4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #99

Status
Not open for further replies.
There are far too many murder cases to name where a victim pulled a knife on an aggressor only to have their knife taken by the aggressor and used to kill the victim

True enough. But not in this case. We know this because otherwise the DNA of the soon-to-be-dead victim would be somewhere on the sheath, if the victim owned the knife and “pulled it” on the aggressor.

To effectively brandish one’s own knife to protect oneself, surely the victim would have removed the knife from the sheath.

Alas for poor little Bryan, it remains only his DNA and none other.


IMO
 
Last edited:
True enough. But not in this case. We know this because otherwise the DNA of the soon-to-be-dead victim would be somewhere on the sheath, if the victim owned the knife and “pulled it” on the aggressor.

To effectively brandish one’s own knife to protect oneself, surely the victim would have removed the knife from the sheath.


IMO
Not if she didn't have enough time to open the snap and remove the knife.
 
Blood on the bannister in a house where there were stabbings and the glove with the blood outside. A network actually live streamed most of the CSI yard search. CSI found many things in the yard. There may be a different glove than what the YouTube detective found on Nov. 28, 2022. But we'll have to wait for the trial. IMO, both blood DNA (bannister and glove) are possible evidence, both should have been tested completely including attempting IGG. Since they were not, this will be used as reasonable doubt. All JMO.
Why?
IIRC The glove outside wasn't found" for a week. It has jo established connect woth the inside of the house - 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬, media and all kinds of teams had been around the house.
As for the the other - if they didn't have a full single DNA profile on part of the crime weapon (its case,) the next step probably would be moving out in the next circle out from CS to testing unknown DNA on high touch area in the party house.
 
Not if she didn't have enough time to open the snap and remove the knife.

She may not have had that time, had this actually happened, but your words were that the victim could have “pulled the knife” on the “aggressor.” She would have had to touch the sheath even if she didn’t touch the snap.

How would she have pulled the knife without leaving fingerprints or DNA? Unless there was some kind of prestidigitation and the knife hovered in the air?

IMO this is not only beyond a reasonable doubt, it is beyond any doubt whatsoever. It is concrete. Bryan’s the only one who touched it.

Alternate scenarios defy logic, IMO, and the jury would presumably want a logical explanation.
 
Last edited:
It is incredibly concerning because that major hack might have allowed most anything to happen. How is the consumer to know if their DNA data was tampered with or not or even worse, used to build a bioweapon? The issue is significant enough that in 2019 the Department of Defense issued an order to stop the use of these consumer ancestry DNA tests by military. personnel.


Why is this such a serious issue? Read here:
Interesting information. But in assessing the BK Idaho case, respectfully not sure of its relevance to it?

IIRC while the accused defendant BK had supposed aspirations of being in law enforcement or the like, I don’t recall that he was in any Pentagon or Department of Defense governed jobs or roles. MOO
 
There are far too many murder cases to name where a victim pulled a knife on an aggressor only to have their knife taken by the aggressor and used to kill the victim



In fact, you are far more likely to be stabbed with your own knife than someone else's:

In this case, knives are prevalent in Idaho due to the hunting/outdoors lifestyle there. IMO, if one or more of the roommates owned a knife it would not be surprising or even unusual for the area.

All JMO.
So an offender goes to that house, is confronted by a victim, he takes the victim's knife and proceeds to use it to murder 4 people?

Come on man.
 
If I were a juror on this case, I would find it beyond a reasonable doubt that the sheath of a murder weapon secreted beneath the body of a murder victim, that murder weapon being a knife when the victims were knifed to death, does NOT somehow equal the actual weapon used to perpetrate the murders.

If it belonged originally to one of the occupants of the house, why is the only DNA found on the sheath snap Bryan’s and not one of the deceased?

JMO of what makes sense.

It will be an agglomeration of clues.

First, we don’t know the connection between BK and Moscow. I wonder if BK relapsed after departing from home. His phrase, “shopping is better in Moscow” can be straightforward, given that sales state tax in Idaho is less than in WA. He could have been buying gas in Idaho, too, I think it makes sense.

But, if he were buying his “substance of choice” in Moscow, or going to drug houses, we really don’t know if this “DNA-bearing object”, the sheath, could have been left/forgotten/stolen somewhere and later, conveniently placed at the bed. It is an object with a “touch” DNA (otherwise, clean?) that’s concerning.

People steal, people borrow books without asking, some people never respect property. I don’t have knife sheaths, but BK’s case taught me. A lot. I want to ask - has anyone, ever, left a phone on a table in a burger shop and never got it back?

I think that if - if! - BK, say, left the knife sheath with some of his Idaho dealers, or it got stolen, he ought to have immediately posted an ad on local FB or Craigslist asking to return it. An add pre-dating the murders would be his alibi.

