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

[LinasK]

Common sense says that's exactly what happened. He didnt' have to "know" one of these victims, but I think it's very likely one of them caught his eye.

That's what happened in the Jayme Closs case. The offender saw her getting off the bus and decided to blow her parents head off with a shotgun at a later date. All to achieve his goal. Her.

I think this guy had one main target, but his goal in general was women. He hated them, likely because he had been rejected in the past.

Thank you for stating that.

 

[whiterhino]

IANAL….. on the matter of whether or not there might have been ‘contact’ by the suspect BK with a resident(s) in the house before the slayings - have to wonder how much stock can be placed at this point pre-trial in any revelations by the prosecution or defense since there is IIUC a gag order in place in this case.

Seems some articles on this refer to terms including contact, message, or stalk. Those terms could differ in meaning perhaps? Look forward to this case being tried publicly and evidence entered in court against the suspect BK. MOO

Those terms describe various forms of criminal harassment (repeated, unwanted contact that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear).

JMHO: There is no evidence of criminal harassment that we know of. That is not to say that someone wasn't watching, driving by etc. It also comes down to the victim who is experiencing the stalking but if they're not aware, they cannot make a report.

 

[Tricia]

Dear Websleuths Members and Guests,
Remember the days when an obnoxious advertisement seemed to cover every single blank area? Let's not go back to those days. Help keep Websleuths ad-free by subscribing to DNA Solves.
Find out how you can become a subscriber to DNA Solves.com by CLICKING HERE.
If you want to make a single donation go to www.dnasolves.com and pick a case you would like to donate to.
Do not comment on this thread. CLICK HERE to ask questions and to learn more.
Thank you very much.
Tricia Griffith

 

[jepop]

RSBM for focus.

Latah County Prosector Bill Thompson and the Judge Judge confirmed that Bryan didn't stalk any of the victims in April 2024.

No. For the sake of accuracy; from your link
"...did not stalk one of the victims, attorneys on both sides of the capital murder case said Wednesday,...". (My emphasis).

Read more at: https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article287556325.html#storylink=cpy

IMO ONE of is what was said piecemeal at the relevant hearing. ONE of the victims. This is consistently misrepresented/conflated to any of the victims as if some sort of confirmed fact. For some reason. From piecemeal snippets at a pre trial hearing. And taken out of context jmo.

One big nothing burger with extras. He knew the house and was surveiling. Victims were unaware. Agree with recent posts suggesting as such. Imo and conjecture.

 

[Boxer]

Absolutely not. There is no evidence of that, no evidence BK knew or knew of any of the victims. Rewatch the hearings from last May. This is NOT the kind of case you think it is.

What kind if case do you think it is?
It is not mistaken identity, it is him, his DNA is the the crime scene.

 

[MassGuy]

What kind if case do you think it is?
It is not mistaken identity, it is him, his DNA is the the crime scene.

It will wind up being a slam dunk. I'm invested just because this guy breaks the mold. But once you look at him, he's the kind of guy who would break that mold. He hates women, because women show no interest him him. He also wanted to show everyone how smart he was, and got off on the perfect murder. It made him somebody.

 

[katydid23]

Absolutely not. There is no evidence of that, no evidence BK knew or knew of any of the victims. Rewatch the hearings from last May. This is NOT the kind of case you think it is.

I think this post needs IMO, or MOO, at the end of it? It is a personal opinion, and not a proven fact, that it was not a sexually motivated crime. IMO

 

[katydid23]

Common sense says that's exactly what happened. He didnt' have to "know" one of these victims, but I think it's very likely one of them caught his eye.

That's what happened in the Jayme Closs case. The offender saw her getting off the bus and decided to blow her parents head off with a shotgun at a later date. All to achieve his goal. Her.

I think this guy had one main target, but his goal in general was women. He hated them, likely because he had been rejected in the past.

THIS^^^^.

