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

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #321
Ohhh sorry I misunderstood!
IF it gets to a Franks hearing... Who knows. Probably the Prosecution would request a closed hearing for that. But AFAIK the success rate of Franks motions is very low.
Motions to suppress however, those will be discussed at a public hearing on Jan 23, IIRC.
 
  • #322
  • #323
View attachment 550200

That’s a directly comparable 2015 and 2013. I reveal the answer as to which is which below

IMO most of the people who say that they think they are vastly different are looking at models that are not equivalent across the model years.

Kohlberger's VIN has been reported on by a local news org that tweeted out his CARFAX and his PA registration is part of court filings. The VIN gives you the EXACT configuration of any given car.

Here's a 101 on VINs for anyone who's interested

If you use any of the dozens of Hyundai VIN decoders only you see that he has a Hyundai Elantra SE. Which is equivalent (MOO but I will look for official documentation when I return home) to the base model of the 2013 year the GLS.

Kohlberger's VIN shows that his car had NO extra equipment added. No fog lamps. No fancy lights. No telematics, which is why it lacked navigation, blue link and anything that might have given investigators car GPS.

The pictures I've seen compared have fog lights. Fancier lights (which was an upgrade option) fancier wheels etc.

When you look at the picture I attached of the 2013 base model white Elantra and the 2015 base model Elantra...the differences are barely there.....IMO. I mean...I do see some (fog lights delete black covers, base wheels changed, reflector on back bumper) . But in IMO grainy footage...at night?

These images were pulled off the official Hyundai website using Archive.org. I should have done a better job of getting them sized the same (but for those who can't tell the bottom is the 2015)

MOO

MOO that if the FBI expert wasn't 100% certain in the range of years they would have just said white elantra 2011- 2018. The ONLY reason it was 2011-2013 is b/c the FBI expert was 100% certain.

IMO the one video where the white car is seen by the dumpster turning around is actually a BMW X6. The car has a sunroof and BK's car did not have a sunroof.

Also, even if BK did it how does anyone explain there is not one spec of evidence in his car or apartment after allegedly killing 4 people with a knife? The same people who think BK is guilty b/c of one tiny spec of touch DNA on a moveable object somehow are the same people who think that it's possible to commit the crime in 10 minutes and not bring any DNA evidence with them.

IMO if BK was ever in the house that night he certainly did not leave in his car otherwise they would have found evidence. Whether it be a dog hair, human hair, blood, etc.

A reminder I'm still on the fence on if he's guilty or not but as of now I'm not really sure how so many of you are convinced he did it.



my 2 cents
 
  • #324
I believe the upcoming hearing is open, if not they usually mention it will be closed.
I honestly don't think this upcoming hearing is a Franks hearing. I think the topics are more likely to be the ones mentioned by @Nila Aella earlier (RSBM):
In the Oct. trial proceedings order, MTCs are set for 1/23/2025. They seem to be following that order regarding deadlines.
jmo
 
  • #325
MOO that if the FBI expert wasn't 100% certain in the range of years they would have just said white elantra 2011- 2018. The ONLY reason it was 2011-2013 is b/c the FBI expert was 100% certain.

IMO the one video where the white car is seen by the dumpster turning around is actually a BMW X6. The car has a sunroof and BK's car did not have a sunroof.

Also, even if BK did it how does anyone explain there is not one spec of evidence in his car or apartment after allegedly killing 4 people with a knife? The same people who think BK is guilty b/c of one tiny spec of touch DNA on a moveable object somehow are the same people who think that it's possible to commit the crime in 10 minutes and not bring any DNA evidence with them.

IMO if BK was ever in the house that night he certainly did not leave in his car otherwise they would have found evidence. Whether it be a dog hair, human hair, blood, etc.

A reminder I'm still on the fence on if he's guilty or not but as of now I'm not really sure how so many of you are convinced he did it.



my 2 cents
He’s a criminology student who had months/years to prepare for the perfect crime. He had no choice but to drive his car to the scene and there was no way to fully prepare for what happened inside. Those are the two places where things went wrong. MOO

To me, that’s more likely than the alternative: BK is a victim of a string of calamitous astronomical coincidences and nefarious conspiracy. JMO

Also, I do not see that at all in the Linda Ln video (assuming that’s the one you’re referring to). I’m a “car guy” (currently own a M2CS and drove what arguably inspired the suv’ish X6’s shape as the first 4 door coupe - CLS63 AMG by a rival car brand).

I just don’t see it or a sunroof.

