ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 63

[Elley Mae]

Yes I do think they probably do give them a razor and take it back when they are done.

Safety razors, anti shank razors, security razors, single blade bic razors.

Different ones are available for jails/prisons, google search shows lots.

Jmo

 

[want2solveit]

This is a ""TMZ"" link. It is from the Indiana police officer who stopped BK's car. It opens to show bK with apparent injury to outter right wrist, and to left top of hand at juncture with wrist, inside aspect. I did NOT add the red circles.It is as I found it in a google image search.

I am sorry I placed this in the wrong spot, within a quoted post. I will be more careful in future. Thank you to mod who pointed it out to me.

 

[jepop]

No one here knows whether or not BK felt "justified" in allegedly killing the victims or felt any remorse afterward.

Yes, that is a good point. It is early days, people want answers now, but there simply are not any.

 

[CityKid]

Can someone please direct me to what y'all are discussing? I am lost. Went back pages and still didn't see whatever spot it is you guys are talking about. Thanks in advance

EDIT: Oh, are you guys talking of the old news that the blood was dripping down the house? If so, the coroner confirmed long ago that it was blood.

Is there a link for the coroner confirming that was blood?

 

[maskedwoman]

So are they claiming he has "two gashes" near his chin or that he was "covered" in facial cuts?

I don't understand the significance. Are they trying to imply the defendant is getting unfair treatment in jail?

It's not significant, other than it first appeared he might have been injured somehow. So the Sheriff had to release something to say it was a botched shave. Hopefully he'll get used to the jailhouse razors or he's going to look pretty rough by his June hearing. LOL

 

[kaley]

Does anyone know if the dateline special tonight on NBC can be streamed for free anywhere?

 

[SharonNeedles]

None of which he knew or might have expected.
We all engage sometimes, I do as well, so dont take it personally. But that is hindsight fallacy. The presumption he knew a miltary age male was there is not supported. presumption he knew golf clubs were there

if you think about it he picked among the most ideal place, time and weapon. All petite females living there. lowest statistical likelihood of having a firearm. weapon less likely to leave forensic trace (knife with handguard/large hilt).

Not sure how one can assume he scouted and planned, knew the layout of the house and where his intended victims were sleeping - but didn't know that Ethan sleeping over was a regular thing? At the very least he should know that the red Jeep parked right by the front door doesn't belong to the girls.

 

[Deleted member 718]

Here’s what’s on TV tonight. DATELINE: KILLINGS IN A COLLEGE TOWN (9 P.M., NBC) “Dateline” sends Keith Morrison to Moscow, Idaho, to get the latest updates on the murders of four University of Idaho college students — Madison Mogen (21), Kaylee Goncalves (21), Xana Kernodle (20) and Ethan Chapin (20) — and the arrest of the suspected killer, Bryan Kohberger.

20/20: HORROR IN IDAHO: THE STUDENT MURDERS (9 P.M., ABC) “20/20” also looks at the Idaho college student murders, with a range of experts talking about various aspects of the case, including the investigation timeline and the DNA technology that helped them identify a suspect.

Read more at: https://www.newsobserver.com/entert...m-tv-blog/article271118047.html#storylink=cpy

Both programs air at 9pm.

 

[AlisRedHat]

This is not correct. Try calling any doctor's office and ask if so-and-so is a patient there. Let us know what they say. A patient's name is protected health information under HIPAA and that information cannot be divulged without prior authorization from the patient.

And I think I'm now officially exhausted from explaining this here on WS. Signed, a legal assistant in the healthcare industry!

Reasonable minds can disagree! Please re read my post as I think you have misinterpreted what I wrote. If the person inquiring names the patient, then the medical office is not releasing PHI. Usually the office has a policy in place not to release that information. It's not always black and white because there are exceptions. Additionally, a doctor's office must be a covered entity or else they are not bound by HIPAA. MOO.
Signed, someone who works with HIPAA issues all day every day 5 days a week.

 

[Diogenetic]

I think accounts of his behavior toward women in *recent* years, as a grown man, could be telling, but reaching back to 12-year-old behavior is really silly. When my daughter was 12, she had boys who paid her compliments like that where she found it weird, and a couple did come off as somewhat awkward. We talked about how to kindly but firmly turn down this sort of attention, but I hardly think anyone should be judged by what is probably their first fumbling attempts to demonstrate interest in someone.

Even the "child bearing hips" is in my view possibly a reference to The Office episode to see if she watched that very popular show. I have seen lots of people mimic Dwight Shruit making that statement.