We assume that BK was prone to breaking in. What if opposite is true? What if people tended to steal from him?

I think his friends at high school could be character witnesses.
 
What forensic examination has almost certainly shown (and early on):

1. The length, width and construction of the knife blade (from the wounds).
2. If the most modern techniques were used, the type of metal from which the knife was constructed. I have no reason to think that the forensics people in Washington State skimped - they have true state of the art technology and have had a lot of time to run tests.

If these two things are known, well, KA-BAR Knives have a proprietary coating on the blade - so I would respectfully suggest that the investigators already know it was indeed a KA-BAR knife that fits into the KA-BAR sheath found at the crime scene.

I think a jury will be able to follow this line of investigation.

Personal opinion: I think LE also has evidence of several purchases made by BK, over quite a period of time. I will be very surprised if they can't find a receipt for his knife purchase, although it's possible he paid cash at a brick and mortar store. But my gut feeling is that he did not do that. I also believe that BK had shown the knife to other people (family members, others) and that they can be called as witnesses to him possessing such a knife. These are my opinions, of course.

I also think it is very odd for anyone to believe that the knife belonged to one of the deceased (and I believe there is going to be clear evidence that the two women upstairs were killed first - so that scenario requires one of the two downstairs victims to have the knife, go upstairs, leave the sheath, then stab themselves and die (and without leaving the knife nearby).

We know that BK pulled up to the house that night and was in the vicinity. The knife is missing. It isn't near any of the victims. Someone took it out of the house. I of course believe that someone was BK. And I also believe that LE/Prosecution has evidence of him owning such a knife and of him being at the house not only in the wee hours of that Sunday - but later on, at around 9:30 am. If he did go back for the knife (or something else), how did he even know the knife had been used if it wasn't his? Why is he at the house those two times? Too much coincidence for me.

I do not believe that Kaylee or anyone had that knife, killed three people and then, themselves, with that knife. I do not believe that either of the surviving roommates is the murderer.

Fact: The ME agrees with me that no one suicided in that house. They were all murdered. A roommate sees a strange man in the house following some commotion-like noise of dog growling/whatever upstairs. This person is not one of the victims, is alive and walking around.

IMO
 
What forensic examination has almost certainly shown (and early on):

1. The length, width and construction of the knife blade (from the wounds).
2. If the most modern techniques were used, the type of metal from which the knife was constructed. I have no reason to think that the forensics people in Washington State skimped - they have true state of the art technology and have had a lot of time to run tests.

If these two things are known, well, KA-BAR Knives have a proprietary coating on the blade - so I would respectfully suggest that the investigators already know it was indeed a KA-BAR knife that fits into the KA-BAR sheath found at the crime scene.

I think a jury will be able to follow this line of investigation.

Personal opinion: I think LE also has evidence of several purchases made by BK, over quite a period of time. I will be very surprised if they can't find a receipt for his knife purchase, although it's possible he paid cash at a brick and mortar store. But my gut feeling is that he did not do that. I also believe that BK had shown the knife to other people (family members, others) and that they can be called as witnesses to him possessing such a knife. These are my opinions, of course.

I also think it is very odd for anyone to believe that the knife belonged to one of the deceased (and I believe there is going to be clear evidence that the two women upstairs were killed first - so that scenario requires one of the two downstairs victims to have the knife, go upstairs, leave the sheath, then stab themselves and die (and without leaving the knife nearby).

We know that BK pulled up to the house that night and was in the vicinity. The knife is missing. It isn't near any of the victims. Someone took it out of the house. I of course believe that someone was BK. And I also believe that LE/Prosecution has evidence of him owning such a knife and of him being at the house not only in the wee hours of that Sunday - but later on, at around 9:30 am. If he did go back for the knife (or something else), how did he even know the knife had been used if it wasn't his? Why is he at the house those two times? Too much coincidence for me.

I do not believe that Kaylee or anyone had that knife, killed three people and then, themselves, with that knife. I do not believe that either of the surviving roommates is the murderer.

Fact: The ME agrees with me that no one suicided in that house. They were all murdered. A roommate sees a strange man in the house following some commotion-like noise of dog growling/whatever upstairs. This person is not one of the victims, is alive and walking around.

IMO

Good post 10!

i’d add that there will be testimony from the surviving witnesses that no one ever saw a Kbar knife in the house before. My speculation only but it’s just obvious plodding evidence that will be given because LE will have cleared around their feet from the start.
 
Idk, perhaps because Jay Logsdon and AT never once let it slip in any motion or hearing where sheathe DNA was mentioned? And the fact multiple warrants were executed looking for purchases of a large knife, the potential murder weapon? Moo it obviously did not belong to anyone living there.