MOO
 
  • #326
He’s a criminology student who had months/years to prepare for the perfect crime. He had no choice but to drive his car to the scene and there was no way to fully prepare for what happened inside. Those are the two places where things went wrong. MOO

To me, that’s more likely than the alternative: BK is a victim of a string of calamitous astronomical coincidences and nefarious conspiracy. JMO

Also, I do not see that at all in the Linda Ln video (assuming that’s the one you’re referring to). I’m a “car guy” (currently own a M2CS and drove what arguably inspired the suv’ish X6’s shape as the first 4 door coupe - CLS63 AMG by a rival car brand).

I just don’t see it or a sunroof.

MOO


you can go to google and type in 'linda lane dumpster video' or hit the link. Not sure how you don't see a sunroof on the car?

IMO, it could also be a Tesla but I think it's a BMW X6 and not an elantra. Either way, it has a sunroof and BK's car does not.

linda lane dumpster video
 
  • #327
you can go to google and type in 'linda lane dumpster video' or hit the link. Not sure how you don't see a sunroof on the car?

IMO, it could also be a Tesla but I think it's a BMW X6 and not an elantra. Either way, it has a sunroof and BK's car does not.

linda lane dumpster video

I have a 2015 Elantra and that is not one in that video
 
  • #328
I believe the upcoming hearing is open, if not they usually mention it will be closed.
I honestly don't think this upcoming hearing is a Franks hearing. I think the topics are more likely to be the ones mentioned by @Nila Aella earlier (RSBM):
State has only just responded to Franks motion so as you say not likely the 11 Dec (?) hearing is for that. Moo

Also, imo unlikely to be MTC and discovery hearing as defense has option to reply by 20th Dec to State's response (was due 6th Dec but State replied well before deadline in November). MTC/Discovery hearing scheduled for Jan 23rd, same day as Ms to Suppress.

Think the upcoming is probably about State's amended petition to appoint special assistant AGs. Don't have details in front of me but will post links below. From memory State also asked to have that petition considered without a hearing.

Believe Hippler quickly ordered in State's favour for appointment of special assist AG/s to the case. However, I think that same day Defense filed objection to the State's amended petition.

Moo, in light of Defense's objection, I'm guessing Hippler agreed to consider State's amended petition at a hearing after all. If something happens at hearing to make him rethink State's amended petition, he may amend his order accordingly.

Judge probably needs to have the hearing to do everything by the book since D objected . Who knows, but avoiding potential appealable issues would definitely be on the Judge's agenda imo. Just my conjecture.

19th Nov: State's Amended petition to appoint special assistant AGs.

20th Nov: State Request for decision sans Hearing.

21st Nov: Amended Order Appointing special assistant AGs.

21st Nov: Defense Objection to State's Amended Petition to appoint special assistant AGs.
 
  • #329
you can go to google and type in 'linda lane dumpster video' or hit the link. Not sure how you don't see a sunroof on the car?

IMO, it could also be a Tesla but I think it's a BMW X6 and not an elantra. Either way, it has a sunroof and BK's car does not.

linda lane dumpster video
According to the link you provided, this dumpster video is time stamped around 12.45 am. It seems irrelevant imo as SV1 first arrives in the area at around 3.30am and the footage under discussion relates to the identification of SV1. See PCA.

Adding that I would check with mods to be sure your link is an approved source. Seems to be some random from YouTube and not sure it is reliable. Potential to muddy the waters unnecessarily. Moo

But anyway, the vehicle clearly isn't an Elantra and there's nothing in your link to verify this footage was ever deemed relevant to the investigation. If it is actually from the morning in question then too early to be SV1 and is clear enough, imo, for LE to have relatively easily identified the car and found the driver. Moo
 
  • #330
MOO that if the FBI expert wasn't 100% certain in the range of years they would have just said white elantra 2011- 2018. The ONLY reason it was 2011-2013 is b/c the FBI expert was 100% certain.

Also, even if BK did it how does anyone explain there is not one spec of evidence in his car or apartment after allegedly killing 4 people with a knife?

RSBM I disagree that the FBI expert was 100% certain of the date range. Plus, we don't know if he verbalized a longer date range even if it wasn't in the email chain.

Also, you have heard that he "cleaned his car, inside and outside, not missing an inch". Right? You are also aware that he didn't take any bodies from the crime scene. He also had a month and a half from the murders until his arrest to double clean the vehicle. We don't know what precautions he took that night regarding his car and any protection inside to mask any evidence.
 
  • #331
I went back and read what Howard Blum wrote in his book on the timeline regarding the IGG and the car. He's working with unnamed sources, so we have no idea if this is true (I've already said in a prior post I read another book by him containing things I know to be factually untrue and he seems to have a hard bias against the FBI so grain of salt and all):

"All along, Corporal Brett Payne had been praying for a name, and now he had it. On December 19, the bureau, according to the official records, shared what had been discovered after the forensic genealogists had extended the DNA-rooted family tree to its farthest branch. Unofficial insider accounts, however, peg the notification to a day, maybe even two, earlier (although those might be attempts by the FBI to mitigate the sting of their self-interested delay). But while there is debate over the actual date, there is no disagreement that once Payne had Bryan Kohberger's name he jumped into action.

