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

[Balthazar]

And... I think AT is asking the judhe to validate the absence of any reference. Which is just nonsense. Sift through all the emails in the whole universe for all time and you still might not find one where the FBI expert widens the year range -- there's nothing to say that wasn't a quick conversation over the phone or in person.

I call this sleight of hand. AT's.

Asking the judge to look through thousands of emails in order to find there's nothing there, the absence of which has no bearing on the veracity of the affidavit anyway.

JMO

IF the FBI expert said the timeframe could be changed from 2011-2013 to 2011 - 2016 during a phone call, there should be a Supplemental Report of that call, names, date and time and what was said to prove it was said and that Supplemental Report would have been added to the Warrant under the same number as the Warrant shortly after the call. But, apparently, there is no Supplemental Report under the same number, otherwise AT would have seen it attached to the Warrant, in the same file as the Warrant. If there is no Supplemental Report it never happened under the law. All law enforcement officers know this.

But consider this: We know that authorities were publicly looking for a 2011-2013 Elantra starting on Dec. 7, 2022 and we know that the news was reporting that they were allegedly still looking for a 2011- 2013 white Elantra as late as December 28, 2022. At that point Border Patrol was also searching for a 2011- 2013 White Elantra.There was an article which stated that authorities knew about BK only 2 weeks after the murders on November 29, 2022:

Shocking court documents reveal police began suspecting Kohberger less than 2 weeks after Idaho murders

Newly obtained court documents reveal that authorities investigating the University of Idaho student killings had been keeping a close eye on suspect Bryan Kohberger well before his identity was released to the public.

www.fox13seattle.com

If that article is true, why wasn't the warrant updated with a Supplemental Report about the vehicle year then, BEFORE the MPD told everyone to be on the lookout for a 2011-2013 Elantra on December 7, 2022?

BK was arrested on December 30, 2022 and the Feds were already on their way to arrest him around December 16, 2022 when BK and his father started driving home and they surveilled him for many days BEFORE the arrest, yet there apparently was no Supplemental Report changing the date of the vehicle. Not before the Kohberger's left to drive to Pennsylvania and not after. At the hearing May, 2023, BP never brought that up. BT never brought it up. AJ never brought that up. From this, one must conclude that a Supplemental Report simply does not exist.

Idaho murders: 90 white Elantras were registered to park on campus as cops struggle to find vehicle

The University of Idaho has 90 white Hyundai Elantras registered to park at the school, vehicles similar to the one police are seeking in connection with the quadruple homicide just steps off campus, records show.

www.fox10phoenix.com

https://www.ci.moscow.id.us/DocumentCenter/View/24943/12-19-22-Moscow-Homicide-Update?bidId=

IF the other 3 pieces of evidence used alongside the car and date were very strong, then a mistake like this might be overlooked. However, the other 3 pieces of evidence used in the warrant are so weak that they prove nothing at all, even in their entirety. This is one reason why LE is often so very slow and careful about making an arrest. They want to be certain they have nearly ironclad documented proof before they make their request in the warrant.

This is not sleight of hand by the defense. This case is a mess. I have no idea if Judge Hippler can pull a rabbit out of the hat and somehow cure this or if he is going to have to dismiss the case. No one likes to make an unpopular decision, but sometimes the only real option is to make a lawful one. We'll see how this goes if there is a Frank's Hearing.

There are some new motions:
Motion

11/26/24 Stipulated Motion to Seal Defendant's Amended Memorandum and Exhibits in Support of Franks Hearing

11/26/24 Memorandum
Amended Defendant's Memorandum in Support for a Franks Hearing

 

[Boxer]

IF the FBI expert said the timeframe could be changed from 2011-2013 to 2011 - 2016 during a phone call, there should be a Supplemental Report of that call, names, date and time and what was said to prove it was said and that Supplemental Report would have been added to the Warrant under the same number as the Warrant shortly after the call. But, apparently, there is no Supplemental Report under the same number, otherwise AT would have seen it attached to the Warrant, in the same file as the Warrant. If there is no Supplemental Report it never happened under the law. All law enforcement officers know this.