Has to be that ownership of the sheathe was one of the first things the police sought to establish. Jmo it defies belief that any of those dead kids happened to own a sheathe for such a weapon and then for two of them to be murdered with a large knife only to have their coincidentally size matched sheathe turn up under their bodies? With "no connection to the victims" BK's dna on the use point? And LE nonetheless executing multiple warrants looking for knife purchase.

Imo in the case of the sheathe, absence of evidence for it belonging to a victim actually does equal absence of evidence. Jmo

There will be witnesses who say they never saw such a knife in the house.

My speculation only.

You are likely correct they have other circumstantial evidence.

MOO
 
@mrjitty @Balthazar @jepop @NCWatcher @Megnut @Arkay

Sitting back, considering ^conflicting viewpoints^ (and others) re BK's G or NG.

What doubt is reasonable doubt?

Is reasonable doubt about one piece of evidence sufficient for jury to vote NG?
In some cases, yes, I think so.

Depending on what the evidence is, doubt about it may bias the view some jurors have of other evidence. It's likely not that those jurors consciously decide "if this is not true, that isn't either." Rather, it's that some jurors may feel "the state is trying to pull a fast one so other evidence may not be what it appears to be if this piece isn't." It might be a stretch for those jurors to vote Guilty.

It likely works in reverse too. Some jurors may become so enamoured of a piece of evidence (say, eyewitness testimony) that they fail to grasp the very real weaknesses in the overall case. It might be a stretch for those jurors to vote Not Guilty.

In either case, one piece of evidence is given a disproportionate weight.
MOO
 
Idk, perhaps because Jay Logsdon and AT never once let it slip in any motion or hearing where sheathe DNA was mentioned? And the fact multiple warrants were executed looking for purchases of a large knife, the potential murder weapon? Moo it obviously did not belong to anyone living there.

Has to be that ownership of the sheathe was one of the first things the police sought to establish. Jmo it defies belief that any of those dead kids happened to own a sheathe for such a weapon and then for two of them to be murdered with a large knife only to have their coincidentally size matched sheathe turn up under their bodies? With "no connection to the victims" BK's dna on the use point? And LE nonetheless executing multiple warrants looking for knife purchase.

Imo in the case of the sheathe, absence of evidence for it belonging to a victim actually does equal absence of evidence. Jmo
Even IF the sheath belonged to one of the victims-which I don't believe in this case, it's not exculpatory for him because murder victims get murdered with their own guns and knives all the time. Also, there's the fact that he purchased an identical knife on Amazon.
 
Even IF the sheath belonged to one of the victims-which I don't believe in this case, it's not exculpatory for him because murder victims get murdered with their own guns and knives all the time. Also, there's the fact that he purchased an identical knife on Amazon.
BBM

Do we know he purchased a knife on Amazon? I missed that as a fact. Also what was this knife identical to?
Thanks
MOO
 
So an offender goes to that house, is confronted by a victim, he takes the victim's knife and proceeds to use it to murder 4 people?

Come on man.

He could have done, first rule of handling any weapon in training is to ensure you don't get your own weapon used against you.

If he was hot prowling or being a creep and someone had a hunting knife in the house, maybe they could have pulled it on him. BK seems like the sort who could have martial arts and self defence training including how to disarm. He would have probably had some form of injuries if that had happened.
 
He could have done, first rule of handling any weapon in training is to ensure you don't get your own weapon used against you.

If he was hot prowling or being a creep and someone had a hunting knife in the house, maybe they could have pulled it on him. BK seems like the sort who could have martial arts and self defence training including how to disarm. He would have probably had some form of injuries if that had happened.
If you’re all masked up and hot prowling, and you’re confronted. You just run.

You don’t take a knife and go room to room stabbing people who can’t even identify you.

And only his DNA was on the sheath anyway.
 
Insofar as I have read in the news, LE has not found the murder weapon in this case so far. Do you know something which has not been released to the public thus far and "the murder weapon was under a murder victim?"

I think you know I meant the sheath was under the murder victim not the knife.

But how darn suspicious that the sheath was a military knife sheath that "seems" to fit a military knife that is made with a handle to help keep blood off murderers.

Is it even possible that the military sheath held the actual murder weapon?

Yes, I think so.

2 Cents
 
Great post.

Trying to construct complex theories based on speculation from sources or hints from AT can be a complete waste of time as illustrated in many cases we have all followed.

I think there are a number of complex theories being constructed based on speculation on both sides, and in many cases, a cigar is just a cigar. But I attribute much of that to the lack of information in this case and a drive for answers and satisfaction of a conviction.

MOO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Keep Websleuths Free

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
45
Guests online
2,573
Total visitors
2,618

Forum statistics

Threads
619,328
Messages
18,396,440
Members
238,423
Latest member
100miles
Back
Top