 

[Annie b- 14]

whether BK will write his experiences down for later publication has come up, and perhaps this answer has been posted before. If that's the case I apologize for the repetition.

BK won't profit from any kind of publication of his story if the state enforces its "Son of Sam" statute, section 19-5301, which states:

"DISTRIBUTION OF MONEYS RECEIVED AS A RESULT OF THE COMMISSION OF CRIME.

(1) Every person, firm, corporation, partnership, association or other legal entity contracting with any person or the representative or assignee of any person, accused of a crime in this state, with respect to the reenactment of such crime, by way of a movie, book, magazine article, radio or television presentation, live entertainment of any kind, or from the expression of such person’s thoughts, feelings, opinions or emotions regarding such crime, shall pay over to the state treasurer any moneys which would otherwise, by terms of such contract, be owing to the person so convicted or his representatives. The state treasurer shall deposit such moneys in an escrow account for the benefit of and payable to any victim of crimes committed by such person, provided that such person is eventually convicted of the crime or is acquitted on the ground of mental disease or defect excluding responsibility and provided further that such victim, or his personal representative, within five (5) years of the date the escrow account has been established, brings a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction and recovers a money judgment against such person or his representatives.

(2) The state treasurer, at least once every six (6) months for five (5) years from the date it receives such moneys, shall cause to have published a legal notice in newspapers of general circulation in the county of the state where the crime was committed advising such victims that such escrow moneys are available to satisfy money judgments pursuant to this section.

(3) Upon disposition of charges favorable to any person accused of committing a crime, or upon a showing by such person that five (5) years have elapsed from the establishment of such escrow account and further that no actions are pending against such person, pursuant to this section the board shall immediately pay over any moneys in the escrow account to such person.

(4) Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this section the state treasurer shall make payments from an escrow account to any person accused of crime upon the order of a court of competent jurisdiction after a showing by such person that such moneys shall be used for the exclusive purpose of retaining legal representation at any stage of the proceedings against such person, including the appeals process.

(5) Any action taken by any person convicted of a crime, whether by way of execution of a power of attorney, creation of corporate entities or otherwise, to defeat the purpose of this section shall be null and void as against the public policy of this state.

(6) The state treasurer may invest the moneys in any escrow account hereunder in any United States government notes or securities.

(7) The attorney general or any other person may bring an action in a court of competent jurisdiction to require the deposit of moneys in an escrow account as provided in this section."

Some of these laws have been challenged on First Amendment grounds, but I don't think Idaho's is one of them. I think BTK and Professor Ramsland leveraged the First Amendment issue and worked out a deal directly with the victims' attorney to share revenue from Ramsland's book voluntarily and circumvent the Kansas Son of Sam statute. MOO.

If he does write a book, I have doubts that his true end goal will be monetary.
[/QUOTE]

*****

Totally agree that if he does write a book, his end goal will not be about the money. Guessing his goal would be more about fame and being seen as "important". Also, guessing he'd want to show people his intellect and the depths of his evil, criminal mind and his distorted thinking.

My fear is that if he writes a book, somebody might buy movie rights to it and I can't fathom the families of the victims having to be be tortured by such a movie. MOO
[/QUOTE]
He seems to be much more about being a part of the textbook, and his criminal mind among legends (of horror).

 

[steeltowngirl]

Does anyone know if the dateline special tonight on NBC can be streamed for free anywhere?

Peacock will have it. Maybe not live, but later to stream.

https://www.peacocktv.com/watch-online/tv/dateline-nbc/9060582955933764112/seasons/19

 

[GRT]

Not sure how one can assume he scouted and planned, knew the layout of the house and where his intended victims were sleeping - but didn't know that Ethan sleeping over was a regular thing? At the very least he should know that the red Jeep parked right by the front door doesn't belong to the girls.

If he'd been tracking the girl(s) as he's accused of doing, he would almost certainly know who owned the Jeep.

MOO

 

[maskedwoman]

Does anyone else feel like the media is really reaching when it comes to painting a picture of BK's "behavior" towards women? As a 12 year old he says to a girl, " Oh, you're so pretty" and other "weird" comments. Seriously??? Since when is complimenting someone weird or creepy?!

I feel like the media, and SM in particular, is desperate to portray BK as some sort of woman hating dude. I'm just not buying it! Why can't he just be a deranged lunatic who wanted to kill?

We will never get to the bottom of why he resulted to this crime, so why even bother trying to figure it out?

I think it largely depends on delivery and circumstances of those statements. "You look really pretty today." isn't creepy at all. "You're so pretty." or "You're beautiful." out of the blue might take me aback, depending on how and why it was said.