But consider this: We know that authorities were publicly looking for a 2011-2013 Elantra starting on Dec. 7, 2022 and we know that the news was reporting that they were allegedly still looking for a 2011- 2013 white Elantra as late as December 28, 2022. At that point Border Patrol was also searching for a 2011- 2013 White Elantra.There was an article which stated that authorities knew about BK only 2 weeks after the murders on November 29, 2022:

Shocking court documents reveal police began suspecting Kohberger less than 2 weeks after Idaho murders

Newly obtained court documents reveal that authorities investigating the University of Idaho student killings had been keeping a close eye on suspect Bryan Kohberger well before his identity was released to the public.

www.fox13seattle.com

If that article is true, why wasn't the warrant updated with a Supplemental Report about the vehicle year then, BEFORE the MPD told everyone to be on the lookout for a 2011-2013 Elantra on December 7, 2022?

BK was arrested on December 30, 2022 and the Feds were already on their way to arrest him around December 16, 2022 when BK and his father started driving home and they surveilled him for many days BEFORE the arrest, yet there apparently was no Supplemental Report changing the date of the vehicle. Not before the Kohberger's left to drive to Pennsylvania and not after. At the hearing May, 2023, BP never brought that up. BT never brought it up. AJ never brought that up. From this, one must conclude that a Supplemental Report simply does not exist.

Idaho murders: 90 white Elantras were registered to park on campus as cops struggle to find vehicle

The University of Idaho has 90 white Hyundai Elantras registered to park at the school, vehicles similar to the one police are seeking in connection with the quadruple homicide just steps off campus, records show.

www.fox10phoenix.com

https://www.ci.moscow.id.us/DocumentCenter/View/24943/12-19-22-Moscow-Homicide-Update?bidId=

IF the other 3 pieces of evidence used alongside the car and date were very strong, then a mistake like this might be overlooked. However, the other 3 pieces of evidence used in the warrant are so weak that they prove nothing at all, even in their entirety. This is one reason why LE is often so very slow and careful about making an arrest. They want to be certain they have nearly ironclad documented proof before they make their request in the warrant.

This is not sleight of hand by the defense. This case is a mess. I have no idea if Judge Hippler can pull a rabbit out of the hat and somehow cure this or if he is going to have to dismiss the case. No one likes to make an unpopular decision, but sometimes the only real option is to make a lawful one. We'll see how this goes if there is a Frank's Hearing.

There are some new motions:
Motion

11/26/24 Stipulated Motion to Seal Defendant's Amended Memorandum and Exhibits in Support of Franks Hearing

11/26/24 Memorandum
Amended Defendant's Memorandum in Support for a Franks Hearing

His DNA is on the sheath of the murder knife.

 

[girlhasnoname]

His DNA is on the sheath of the murder knife.

Exactly and it was a single source DNA of BK's, so there's that...

MOO

 

[mrjitty]

thanks for the answers.

I am struggling to have a strong view on the validity and strength of this allegation when i can’t read the Franks memo or the supporting emails.

I will say It’s not a good sign that the defence could not particularise the allegation leading to the Judge tossing the Franks

I will also say that just because the defence is claiming something in a franks does not mean said thing happened like they say as has been aptly demonstrated to the Delphi vets here.

we shall see!

 

[INfisherman]

thanks for the answers.

I am struggling to have a strong view on the validity and strength of this allegation when i can’t read the Franks memo or the supporting emails.

I will say It’s not a good sign that the defence could not particularise the allegation leading to the Judge tossing the Franks

I will also say that just because the defence is claiming something in a franks does not mean said thing happened like they say as has been aptly demonstrated to the Delphi vets here.

we shall see!