 

[PinkParis2052]

IANAL….. on the matter of whether or not there might have been ‘contact’ by the suspect BK with a resident(s) in the house before the slayings - have to wonder how much stock can be placed at this point pre-trial in any revelations by the prosecution or defense since there is IIUC a gag order in place in this case.

Seems some articles on this refer to terms including contact, message, or stalk. Those terms could differ in meaning perhaps? Look forward to this case being tried publicly and evidence entered in court against the suspect BK. MOO

I look forward to seeing what comes out during the trial. If it's live streams or released at a later time.

Yes there is a gag order that that's for outside of the court hearings and court documents based on commentary that I heard from a lawyer. So it doesn't cover the hearings and the court documents but some point last year in 2023 both sides have agreed to limit what they put in court documents and limit what they speak about during court hearings which is really interesting. IMO.

 

[PinkParis2052]

RSBM for focus.

No. For the sake of accuracy; from your link
"...did not stalk one of the victims, attorneys on both sides of the capital murder case said Wednesday,...". (My emphasis).

Read more at: https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article287556325.html#storylink=cpy

IMO ONE of is what was said piecemeal at the relevant hearing. ONE of the victims. This is consistently misrepresented/conflated to any of the victims as if some sort of confirmed fact. For some reason. From piecemeal snippets at a pre trial hearing. And taken out of context jmo.

One big nothing burger with extras. He knew the house and was surveiling. Victims were unaware. Agree with recent posts suggesting as such. Imo and conjecture.

okay, I need to watch the whole survey hearing. I heard that it was a long hearing. IMO.

 

[Nila Aella]

Order governing proceedings

C. Discovery and Expert Disclosures

Experts: A list of experts the parties intend to call at trial, including a copy of the expert's report consistent with I.C.R. 16(b)(7) and a copy ofthe expert's curriculum vitae, shall be disclosed to the opposing party as follows:

State's guilt phase experts: December 18, 2024
Defendant's guilt phase experts: January 23, 2025

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

Case Summary page

12/18/2024 Stipulation Stipulated Motion to Seal State's Supplemental Response to Request for Discovery Regarding Expert Testimony
12/18/2024 Response to Request for Discovery SEALED State's Supplemental Response to Request for Discovery Regarding Expert Testimony

12/27/2024 Motion to Compel Motion to Compel ICT 16(b)(7) Material and for Sanctions
https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR01-24-31665/Summary/Case-Summary-Kohberger-12272024.pdf

ICR 16 (b)(7)
Rule 16. Discovery and Inspection
(b) Disclosure of Evidence and Materials by the Prosecution on Written Request. Except as otherwise provided in this rule, the prosecuting attorney must, at any time following the filing of charges, on written request by the defendant, disclose the following information, evidence and material to the defendant:
(7) Expert Witnesses. On written request of the defendant, the prosecutor must provide a written summary or report of any testimony that the state intends to introduce at trial or at a hearing pursuant to Rules 702, 703 or 705 of the Idaho Rules of Evidence. The summary provided must describe the witness’s opinions, the facts and data for those opinions, and the witness's qualifications. Disclosure of expert opinions regarding mental health must also comply with the requirements of Idaho Code § 18-207. The prosecution is not required to produce any materials not subject to disclosure under subsection (g) of this Rule. This subsection does not require disclosure of expert witnesses, their opinions, the facts and data for those opinions, or the witness's qualifications, intended only to rebut evidence or theories that have not been disclosed under this Rule prior to trial.

(g) Prosecution Information Not Subject to Disclosure.

(1) Work Product. Disclosure must not be required of:

(A) legal research or of records,
(B) correspondence, or
(C) reports or memoranda to the extent that they contain the opinions, theories or conclusions of the prosecuting attorney or members of the prosecuting attorney's legal staff.

(2) Informants. Disclosure must not be required of an informant's identity unless the informant is to be produced as a witness at a hearing or trial, subject to any protective order under subsection (l) of this rule or a disclosure order under subsection (b)(6) of this rule.

jmo

 

[Nila Aella]

K. Fixler article

Led by Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson, the prosecution met a court-imposed deadline to submit a list of those experts and their credentials last week. But the identities of those included among the group the state intends to call as witnesses in the case against defendant Bryan Kohberger is being kept from the public.