Being said to me multiple times by the same person, if we weren't friends or dating? Definitely creepy.

Now think of someone who is normally very quiet, standing inside your personal bubble, telling you that. That's creepy. No context. Just blurting it out. That's hella creepy.

 

[Pretty Go Pale]

Not sure how one can assume he scouted and planned, knew the layout of the house and where his intended victims were sleeping - but didn't know that Ethan sleeping over was a regular thing? At the very least he should know that the red Jeep parked right by the front door doesn't belong to the girls.

Well, if he knew Ethan and Xana were a couple, but BK's target was K and/or M, he might not have anticipated encountering Ethan, thinking he and Xana would be sleeping. BK could have just planned to attack K and/or M, then get the hell out of dodge. But then the plan went sideways when he crossed paths with an awake and outside-of-her room Xana.

 

[ktm44]

Even the "child bearing hips" is in my view possibly a reference to The Office episode to see if she watched that very popular show. I have seen lots of people mimic Dwight Shruit making that statement.

I think that if someone were to scrutinize each and every thing we have said in our lives, someone would certainly be able to take something we said, possibly out of context and find a way to make it seem insensitive or foolish so I'm not really that hung up on one comment made at one point in his life.

 

[ItalyReader]

Element of surprise. Night attack on people presumably asleep after a night of partying. Young, vulnerable female victims he had observed/stalked (+ unexpected male who could have been a game changer in a different scenario). Sliding door easy entry. House layout online. Party house open to friends & unvetted strangers a lot.

I don't find the use of a Ka-Bar knife odd at all. I think he was obsessed with the exact scenario he carried out.

Some have suggested that moving across country away from family & familiar environment was an influencer. We know he wasted no time in working toward his goal once he was living in Pullman.

Risk? He weighed it & the desire to commit the crimes was more compelling than to merely fantasize about it.

I don't think a gun was likely to be available or prove useful to the victims in this scenario. I don't think anyone in the house when the crimes were committed ever seriously thought about self-defense being an issue in that home. Why should they?

moo

The party house element is huge in its appeal to an intruder/BK IMO - a house accustomed to seeing all types of people at all hours, likely rarely if ever locked etc MOO

 

[mendicant]

I think it largely depends on delivery and circumstances of those statements. "You look really pretty today." isn't creepy at all. "You're so pretty." or "You're beautiful." out of the blue might take me aback, depending on how and why it was said.

Being said to me multiple times by the same person, if we weren't friends or dating? Definitely creepy.

Now think of someone who is normally very quiet, standing inside your personal bubble, telling you that. That's creepy. No context. Just blurting it out. That's hella creepy.

It's all in the delivery. One is able after a time to spot a sociopath a mile away.

 

[want2solveit]

In answer to your question, no they cannot do that.

It's not significant, other than it first appeared he might have been injured somehow. So the Sheriff had to release something to say it was a botched shave. Hopefully he'll get used to the jailhouse razors or he's going to look pretty rough by his June hearing. LOL

It could be small shaving nicks which developed infection due to unsanitary conditions there-no clean towel, indequate soap for handwashing, etc. His lady lawyer will probably give him some nice quality disposable razors.

 

[CGray123]

Very routine. Today was a status hearing. BK had a right to have the preliminary hearing begin in a week; his attorney wanted more time; the preliminary hearing was scheduled for late June. The ‘challenge the evidence’ wording, I believe, is typical defense attorney bluster. Doesn’t mean anything except that, if the preliminary hearing takes place, she may exercise her right to cross examine.

(I’m not saying that all defense attorneys bluster, just that it’s quite common to see a progression from: “my client is 110% innocent”, to “ how about a plea bargain?”

MOO

Resources matter.

It's interesting to compare and contrast the defense in this case with the case of People v. Barry Morphew. Morphew, a millionaire contractor who lived in a chalet along the Arkansas River near the Monarch ski area in Colorado, was charged with the murder of his wife Suzanne, who disappeared shortly after telling Barry she wanted a divorce.

Barry hired an aggressive defense attorney and funded a "full court press" defense. He demanded his right to a speedy trial, and from the beginning filed every conceivable motion, overwhelming the small rural DA's capacity to respond to discovery requirements in a timely fashion. Ultimately, shortly before the trial, the judge imposed sanctions for the repeated discovery violations that restricted the availability of evidence critical to the prosecution. The DA was forced to voluntarily dismiss the case, reserving the right to refile.

It appears that limited resources of the Idaho PD's office preclude that kind of defense. We're on a slow track here.