I agree. Lots of ifs being thrown around to be more than a theory. Judge will decide, regardless & I doubt it will favor the defense. This may potentially open doors for any case using model years of car descriptions to be up for appeals on those grounds. "But they didn’t get my vehicle model year correct, just the make & model", which is what is used for all sorts of reasons to focus on a potential suspect in other cases & everyday traffic stops.

This is typical defense misdirection, like you point out. Similar strategy was employed in the Delphi trial. The D can make all the claims they want. At the point they decide to open that particular door, they have to have evidence to show it. If it were so easy to prove, why throw a mess of unorganized papers at the court? Maybe some smoke but I’m not feeling any heat from a fire yet. Seems to be more of a desperate attempt at distraction than anything.

MOO

 

[MassGuy]

I agree. Lots of ifs being thrown around to be more than a theory. Judge will decide, regardless & I doubt it will favor the defense. This may potentially open doors for any case using model years of car descriptions to be up for appeals on those grounds. "But they didn’t get my vehicle model year correct, just the make & model", which is what is used for all sorts of reasons to focus on a potential suspect in other cases & everyday traffic stops.

This is typical defense misdirection, like you point out. Similar strategy was employed in the Delphi trial. The D can make all the claims they want. At the point they decide to open that particular door, they have to have evidence to show it. If it were so easy to prove, why throw a mess of unorganized papers at the court? Maybe some smoke but I’m not feeling any heat from a fire yet. Seems to be more of a desperate attempt at distraction than anything.

MOO

The fact that only a few people on the internet are concerned about this case being in jeopardy, tells you all you need to know. This is beyond silly.

Standard defense tactics that are doomed to failure.

 

[INfisherman]

The fact that only a few people on the internet are concerned about this case being in jeopardy, tells you all you need to know. This is beyond silly.

Standard defense tactics that are doomed to failure.

Seems like they’re following the Rozzi & Baldwin playbook almost to the letter. Throw everything out, everything was unwarranted. Any mention of Odinists out stargazing & pillaging nearby yet?

 

[Balthazar]

His DNA is on the sheath of the murder knife.

Unfortunately it is touch DNA - a sample of 20 or so skin cells on an easily moveable object (according to Howard Blum.) The truth is that touch DNA is fairly meaningless. It doesn't even prove the person touched the object that it was found on and it definitely cannot tell us when it was deposited. It could have been there for months. Touch DNA comes off of us when we're just walking around. We shed as many as 400,000 of these cells per day.

You might find these articles interesting:

Federal Court Says 'Touch DNA' Analysis Is Mostly Guesswork That Can't Be Used As Evidence

Dna Junk (PDF) Dna Junk (Text)

www.techdirt.com

Touch DNA. What is it? Where is it? How much can be found? And, how can it impact my case? | Ryan Forensic

 

[snooptroop88]

What exactly is the lie?

That the expert determined the vehicle seen in cctv to be consistent with a 2011-2013 Hyundai Elantra, later expanded to include 2015 (new range 2011-2013)?

If anyone could point me to where this expert or any other said it was absolutely a 2011-2013 and could NOT be any other year....

I believe AT's fancy footwork is this: maybe nowhere in the vast email collection is there an email between BP and the expert expanding the years outside 2011-2013. Doh. Email isn't the only form of communication in the world. It could well be documented elsewhere as about a thirty second phone call. As likely it was an informal conversation between the expert and BP or any other detective working the case.

BK is not going to walk free because an expert's preliminary vehicle analysis was off by two years. Nor is there any real evidence that BP misrepresented anything about the vehicle or the FBI description of it.

IMO if AT had a legitimate point, she'd make it directly, in one clear page.

She's wasting trees.

JMO

Agreed! This could be SUCH a nothingburger that AT may well have the judge searching for literally that: nothing. Correct. The judge needs to... find the void, this critical piece of nothing. This nothingburger adds a whole new dimension to the whole idea of a "nothingburger."

And also agreed that trees everywhere are endangered by this supposedly vegan client. Their leaves are trembling.

