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

[katydid23]

If BK's arrest at his family home had gone wrong, would he have been capable of killing them all, I wonder? Himself and his parents? (and his sisters? It is unclear to me if they were there at the time.)

I know his parents were there---not sure about his sisters.

I do think LE had to be concerned about that possibility. Sometimes suspects do hold family members hostage, when LE arrives with an arrest warrant. IIRC, that is why they barged through the doors with SWAT team, instead of politely knocking. A polite knock would allow an agitated, paranoid murder suspect time to grab weapons or hostages and things can go sideways.

 

[Nila Aella]

MOO the point is that Elantras are the same model design years.
His fits the video of leaving Pullman, circling the King Rd. house, leaving Moscow and returning to Pullman in the morniing.

According to BP testimony, there is no video of the car leaving Moscow, on any route.

43.33 start of exchange on video
45:23 Video depicting the car

jmo

 

[Balthazar]

Wasn't that said by LE back at the start of the case?

Not that I am aware. I haven't been able to find a source for it. That's why I'm curious.

 

[Nila Aella]

I think LE thought that might be a real possibility and that is why they made such a forceful tactical SWAT raid on the house in the early morning hours. They did recover a gun in the SW, I think BK could have been capable of anything, including killing himself if he'd been able to get to the weapon.

I feel sorry for his parents, I think they've always tried to help BK above and beyond in every way they could. They are victims of his actions as well.

JMO

There was no ammunition recovered from the home.
jmo

 

[Swansee]

I think they just decided to do it immediately after the paternity test results gave them the justification they needed, just rushed in to get it done asap. Nothing else to it.
If he had been jogging at that moment, they would have scooped him up outside. He happened to be indoors so they got him indoors.

JMO

 

[Swansee]

Not that I am aware. I haven't been able to find a source for it. That's why I'm curious.

I don't believe this was actually ever stated by any official.
This is probably something that was inferred by either a media "expert" or perhaps it was in one of Howard Blum's pieces or something of the sort. I guess the idea being that such crevices would be a difficult area to clean, therefore likely to be where DNA might be found. But I never read from an official source exactly what part of the snap button they found the sample on.

 

[SamiSleuth]

I don't believe this was actually ever stated by any official.
This is probably something that was inferred by either a media "expert" or perhaps it was in one of Howard Blum's pieces or something of the sort. I guess the idea being that such crevices would be a difficult area to clean, therefore likely to be where DNA might be found. But I never read from an official source exactly what part of the snap button they found the sample on.

It was in the PCA on page 2:
"The Idaho state lab later located a single source of male DNA (suspect Profile) left on the button
snap of the knife sheath."

 

[Swansee]

It was in the PCA on page 2:
"The Idaho state lab later located a single source of male DNA (suspect Profile) left on the button
snap of the knife sheath."

Yes it was on the button snap, that much is clear.
The question was about what part of the snap, since there were some posters here who seemed to remember the dna being specifically found in the ridges of it. AFAIK there was never any specific statement about where on the button snap the dna was collected from.
I'm not sure it matters, but maybe it does.

 

[SamiSleuth]

@Swansee
You're correct, sorry for any confusion.
I don't post often, but I've been lurking for years. I do remember the convos around here about that 'snap' and thinking 'ok, I'm just old and nobody knows sewing anymore', lol! See, I was taught to sew from about age 8, and I know how to sew snaps onto fabric. The two sections that hold together we called the 'snap'; the 'button' was what cosmetically covered the piece sewn onto fabric where it would later show. So, on a knife sheath, I was thinking of the 'button' as the piece that shows when the sheath is closed; the 'snap' is both the male and female connecting parts you see when you open the sheath.
But, since it's highly unlikely Office Payne (or the attorney helping him) grew up with a similar 'home ec' style education, it's also unlikely he was using the terms to clarify that it was on the button snap portion, lol!

 

[Nila Aella]

@Swansee
You're correct, sorry for any confusion.
I don't post often, but I've been lurking for years. I do remember the convos around here about that 'snap' and thinking 'ok, I'm just old and nobody knows sewing anymore', lol! See, I was taught to sew from about age 8, and I know how to sew snaps onto fabric. The two sections that hold together we called the 'snap'; the 'button' was what cosmetically covered the piece sewn onto fabric where it would later show. So, on a knife sheath, I was thinking of the 'button' as the piece that shows when the sheath is closed; the 'snap' is both the male and female connecting parts you see when you open the sheath.
But, since it's highly unlikely Office Payne (or the attorney helping him) grew up with a similar 'home ec' style education, it's also unlikely he was using the terms to clarify that it was on the button snap portion, lol!

LOL. I thought the same.
Button and Snap.
Later in the protective order documents, it just says button.
jmo

edit to add:

P motion for protective order just says on the sheath

The Idaho State Police Lab in Meridian, Idaho, located DNA on the Ka-Bar knife sheath.

