Is it me, or did the Moscow, ID detectives who testified at the evidentiary hearing invoke the term, "I don't recall" WAY too many times while being questioned by the defense attorneys about the very evidence they collected??
For me, an inordinate number of "I don't recall" responses from a witness under oath suggests either evasion, or incompetency - either one likely won't appear well to a jury. They did NOT exude confidence (except the typical degree of swagger exhibited by LEO's experienced in testifying for the state), nor did they come-off (to me) as being particularly compelling or convincing.
In the COPO (Court of Public Opinion), the much easier court to convict an accused - there already seems to be some reasonable doubt, especially surrounding the DNA collection and the cell tower "dump" collection...two things that states case relies heavily on.
This isn't a slam dunk for the state by any means. To leave so little forensic evidence while in the commission of 4 FOUR stabbing homicides, this dude Kohberger (whose parent's home is less-than 1/4 mile from our family's Pocono summer place in PA) would have had to have been excruciatingly talented at concealing murders, or, beyond-statistical analysis lucky, or, not present at the time of the murders.
That was completely standard from what I've seen at hearings like this. Many times, the defense attorney will ask questions that they know is beyond the purview of the investigator on the stand, in order to create an impression that certain things weren't done. When it happens at trial, it leads to mass hysteria online. "I can't believe they didn't perform a rape kit," was one of the refrains from the Delphi Trial. Of course that defied common sense, and we later learned why that the CSI didn't perform a rape kit (that's the work of the medical examiner). These investigators also don't want to lock themselves into an answer, when they aren't absolutely positive.
As for the DNA and cell phone stuff, those are simply defense claims. Again, there have been numerous cases I've followed where the defense was even stronger in their attempted rebuttal of this stuff (at preliminary hearings/other hearings), and come trial they showed they were all bark and no bite. In one case (Kelsey Berreth murder) they completely rolled over and never called anyone to refute the things they were attempting to refute at prior hearings.
Regardless of if one believes Kohberger is the killer, the person who committed these murders left very little physical evidence at the scene. That's not the product of luck, it was the product of planning.
He uses a combat knife so he doesn't cut himself (the guard prevents slippage that we see in other murder cases).
He likely wore some sort of protective suit with booties, which can be easily purchased on Amazon.
He wore gloves to eliminate the possibility of fingerprints or DNA transfer.
Once he removed that suit, likely before entering his car, there would be minimal, if any, blood on him.
I believe that he had at least one site picked out where he'd dump evidence, and completely change clothes (may not have even been necessary with those overalls).