But he has proof on his phone that he was star gazing on other nights.

The defense wants us to believe that photos from other nights equates to an alibi for the night he is accused of murder.

Pretend alibi jury will see through.

2 Cents

Star gazing. I want an eye roll emoji on here. Seriously. I find it incredibly ironic that AT's making the judge play "Where's Waldo?" with this motion after already trying to make us play "Where's Bryan?" with that "alibi."

No worries, we know where Bryan was. Like this newest desperate effort by D is going to succeed? I agree this case is a mess, but it's thanks to the "Where's Waldo?" defense team where I already know-- there's no point to reach. It's just lumbering daily towards the firing squad, from what I can see.

 

[concernedcitizen706]

I thought LE purposely mis stated the dates on the white Elantra in order to fool Bryan. That was part of the police's idea to give false information to the public about everything about the case early on, because they knew BK was watching. That whole early story about the girls not calling until later and all the people getting there at the house the first day and everything pointing to jack S, was all a smoke screen by the FBI. And it's funny how so many bloggers still believe all that early crap that was thrown out by police, even now.

Police wanted Bryan to think that police did not have any good evidence about the case, and that all the evidence was destroyed and or pointing to other people, because they wanted him to let his guard down. They also wanted him to think that they had the wrong dates on the car.

Probably Bryan was already a suspect for some of the other murders around there, and police already knew about him. That's how they caught on to him so quick.

 

[concernedcitizen706]

I don't believe it matters what year the white Elantra was. The two facts that it was, a white Elantra, near the scene of the crime, is good enough. Even if they lied about the dates, that is not really a material lie. Because first of all the cars look almost identical, and especially on a blurry late night camera. So I don't think this will do much, to get the case thrown out.

 

[jepop]

None of the speculation stemming from a footnote (!) Hippler gave *by way of example* in his order, points in any meaningful way to the case being thrown out. IMO. Holy moly! Hippler simply ordered defense to get with it and pare the original memorandum the heck down (paraphrasing) and cut back the exhibits to only what is relevant.

The defense subsequently resubmitted the sealed Franks memorandum on 26th November. Assuming they did something to make it non ambiguous and clearer. Now we wait for P responses to that and pros responses on the many motions to suppress. Due Dec 6th. Subsequent D replies by 23rd Dec.

Docs including Hippler's no messing around ( don't *** with me) schedule all posted a few times up thread.

As I understand it, Hippler will make a decision as to whether there is even cause for a Franks hearing ( guessing from my reading in other threads the bar is high and defense needs substantive proof of deliberate and knowingly intentional misleading in warrants.). He will likely decide some time between Dec 6th and Jan 23rd moo. He may not even need to wait for P responses and/or subsequent D replies if there is insufficient factual proof in the D's resubmitted memo and (assume) pared down exhibits. The Franks is slightly different to the Motions to Suppress imo because it is up to court to decide if there will even be a hearing to hear oral argument. Jmo

My personal opinion is court will find no basis for a Franks hearing. Hippler's not one to waste time if the D's written submissions are lacking. Jmo.
.
My personal guess to add to the speculation: We'll get to see the basis of defense's argument (such as it may be) in an order denying a franks hearing before Jan 23rd (which is date scheduled for Hearing Suppress Motions). Looking forward.
Jmo

Docs at

Idaho Judicial Cases of Interest

 

[Warwick7]

The prosecution has BK’s DNA on the button of the knife’s sheath, which was on the bed partially under a body. How is he going to weasel out of that?

Here is one way:

BK simply says … “I bought a knife with a sheath just like that. Last time I saw it was when I put it in my desk drawer at the college. The next day it was gone. Instead of accusing me, why aren’t the police talking to the students and janitorial staff?”

Remember, it only takes one juror to create a hung jury!

However.....

The past trials I've followed here showed jurors as thinking people. They've used there reasoning, thinking logically and rationally. Every time they come back with a guilty verdict.