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/061623+States+Motion+for+Protective+Order.pdf

D objection to protective order says button

ldaho State Police Lab in Meridian, Idaho located DNA on the button of the sheath and

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/062323+Objection+to+States+Motion+for+Protective+Order.pdf

 

[Boxer]

According to BP testimony, there is no video of the car leaving Moscow, on any route.

43.33 start of exchange on video
45:23 Video depicting the car

jmo

Sorry, you sre right video is further down in Lewston, it was his phone pinging near Blaine south of Moscow.

 

[Nila Aella]

Sorry, you sre right video is further down in Lewston, it was his phone pinging near Blaine south of Moscow.

The video capture in Clarkston is at 12:36pm Nov 13

PCA
Further analysis of the cellular data provided showed the 8458 Phone utilized cellular resources on November 13, 2022 consistent with the Phone travelling from Pullman, Washington to Lewiston, Idaho via US Highway 195. At approximately 12:36 p.m., the 8458 Phone utilized cellular resources that would provide coverage to Kate's Cup of Joe coffee stand located at 8 l0 Port Drive, Clartston, WA. Surveillance footage from the US Chefs Store located at t20 Port Drive, Clarkson, WA and adjacent to Kate's Cup of Joe showed a white Elantra, consistent with Suspect Vehicle l, drive past Kate's Cup of Joe at a time consistent with the cellular data from the 8548 Phone.

jmo
edit to correct spelling

 

[Nila Aella]

Motion hearing 12/11/24 that was added to the Summary page



ETA link

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/Summary/Case-Summary-Kohberger-12062024.pdf

 

[Boxer]

The video capture in Clarkston is at 12:36pm Nov 13

PCA
Further analysis of the cellular data provided showed the 8458 Phone utilized cellular resources on November 13, 2022 consistent with the Phone travelling from Pullman, Washington to Lewiston, Idaho via US Highway 195. At approximately 12:36 p.m., the 8458 Phone utilized cellular resources that would provide coverage to Kate's Cup of Joe coffee stand located at 8 l0 Port Drive, Clartston, WA. Surveillance footage from the US Chefs Store located at t20 Port Drive, Clarkson, WA and adjacent to Kate's Cup of Joe showed a white Elantra, consistent with Suspect Vehicle l, drive past Kate's Cup of Joe at a time consistent with the cellular data from the 8548 Phone.

jmo
edit to correct spelling

I meant the 4:48am ping on highway 95 by Blaine.

 

[Swansee]

Dbm

 

[Swansee]

Hmm I am surprised about the lack of reply from the State on the docket by the Dec 6 deadline. Maybe just be a lag in the online update process to the docket?

Motion hearing 12/11/24 that was added to the Summary page

In conjunction with the lack of States response, this surprise hearing set for next week seems kind of odd.
Could this be about the Defense's objection to the State's new extra Prosecutor request?

 

[Nila Aella]

Hmm I am surprised about the lack of reply from the State on the docket by the Dec 6 deadline. Maybe just be a lag in the online update process to the docket?



In conjunction with the lack of States response, this surprise hearing set for next week seems kind of odd.
Could this be about the Defense's objection to the State's new extra Prosecutor request?

Yes, there is a delay - often.

Motion to Compel
Att Generals offfice appointment
Maybe any discovery issues

jmo

 

[girlhasnoname]

There was no ammunition recovered from the home.
jmo

Interesting, I did not know that. Thanks Nila.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

No one 'altered' evidence. They updated their earlier analysis of the cars model years that they were searching for. They expanded the years because they realised they looked so similar...that is not 'blatant misconduct.' They expanded their search criteria.

IF they really expanded the years because they realized they looked similar independent of the suspect. But that isn't a fact. The post I replied to said that it was fine for LE working on an investigative theory from some other intelligence to re-analyze the cars and alter the analysis.

To me, that reads as it's fine to narrow in on a suspect from other evidence and then go back and alter the analysis to fit. I do think this becomes misconduct very easily. MOO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

I disagree with that characterisation. Experts make mistakes all the time. In the context of a fluid investigation, where LE had received new evidence, he was asked if he could have been incorrect in his assessment of the year. He apparently agreed that could be the case. None of this was hidden from the Judge who granted the warrant. The affiant included this reassessment on the face of the document.

So he wasn't changing it to fit the hypothesis. The investigation had new evidence which suggested the two cars were the same and the FBI expert had the year wrong. It's entirely fine to do this in light of new facts.

Of course this will open the door at trial for the defence to suggest his original assessment was the correct one. But the idea he can't update his assessment is strange to me, so long as the judge was told this - and it is explicit in the affidavit that he changed his mind.

MOO

Again, it depends on why he changed his mind. If he changed his mind independent of the suspect? No big deal. If he changed his mind because now they had a suspect who drove a car of a different model year? Becomes a bigger deal.

MOO.