Under an agreement to seal between the defense and the prosecution, the state’s expert list was filed through the legal process known as discovery on Dec. 18, according to a publicly available summary of filings in the case. Hippler’s case scheduling order did not require that the expert list be filed under seal, but he also has not unsealed the filing for public consumption.

On Friday, Kohberger’s defense attorneys filed a motion with the court to compel the prosecution to provide written summaries for the testimony of its expert witnesses, the case summary showed. The filing also includes a request for court sanctions.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjh7r_pxcqKAxX5EFkFHfYFO08QFnoECBQQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bellinghamherald.com%2Fnews%2Fstate%2Farticle297650823.html&usg=AOvVaw36v-8tMBIN91mEIuMqXLAa&opi=89978449

 

[xjd11]

It will wind up being a slam dunk. I'm invested just because this guy breaks the mold. But once you look at him, he's the kind of guy who would break that mold. He hates women, because women show no interest him him. He also wanted to show everyone how smart he was, and got off on the perfect murder. It made him somebody.

well I don't really think he is breaking any mold in trying to do the perfect murder, just see Leopold & Loeb. thought they were so smart and also caught by dumb mistake.

 

[sunshineray]

Absolutely not. There is no evidence of that, no evidence BK knew or knew of any of the victims. Rewatch the hearings from last May. This is NOT the kind of case you think it is.

The PCA states BK was stalking the house for weeks.

"Kohberger had allegedly been stalking the King Road home for weeks, according to the probable cause affidavit."

That, IMO, just doesn't happen for no reason, especially in that more out of the way area. Again IMO, that gives weigh to KG's family member claims that she also saw what MM's online outlet researchers saw, BK's numerous Instagram accounts following the two and/or three female victim's living in the house that he was allegedly stalking.



Since there's now a wide-ranging gag order in place only the filings, hearings and trial will tell the public the full story. The defense can claim there's absolutely no connection between BK and his victims but it seems it's likely there is one. I do not believe the people who saw these accounts interaction with the victim's accounts are lying and since there are numerous credible reports of the same info being seen, it's most likely correct info. That's AJMO

Redirect Notice

Redirect Notice

Bryan Kohberger Followed All 3 Female Idaho Victims on Instagram: Source

Bryan Kohberger is accused of murdering Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin

people.com

 

[whiterhino]

It will wind up being a slam dunk. I'm invested just because this guy breaks the mold. But once you look at him, he's the kind of guy who would break that mold. He hates women, because women show no interest him him. He also wanted to show everyone how smart he was, and got off on the perfect murder. It made him somebody.

RBBM & JMHO I get where you're coming from but you're framing opinions as if they are facts. FWIW I'm not siding with the defendant. JMO.

I'd also like to correct my previous post about criminal harassment because editing timed out. My experience is based on Canadian laws which are phrased in a similar manner.

This is the Canadian version: " in conduct referred to in subsection (2) that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances, to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them. "

Criminal Code

Federal laws of Canada

laws-lois.justice.gc.ca

Idaho State Law: Section 18-7906 – Idaho State Legislature

" A person commits the crime of stalking in the second degree if the person knowingly and maliciously:
(a) Engages in a course of conduct that seriously alarms, annoys or harasses the victim and is such as would cause a reasonable person substantial emotional distress; or ..."

 

[Nila Aella]

The PCA states BK was stalking the house for weeks.

"Kohberger had allegedly been stalking the King Road home for weeks, according to the probable cause affidavit."

That, IMO, just doesn't happen for no reason, especially in that more out of the way area. Again IMO, that gives weigh to KG's family member claims that she also saw what MM's online outlet researchers saw, BK's numerous Instagram accounts following the two and/or three female victim's living in the house that he was allegedly stalking.

