I would expect to see any lawyer try and do so.

The State, IMO, has provided what they have had to this Defense except the drilled down GGI information, which they didn't have from the FBI that AT wanted to begin with. Kind of tough to make the FBI respond on your timeline.

<RSBBM>
Other than that, I don't know of what "They've been complaining about receiving massive amounts of unlabeled, disorganized, snowglobe-style discovery" you are speaking about.

JMO

 

[Boxer]

The email thread that Judge Hippler is complaining about is proof of something for the requested Frank's Hearing.

A Franks Hearing is a hearing in which the defense must prove that LE lied in order to obtain a warrant.

I believe AT gathered the proof of a lie from the testimony of BP shown here:

There is much about BP's testimony on that particular day which gave me pause, however, it became clear to me that AT was nailing down his testimony under oath starting at about 16:00. I believe the key question comes at 16:30. I think everyone here is aware that attorneys never ask questions in a courtroom unless they already know the answer. AT is no exception.

I'm not sure why the judge would want the defense to limit the evidence shown to him when the defense is clearly exposing an electronic email "paper trail." The situation may be that ALL of the emails read in their totality ARE the evidence. In the hearing I linked, BP claimed he received an email from the FBI car identification agent saying the Elantra model might date 2011 - 2016 instead of the original 2011-2013.

BP replied:
17:18
BP: that it would have been his his input as an expert in vehicle identification

BP claimed the FBI car expert decided that a 2014 - 2016 Elantra could be mistaken for a 2011-13 Elantra. Take a look at these pictures:

white 2011 Elantra:
View attachment 548029

2011 Pearl White Hyundai Elantra GLS #84042946 Photo #6 | GTCarLot.com - Car Color Galleries

gtcarlot.com

white 2015 Elantra:
View attachment 548026

%VEHICLE_SEARCH_PAGE_KEYWORDS_CAP_FIRST_LETTER% Vehicles for Sale in %CITY%, %STATE% | %DEALER_NAME%

Search %VEHICLE_SEARCH_PAGE_KEYWORDS% vehicles for sale in %CITY%, %STATE% at %DEALER_NAME%. We're your auto dealership serving %DEALER_GEO_ONE%, %DEALER_GEO_TWO%, and %DEALER_GEO_THREE%.

www.mygalleriachevrolet.com

If you ignore the wheels and just compare the two car bodies, it quickly becomes apparent that a 2015 Elantra could NEVER be confused with a 2011 Elantra, most especially NOT by an FBI car expert. Not even in the dark.

We will learn more at the forthcoming Jan. 23 Motion Hearing.

All JMO.

MOO They look almost identical.
I personally went through Car
Max etc. looking at Elantras and saw that the 2014 and later models were almost indeistinguishable long before the year correction.