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

[PinkParis2052]

Thank you. And after reading up on it. He should or could be charged with aggravated burglary because of the weapon.

It was felony burglary



source CRIMINAL COMPLAINT

 

[Charlot123]

.

IMO - So respectfully, you’re just as interested in the random non identified dna found in the house as the dna found on possibly the murder weapon’s sheath that was under one of the bodies? Just to put it out there, I’m not, that dna on possibly the murder weapon’s sheath found under a body is the whole kit & caboodle for me. There will be no innocent explanation on why that dna was found there & the presumption of privacy after leaving your dna in such a compromising position at a crime scene is preposterous! MOO

I am a regular citizen who is just following the case, from day one, on most medias, watching all police bodycam videos, mostly, everything. The defense asked a question, I am commenting on the fact that to me the question seems legit. MOO.

 

[jepop]

SBMFF.

Reasonable doubt is made of things that "prove nothing or amount to wild speculation." I hardly think they'll be put aside. MOO.

Well, doubt for some might be made of those things, but whether or not one might call it reasonable is another question of course. Jmo

 

[MassGuy]

And one thing might not fit and the jury can still vote it is still not enough for reasonable doubt.

2 Cents.

Sometimes lots of things might not fit/be convincing enough, and there's still no room for reasonable doubt. I've followed numerous cases where I'm not convinced in regards to certain claims made by investigators or the prosecution.

His DNA is there. His DNA has absolutely no legitimate reason to be there.

The timeline as provided by surveillance footage of his car, and cell phone data (that damning dark period prior to and following the murders) tells us why his DNA is there.

Normally we're privy to a lot more details at this stage, as there is usually a preliminary hearing. Here we're forced to piece things together through the PCA and a few written motions/hearings. There's enough there to read between the lines though. There are really bad things for him as a result of some of those search warrants.

You take the big stuff, sprinkle in some of the other evidence, and you've got a rock solid case. I have no concern that this will disappoint.

 

[DizzyB]

Agree.

I disagree and there is absolutely no evidence of any of that which has been made public. JMO.


We know that KG allegedly said "There's someone in the house." If she said it to MM and one of them had a knife for protection, it would be a normal reaction for that person to try to get their knife out to protect themself from the intruder. What has happened in some home invasion cases is that the intruder (who is also armed) gets to the victim too fast for the victim to completely be ready to use their weapon and the intruder takes the weapon from the homeowner. Then, the intruder is armed with two weapons. Does he use that weapon on the victim or the weapon he brought with him? It could easily be either or even both. So far we have no evidence proving which is true. JMO.


There is zero evidence he was at the house at all - the trace DNA is not enough to prove his presence without corroborating evidence that he was actually inside of 1122 King Rd which does not seem to exist. AT talks about the stalking story being false at 6:48 in the video I linked at the bottom of the page.

I don't believe any of that either.


Unfortunately, I don't think we can be sure DM's story of the strange man is true at all. She apparently told LE that she may have dreamed it or her mind was playing tricks on her, that she was drunk or couldn't remember, etc. stated in the Jan 23, 2024 hearing by AT to which the prosecution did not object. (6:27, 6:35) in the video of the hearing I linked below.)

DM’s testimony is minor for me. It’s all of the other evidence. I just don’t see an entire jury coming back with a not guilty verdict. A hold out or two to acquit, maybe people that expect a case to be they way they see it on tv, okay. But I believe there will be others that will refuse to let this guy walk. His best hope is a hung jury and a mistrial. And then they’ll go again.

 

[INfisherman]

Beyond all possible doubt is not the same as reasonable doubt. One excuse does not erase everything else at all. Come up with all excuses you can, BK is going to have to prove the doors his attorneys open are true, no different than the state.

He is cooked. His DNA has no business being in that house. If it was placed there, the defense has to prove that it was placed there. That is the bottom line, whether Bigfoot owns the knife, sheath or the car. If the defense decides to open doors of doubt, then they have to prove it beyond reason. That is a very long & wide open street & we’re not even touching security camera evidence or cell phone evidence. What we know today WILL change once the trial begins - just ask the KC fans from the past year. No weapon, no problem.

Good luck Bryan, I hope you’re as confident in July as you are tonight.

I’ve got squirrels to feed. Have fun folks.

MOO

 

[Cool Cats]

Sometimes lots of things might not fit/be convincing enough, and there's still no room for reasonable doubt. I've followed numerous cases where I'm not convinced in regards to certain claims made by investigators or the prosecution.

His DNA is there. His DNA has absolutely no legitimate reason to be there.

The timeline as provided by surveillance footage of his car, and cell phone data (that damning dark period prior to and following the murders) tells us why his DNA is there.

Normally we're privy to a lot more details at this stage, as there is usually a preliminary hearing. Here we're forced to piece things together through the PCA and a few written motions/hearings. There's enough there to read between the lines though. There are really bad things for him as a result of some of those search warrants.

You take the big stuff, sprinkle in some of the other evidence, and you've got a rock solid case. I have no concern that this will disappoint.

This case is so bad for the defense there could be a plea deal at start of trial.

 

[INfisherman]

This case is so bad for the defense there could be a plea deal at start of trial.

Even next week or beyond. His attorneys are doing what they should according to their playbook. Once they run out of plays, what’s next? I don’t know….if it were me, I’d certainly be pondering standing in front of a firing squad, as that’s potentially something to consider, let alone death by chemicals.

Between me & you? Death by doughnuts, including Sunday.

 

[MassGuy]

This case is so bad for the defense there could be a plea deal at start of trial.

It all comes down to their client, and if he wants to roll the dice or not. We've seen plenty of cases where there's overwhelming evidence, where the defendant still refuses to play ball.

I do think it's likely to go to trial, and I really want it to go to trial (selfishly). I want to know everything.