View attachment 554317

Since there's now a wide-ranging gag order in place only the filings, hearings and trial will tell the public the full story. The defense can claim there's absolutely no connection between BK and his victims but it seems it's likely there is one. I do not believe the people who saw these accounts interaction with the victim's accounts are lying and since there are numerous credible reports of the same info being seen, it's most likely correct info. That's AJMO

Redirect Notice

Redirect Notice

Bryan Kohberger Followed All 3 Female Idaho Victims on Instagram: Source

Bryan Kohberger is accused of murdering Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin

people.com

According to testimony: The last two questions on the survey were FALSE.
April 2024

Last two questions:

"Have you read, seen or heard if Bryan Kohberger stalked one of the victims?"

"Have you read, seen or heard if Bryan Kohberger had followed one of the victims on social media?"

Bryan Kohberger community survey can proceed, judge rules

The judge ruled that the defense team's Bryan Kohberger community survey can proceed.

abcnews.go.com

Objection to COV
BT footnote

The probable cause affidavit did not explicitly state that Defendant was “near” the actual home of the victims, but stated that Defendant was in the vicinity of a cell tower servicing the area of the victim’s residence twelve times in the months before the homicides

pg 10

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/2024/081224-States-Objection-Defendants-MCV.pdf

ETA JMO

 

[sunshineray]

According to testimony: The last two questions on the survey were FALSE.
April 2024

Last two questions:

"Have you read, seen or heard if Bryan Kohberger stalked one of the victims?"

"Have you read, seen or heard if Bryan Kohberger had followed one of the victims on social media?"

Bryan Kohberger community survey can proceed, judge rules

The judge ruled that the defense team's Bryan Kohberger community survey can proceed.

abcnews.go.com

Objection to COV
BT footnote

The probable cause affidavit did not explicitly state that Defendant was “near” the actual home of the victims, but stated that Defendant was in the vicinity of a cell tower servicing the area of the victim’s residence twelve times in the months before the homicides

pg 10

https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/isc.coi/CR29-22-2805/2024/081224-States-Objection-Defendants-MCV.pdf

ETA JMO

Interesting they asked the community that if there's, supposedly to some, no evidence of a seen and reported connection. That's just my opinion on it.

The other sounds like he was possibly searching for the right house...JMO.

I find it extremely interesting that BK apparently had so many Instragram accounts too.

AJMO

 

[NCWatcher]

Interesting they asked the community that if there's, supposedly to some, no evidence of a seen and reported connection. That's just my opinion on it.

The other sounds like he was possibly searching for the right house...JMO.

I find it extremely interesting that BK apparently had so many Instragram accounts too.

AJMO

I believe the survey questions were designed to assess the common beliefs about BK & the case held by community members, not so much their familiarity with actual pieces of evidence. (IMO the latter would be a major problem only if the evidence had already been ruled inadmissible.) On the other hand, erroneous beliefs going into a trial as a juror, beliefs that have been created by relentless & inaccurate local media reports, would be a problem. So the issue wasn't what the "evidence" was, just what the media claimed it was.
MOO

 

[Nila Aella]

Interesting they asked the community that if there's, supposedly to some, no evidence of a seen and reported connection. That's just my opinion on it.

The survey was constructed to guage what the public heard though the MSM/SM. Whether media reports (true or false) biased the jury pool.
jmo

I find it extremely interesting that BK apparently had so many Instragram accounts too.

AJMO

IMO LE would have checked BKs SM as soon as they had his name, before it was public, before fake accounts appeared.
jmo

 

[sunshineray]

I believe the survey questions were designed to assess the common beliefs about BK & the case held by community members, not so much their familiarity with actual pieces of evidence. (IMO the latter would be a major problem only if the evidence had already been ruled inadmissible.) On the other hand, erroneous beliefs going into a trial as a juror, beliefs that have been created by relentless & inaccurate local media reports, would be a problem. So the issue wasn't what the "evidence" was, just what the media claimed it was.
MOO

Who's to say what the defense's actions are really all about. I guess time will tell. MO