Early on, he entered the name and license plate number the feds had shared into the Motor Vehicle Records system. The computer screen promptly displayed a state driver's license. It listed Bryan Kohberger as a white male, a sturdy 6' and 185 pounds. Which, Payne told himself, was pretty close to the broad description of the intruder DM had seen. As well as, he also matter-of-factly conceded, a few thousand other guys on either the U of I or WSU campuses."


He goes on to say that Payne noticed the bushy eyebrows and then went on to get the cell phone number from the routine traffic stop in August. The PCA doesn't explicitly say when Payne reviewed the license and photo or that he did so because of the query for Elantras done by the WSU officer. It just says that the query was done and that Payne later reviewed the license and photo and went from there. The way it's written, it does imply that Payne reviewed the license due to the WSU query. Blum says he reviewed the license and photo after getting the name from the FBI. I had assumed that this is what the defense is after.

But there have been posts here that AT "identified the lie" during Brett Payne's hearing in May. What did she identify?

JMO
 
  • #332
I went back and read what Howard Blum wrote in his book on the timeline regarding the IGG and the car. He's working with unnamed sources, so we have no idea if this is true (I've already said in a prior post I read another book by him containing things I know to be factually untrue and he seems to have a hard bias against the FBI so grain of salt and all):

"All along, Corporal Brett Payne had been praying for a name, and now he had it. On December 19, the bureau, according to the official records, shared what had been discovered after the forensic genealogists had extended the DNA-rooted family tree to its farthest branch. Unofficial insider accounts, however, peg the notification to a day, maybe even two, earlier (although those might be attempts by the FBI to mitigate the sting of their self-interested delay). But while there is debate over the actual date, there is no disagreement that once Payne had Bryan Kohberger's name he jumped into action.

Early on, he entered the name and license plate number the feds had shared into the Motor Vehicle Records system. The computer screen promptly displayed a state driver's license. It listed Bryan Kohberger as a white male, a sturdy 6' and 185 pounds. Which, Payne told himself, was pretty close to the broad description of the intruder DM had seen. As well as, he also matter-of-factly conceded, a few thousand other guys on either the U of I or WSU campuses."


He goes on to say that Payne noticed the bushy eyebrows and then went on to get the cell phone number from the routine traffic stop in August. The PCA doesn't explicitly say when Payne reviewed the license and photo or that he did so because of the query for Elantras done by the WSU officer. It just says that the query was done and that Payne later reviewed the license and photo and went from there. The way it's written, it does imply that Payne reviewed the license due to the WSU query. Blum says he reviewed the license and photo after getting the name from the FBI. I had assumed that this is what the defense is after.

But there have been posts here that AT "identified the lie" during Brett Payne's hearing in May. What did she identify?

JMO

i asked the same question.
 
  • #333
  • #334
State has only just responded to Franks motion so as you say not likely the 11 Dec (?) hearing is for that. Moo

Also, imo unlikely to be MTC and discovery hearing as defense has option to reply by 20th Dec to State's response (was due 6th Dec but State replied well before deadline in November). MTC/Discovery hearing scheduled for Jan 23rd, same day as Ms to Suppress.

Think the upcoming is probably about State's amended petition to appoint special assistant AGs. Don't have details in front of me but will post links below. From memory State also asked to have that petition considered without a hearing.

Believe Hippler quickly ordered in State's favour for appointment of special assist AG/s to the case. However, I think that same day Defense filed objection to the State's amended petition.

Moo, in light of Defense's objection, I'm guessing Hippler agreed to consider State's amended petition at a hearing after all. If something happens at hearing to make him rethink State's amended petition, he may amend his order accordingly.

Judge probably needs to have the hearing to do everything by the book since D objected . Who knows, but avoiding potential appealable issues would definitely be on the Judge's agenda imo. Just my conjecture.

19th Nov: State's Amended petition to appoint special assistant AGs.

20th Nov: State Request for decision sans Hearing.

21st Nov: Amended Order Appointing special assistant AGs.

21st Nov: Defense Objection to State's Amended Petition to appoint special assistant AGs.
The D objection was to the Court's Order:

1733861530290.png
 
  • #335
View attachment 550301View attachment 550302
Red is glaring:
Reflector in back
Overall shape of the FL
Black portion of the FL
Distance between the HL and FL
Wheel

Lime green less glaring:
HL shape
Rear panel/bumper angular vs smooth

jmo

2010 lime green Lamborghini vs white 2015 Elantra
The expert would be looking for a new job in a different field. lol.