 

[Cool Cats]

Beyond all possible doubt is not the same as reasonable doubt. One excuse does not erase everything else at all. Come up with all excuses you can, BK is going to have to prove the doors his attorneys open are true, no different than the state.

He is cooked. His DNA has no business being in that house. If it was placed there, the defense has to prove that it was placed there. That is the bottom line, whether Bigfoot owns the knife, sheath or the car. If the defense decides to open doors of doubt, then they have to prove it beyond reason. That is a very long & wide open street & we’re not even touching security camera evidence or cell phone evidence. What we know today WILL change once the trial begins - just ask the KC fans from the past year. No weapon, no problem.

Good luck Bryan, I hope you’re as confident in July as you are tonight.

MOO

Payne in the PCA said that King was a quiet road, not normal for cars to be driving around at 4:00am. There was no 4:00am party, people were going to bed. That car tearing out of there was probably BK desperate to dump his evidence.

 

[Cool Cats]

It all comes down to their client, and if he wants to roll the dice or not. We've seen plenty of cases where there's overwhelming evidence, where the defendant still refuses to play ball.

I do think it's likely to go to trial, and I really want it to go to trial (selfishly). I want to know everything.

Same here Mass

 

[Cool Cats]

Even next week or beyond. His attorneys are doing what they should according to their playbook. Once they run out of plays, what’s next? I don’t know….if it were me, I’d certainly be pondering standing in front of a firing squad, as that’s potentially something to consider, let alone death by chemicals.

Between me & you? Death by doughnuts, including Sunday.

Doughnuts HA! Hard to survive with no coffee.

 

[MassGuy]

Beyond all possible doubt is not the same as reasonable doubt. One excuse does not erase everything else at all. Come up with all excuses you can, BK is going to have to prove the doors his attorneys open are true, no different than the state.

He is cooked. His DNA has no business being in that house. If it was placed there, the defense has to prove that it was placed there. That is the bottom line, whether Bigfoot owns the knife, sheath or the car. If the defense decides to open doors of doubt, then they have to prove it beyond reason. That is a very long & wide open street & we’re not even touching security camera evidence or cell phone evidence. What we know today WILL change once the trial begins - just ask the KC fans from the past year. No weapon, no problem.

Good luck Bryan, I hope you’re as confident in July as you are tonight.

I’ve got squirrels to feed. Have fun folks.

MOO

That's a thing I'm noticing more and more now, not just in this case, but in practically every murder case in general. The standard has changed from reasonable doubt, to no doubt. It's wild, because based on what some of these people expect, virtually no murder case is prosecutable.

 

[mrjitty]

I think the Judges shot clock is running out on a potential Franks??

Didn’t he indicate a three week window for the hearing?

IMO

 

[Swansee]

@mrjitty
Whoever is in charge of putting documents up has been chronically slow to upload them so far, so for all we know Hippler could have ruled on this last week.
I hope we'll get something soon.

 

[schooling]

That's a thing I'm noticing more and more now, not just in this case, but in practically every murder case in general. The standard has changed from reasonable doubt, to no doubt. It's wild, because based on what some of these people expect, virtually no murder case is prosecutable.

Seriously, CSI Las Vegas, Dateline/2020/48Hours episdoes where everything is perfectly wrapped up in 48 minutes (though I grew up with post TGIF Friday night 20/20, Tuesday night Dateline and Thursday night 48 hours and I don't get like this) , True Crime podcasts, True Crime television networks. It's created such a skewed view of what reasonable doubt is.

I'll tell you one thing...99 times out of 100 it's not wild speculation.

MOO

 

[jepop]

I think the Judges shot clock is running out on a potential Franks??

Didn’t he indicate a three week window for the hearing?

IMO

He did. That window ends this week. No filed notice of hearing. No filed order for Franks hearing. I suppose, strictly speaking, that's not to say these filings don't exist and are just late being uploaded. But jmo if there haven't been off the record communications between the court and parties re a hearing for a day this week, then there's no time left for court to reasonably order a hearing for, say, Thursday or Friday. It wouldn't be Hippler's style to pull a surprise on the parties with only a few days notice. Jmo and assuming no off record comms to alter the time table.

 

[Soulmagent]

.

I am a regular citizen who is just following the case, from day one, on most medias, watching all police bodycam videos, mostly, everything. The defense asked a question, I am commenting on the fact that to me the question seems legit. MOO.

Exactly like a person the court will be seeking out for the jury.

 

[INfisherman]

Exactly like a person the court will be seeking out for the jury.

Maybe, except the jurors desired won’t be commenting on a TC forum. None of us should rightfully be on a jury if we’re being honest.

MOO

 

[Charlot123]

That's a thing I'm noticing more and more now, not just in this case, but in practically every murder case in general. The standard has changed from reasonable doubt, to no doubt. It's wild, because based on what some of these people expect, virtually no murder case is prosecutable.

People might expect not only high standards for the burden of proof.

People sometimes doubt that the alibis were as well-checked, and some recent cases give them ample reason to doubt.

Personally, I do feel upset about some cases, too, like Suzanne Morphew’s one. When will justice be done there?

Looking at it from the opposite side, though, one badly patched up case in a different state automatically increases requirements to all subsequent ones.

About BK. What gives me uneasy feeling about him is the reaction of these women in a restaurant in PA. Remember, when he was asked to leave because he gave them creeps? Such nonverbal signals I tend to trust.

Yet the problem with the murders in Idaho lies, it seems, in the house that has been known as a “party” one long before the victims moved in there. It also seems that the house had a very poor protection. Add to it no firm evidence of stalking or obsession by BK who is a total outsider plus the fact that the four victims were vibrant, social, active and well-known in town, and the dire need to prove that it was him becomes obvious. JMO.