 

[mrjitty]

it obviously would not be cool if the affiant did perjure himself over the change of year, though i doubt he'd be that stupid in a hearing where he had legal support. So i'd be quite surprised if he did that.

 

[StarryStarryNight]

The FBI examiner determined the date range to be 2011-2013.

BP wrote in the PCA that the FBI analyst widened the range from 2011-2013 to 2011 - 2016. But apparently AT believes that is not what happened based on the emails between BP and the FBI analyst. If BP took it upon himself to widen the date range even though the FBI analyst disagreed, then this is a lie in the PCA, a sworn court document.
All JMO.

No need to apologize, our legal system is complex.

All JMO

“But apparently AT believes that is not what happened based on the emails between BP and the FBI analyst.”

First, as for me, I’m not going to make sweeping changes in what I think about a case based on what a defense attorney “believes”.
Second, why would BP even require the FBI’s agreement to make that change in the car’s model years? Sure, consult with them, discuss it with them. They don’t have to agree and the FBI doesn’t get the final say on this…it’s BP’s case. He gets to make that call.
For AT to mangle this into a reason to dismiss the case is a far far far reach.
She can’t wash away the DNA, so she tries to free a quad-killer by parsing words.
That’s not justice in my opinion.

Opinion.

 

[MassGuy]

Unfortunately it is touch DNA - a sample of 20 or so skin cells on an easily moveable object (according to Howard Blum.) The truth is that touch DNA is fairly meaningless. It doesn't even prove the person touched the object that it was found on and it definitely cannot tell us when it was deposited. It could have been there for months. Touch DNA comes off of us when we're just walking around. We shed as many as 400,000 of these cells per day.

You might find these articles interesting:

Federal Court Says 'Touch DNA' Analysis Is Mostly Guesswork That Can't Be Used As Evidence

Dna Junk (PDF) Dna Junk (Text)

www.techdirt.com

Touch DNA. What is it? Where is it? How much can be found? And, how can it impact my case? | Ryan Forensic

Touch DNA comes into play in many cases we follow on here, and yes, it can be meaningless for the reasons you say.

I’m following one right now where multiple objects have multiple touch DNA profiles, with some of the samples mixed with several people.

Many of those profiles have a legitimate reason for being on the objects in question, and thus, aren’t incriminating.

This case isn’t like that; not at all.

There is a single sample on an object that we know for a fact the killer touched. Brian Kohberger’s DNA had absolutely no business being at that scene, as he had no previous connection to the house, nor the victims.

Couple that with the fact that this guy’s alibi couldn’t possibly be more hilarious/damning, then it becomes completely unreasonable not to believe he’s the guy.

No one is going to believe that the DNA has an innocent explanation, and BK was stargazing with his phone off at the precise time in question.

Not with the rest of it.

 

[mrjitty]

“But apparently AT believes that is not what happened based on the emails between BP and the FBI analyst.”

First, as for me, I’m not going to make sweeping changes in what I think about a case based on what a defense attorney “believes”.
Second, why would BP even require the FBI’s agreement to make that change in the car’s model years? Sure, consult with them, discuss it with them. They don’t have to agree and the FBI doesn’t get the final say on this…it’s BP’s case. He gets to make that call.
For AT to mangle this into a reason to dismiss the case is a far far far reach.
She can’t wash away the DNA, so she tries to free a quad-killer by parsing words.
That’s not justice in my opinion.

Opinion.

That is the part i don't get with this theory.

Clearly LE believed the cars were the same - so why not simply say that? There would be no reason to include this alleged lie let alone to double down on it on the stand.

 

[Megnut]

Toward this end, AT  could put the FBI on the stand as a defense witness (at trial) to ask him to share all his credentials, ask him if he reviewed all the available CCTV in November of 2023, and if he deternined the vehicle to be a 2011-2013 Hyundai Elantra. She can pull out his report, elicit a yes from him.