View attachment 550303View attachment 550304

jmo
I also notice some kind of black guard at the rear of each tire well (front and back) in the 2011 model that are not present in the 2015 model and, I realize you were just looking at the side view, but the rear view is dramatically different with the large black undercarriage wrap/bumper on the 2015 model which is white in 2011. To me, this black undercarriage wrap/bumper seen at the rear of the vehicle would make a 2015 unmistakeable from a 2011, from even the briefest glance in the same way that the front light array is unmistakably different. I also notice the front fog lights are completely different between the two models. Even the body of the Elantra has been modified to fit in the new style for lights and front lights.

While I would NOT expect rank and file police to be able to identify the differences in car models across the years, much more is expected from FBI agents who are vehicle identification experts than to misidentify the year of a very common car and I do NOT believe there is any likelihood that happened in this case. As you have shown, there are far too many points of differentiation between 2011-2013 and 2014 - 2016 for such a mistake to have been made.
 
  • #336
I also notice some kind of black guard at the rear of each tire well (front and back) in the 2011 model that are not present in the 2015 model and, I realize you were just looking at the side view, but the rear view is dramatically different with the large black undercarriage wrap/bumper on the 2015 model which is white in 2011. To me, this black undercarriage wrap/bumper seen at the rear of the vehicle would make a 2015 unmistakeable from a 2011, from even the briefest glance in the same way that the front light array is unmistakably different. I also notice the front fog lights are completely different between the two models. Even the body of the Elantra has been modified to fit in the new style for lights and front lights.

While I would NOT expect rank and file police to be able to identify the differences in car models across the years, much more is expected from FBI agents who are vehicle identification experts than to misidentify the year of a very common car and I do NOT believe there is any likelihood that happened in this case. As you have shown, there are far too many points of differentiation between 2011-2013 and 2014 - 2016 for such a mistake to have been made.
100%

Yes, I did only point out obvious differences on the side view (requested by the poster I was responding to). I agree there are more differences and that the body was modified to accommodate them (front and back). All three views have obvious, less obvious, and subtle differences. All of which an expert would be aware of IMO.

I find it hard to believe he made a mistake.

jmo
 
  • #337
Right, my mistake. Though I would think in that case it makes even more sense for judge to call a hearing to hear D's objection to court's order re appointment of special asst. AGs and decision *without* a hearing. Imo.

Not clear what you think, but in any case maybe we'll find out soon enough. Perhaps hearing is something entirely unrelated to do with some housekeeping or something. Could be Hippler has already decided on a Franks hearing, though if so he would have made that decision without considering state's written submissions objecting. So that makes me think no to Franks. Moo.
 
  • #338
100%

Yes, I did only point out obvious differences on the side view (requested by the poster I was responding to). I agree there are more differences and that the body was modified to accommodate them (front and back). All three views have obvious, less obvious, and subtle differences. All of which an expert would be aware of IMO.

I find it hard to believe he made a mistake.

jmo
But, again, is this what AT "identified [as] the lie" during the May hearing? This is being debated for pages--but what exactly did she say that's causing this debate?
 
  • #339
Right, my mistake. Though I would think in that case it makes even more sense for judge to call a hearing to hear D's objection to court's order re appointment of special asst. AGs and decision *without* a hearing. Imo.

Not clear what you think, but in any case maybe we'll find out soon enough. Perhaps hearing is something entirely unrelated to do with some housekeeping or something. Could be Hippler has already decided on a Franks hearing, though if so he would have made that decision without considering state's written submissions objecting. So that makes me think no to Franks. Moo.
Without titles listed for the motion hearings, it is hard to tell.

IMO the hearing will be regarding the Attorn Gen Objection.
Like other hearings, he will ask if there are any other issues the Court needs to address.

jmo
 
  • #340
View attachment 550301View attachment 550302
Red is glaring:
Reflector in back
Overall shape of the FL
Black portion of the FL
Distance between the HL and FL
Wheel

Lime green less glaring:
HL shape
Rear panel/bumper angular vs smooth

jmo

2010 lime green Lamborghini vs white 2015 Elantra
The expert would be looking for a new job in a different field. lol.

View attachment 550303View attachment 550304

jmo

Honestly, I don't think they're glaring at all. I had to look really hard to spot the differences on the original pics, and I knew there were supposed to be some.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
120
Guests online
2,652
Total visitors
2,772

Forum statistics

Threads
632,150
Messages
18,622,693
Members
243,034
Latest member
RepresentingTheLBC
Back
Top