And the State could shut it down with one question: upon review of a 2015 Hyundai Elentra belonging to BK, did you determine the earlier image could be a newer model?

Which is why she won't call him.

She's trying to snowglobe the judge.

But so far, she can't even make a case for a hearing, let alone proving any deceit.

The FBI expert, if asked, surely believes there is only car, BK's matches the ones in the early videos, previously misidentified by two years.

BK was not driving around in his Elantra in Utah stargazing while someone else was driving a slightly older model Elantra into Moscow to leave BK and only BK's DNA on the touchpoint of the sheath to the murder weapon.

Asking the judge to find the absence of a conversation within the limited communication of email as if it proves something is... inventive. I'll give her that.

JMO

 

[Nila Aella]

“But apparently AT believes that is not what happened based on the emails between BP and the FBI analyst.”

First, as for me, I’m not going to make sweeping changes in what I think about a case based on what a defense attorney “believes”.
Second, why would BP even require the FBI’s agreement to make that change in the car’s model years? Sure, consult with them, discuss it with them. They don’t have to agree and the FBI doesn’t get the final say on this…it’s BP’s case. He gets to make that call.
For AT to mangle this into a reason to dismiss the case is a far far far reach.
She can’t wash away the DNA, so she tries to free a quad-killer by parsing words.
That’s not justice in my opinion.

Opinion.

PCA:
After reviewing the numerous observations of Suspect Vehicle 1, the forensic examiner initially believed that Suspect Vehicle 1 was a20ll-2013 Hyundai Elantra. Upon further review, he indicated it could also be a2011-2016 Hyundai Elantra. As a result, investigators have been reviewing information on persons in possession of a vehicle that is a 201 1-2016 white Hyundai Elantra.

The sealed FM has 38 exhibits.

IGG is a major focus as are the basic facts used to support an arrest.

From the MTS Arrest warrant

The basic facts Cpl. Payne used to support the arrest are discussed in detail in a separately filed motion pursuant to Franks v. Delaware 438 U.S. 154 (1978).

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2024/111424-Motion-Supress-Memorandum-Support-Arrest-Warrant.pdf

From the MTS ATT

All information in the affidavit was gathered because of law enforcement’s unconstitutional use of Investigative Genetic Genealogy, and thus nothing in the warrant should remain.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2024/111424-Motion-Supress-Memorandum-Support-ATT-First-Warrant.pdf

The FM is about more than a car identification. The car identification is only one basic fact in the PCA. The car is under discussion because of a footnote in an Order and the previous testimony of BP.

ETA links

JMO

 

[StarryStarryNight]

PCA:
After reviewing the numerous observations of Suspect Vehicle 1, the forensic examiner initially believed that Suspect Vehicle 1 was a20ll-2013 Hyundai Elantra. Upon further review, he indicated it could also be a2011-2016 Hyundai Elantra. As a result, investigators have been reviewing information on persons in possession of a vehicle that is a 201 1-2016 white Hyundai Elantra.

The sealed FM has 38 exhibits.

IGG is a major focus as are the basic facts used to support an arrest.

From the MTS Arrest warrant

The basic facts Cpl. Payne used to support the arrest are discussed in detail in a separately filed motion pursuant to Franks v. Delaware 438 U.S. 154 (1978).

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2024/111424-Motion-Supress-Memorandum-Support-Arrest-Warrant.pdf

From the MTS ATT

All information in the affidavit was gathered because of law enforcement’s unconstitutional use of Investigative Genetic Genealogy, and thus nothing in the warrant should remain.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/2024/111424-Motion-Supress-Memorandum-Support-ATT-First-Warrant.pdf

The FM is about more than a car identification. The car identification is only one basic fact in the PCA. The car is under discussion because of a footnote in an Order and the previous testimony of BP.

ETA links

JMO

Thanks.
I was only replying regarding what was said about the car.
I do, however, disagree on everything put forth in these motions by the defense.

My thoughts