ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered - Bryan Kohberger Arrested - Moscow # 65

[TL4S]

In regards to BK's 12 times in the area of King Rd...

1) His phone was in the coverage area.
2) His phone was close enough to do a handshake with their wifi.
3) His phone didn't return after Nov. 14.
4) This information was sought out by LE and included in the PCA as a possible sign of prior stalking behavior.

Individually, these pieces could mean anything. But when these individual pieces are combined with each other and a quadruple homicide, they start to form a picture, imo.

I can say, logically, that okay, he was shopping in the area, or had a friend near the residence, or didn't return after the murders because reasons A, B, or C. But allegedly, this same person, vehicle, phone, etc., is now linked via camera footage and DNA to four murders. LE suspected prior stalking behavior, so they sought a warrant for his phone records, and there it was, just as they seemed to suspect.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that these pieces seem to be piling up and are looking less and less like anything other then the crap they are. Jmo.

 

[Which_pancake]

Drug dealer is not legitimate, though.

And still a possibility.

Ha well that is true. I guess I mean non-stalking reasons

 

[jepop]

On the previous thread, jepop posted the following to me:

"But what about DMs sworn statement to police, her witness statement, which I am assuming was extracted from in some form to be included in the PCA. Not just something that she casually said to an officer, but a witness statement, taken down at the station, signed and witnessed, say on November 13th sometime. Genuine question, as in what do you think? Would that be included in the exceptions? Another poster here seemed to think so if I read them right." ....

(Edited for focus. The original post is full of interesting comments and questions and I would link to it if I knew how.)

Thank you for your courtesy. I assume all your questions are genuine; you and I are just trying to figure out what the experts are saying about legal subtleties.

I'll try to ask my lawyer/friend, since I happen to have an expert on speed dial. As I mentioned in that earlier thread, she is a federal appeals public defender for juveniles, so the use of responses given to police interviews should be right up her alley.

I assume a witness statement could be used to impeach DM if she says something different on the stand or in a deposition. But if she never testifies under oath, I'm not sure what she told police can be used at all by the DA in the actual trial.

So good of you to bring this forward. Thanking you kindly!

 

[stormymama]

Re: the wifi comment

Is it possible SG mentioned “touching the WiFi” just to reiterate how close BK was to the house, like a figure of speech?

 

[NCgardener]

Phones don't ping wifi connections. LE can track cell tower pings through providers, with a warrant. Check your router log and see if it records cell phones that never connected. I know of no consumer routers that do this.

There is no consumer log but there could still be a forensic trail. The Fbi has computer forensics specialists. Like how they recreate data purely from old memory that hasn't been overwritten yet.

 

[Walela]

I know that previously in the thread I mentioned alternative reasons that BK might have traveled frequently to Moscow, but IMO it is so very incriminating that he apparently stopped going altogether after Nov. 14th. I guess the defense could argue he was too scared after the murders, but any alternative reason he might have had for repeated nighttime visits to Moscow wouldn't have simply disappeared after the murders (i.e., a relationship, friendship, a specific restaurant / food he could only get there).

IMO, we really have no information on any camera activity or cell phone activity that places BK in Moscow after the 14th and that is mainly because it could possibly be exculpatory and no DA in his right mind is going to allow anything even remotely exculpatory to be included in a probable cause affidavit. He could have made several trips that we are unaware of.

 

[Friday Fan]

Re: the wifi comment

Is it possible SG mentioned “touching the WiFi” just to reiterate how close BK was to the house, like a figure of speech?

Maybe
The reason I keep harping on this is because it's huge! If true, then BK should just hang it up! BK just lost the case!
That's why I'm skeptical. Why would the prosecution's case be in the open like this???

 

[Pretty Go Pale]

Drug dealer is not legitimate, though.

Pfizer begs to differ.

 

[10ofRods]

@10ofRods and @Mad Hettie :

re triangulation via cell towers:

My area has only two towers and they are from differing companies.

When the triangulation you are referring to occurs, is it only using whichever company's tower you have service for, or is it any functioning tower nearby?

Our towers are Verizon and US Cellular.

I guess they can't triangulate with only two towers, but by drawing range radius circles around each tower that pings (like they did with KK's drive in the Frazee case, IIRC), they can narrow the phone's location down to two possible locations.

ETA: because I think the ping can also tell HOW FAR from the tower the phone was when it pinged? Otherwise my radius circle idea is defunct.

It should be any functioning tower. Packets emitting from a device are anonymous until they hit a receiver (any tower). If it's your carrier, it allows your cellular activity to go onward; if not, not. But no carrier can know whether the end user is "theirs" without at least letting the device owner contact the tower.

All of your emissions from your phone go in every direction - the emissions have no way of knowing where they are going and they radiate outward from you to every tower (pings) whether it's "your tower" or not. Then, if it is your carrier's tower or one connected to your carrier (some antennae connect for more than one carrier) it passes your emission on to where ever you want it to go (hopefully). When I am in Yosemite, I take two devices, one Verizon and one ATT. Sometimes one has coverage and the other doesn't. But both devices are pinging off the available towers; each able to complete the handshake with its own carrier. "Pings" are just like knocking on the door; it hasn't been opened yet.

Much more can be known from GPS (often).

They *can" triangulate from only two towers although that's not optimal. One tower hit (no triangulation) still puts a person in the general radius of the one tower (which is a known quantity - each cell tower's coverage is known and recorded in real time, as I understand it).

And it is my understand that yes, each tower can assess the vector and relative strength (closeness) of a mobile device. Not sure how it's done or how accurate (maybe not a pinpoint).

 

[10ofRods]

Maybe
The reason I keep harping on this is because it's huge! If true, then BK should just hang it up! BK just lost the case!
That's why I'm skeptical. Why would the prosecution's case be in the open like this???

Because there's way, way more. That's my theory anyway.

 

[Ccging]

Where and when was his car in line at a drive-thru? There are plenty of times that I am in line at drive-thrus, but the drive-thru is so slow that I get out of line and leave.

It’s in the PCA

 

[eloquence]

I feel very strongly that if it was a KA-BAR, mask, gloves, or even bleach it would have been in the PCA.

The Albertson's purchase was 8 hours after the murders, so the knife and mask were not from there. If it's cleaning supplies, that's damning. Maybe it was cereal and a Gatorade and it's not relevant. I'm sure LE has tracked the purchases down by now

 

[steeltowngirl]

After someone asked what SG was talking about when he said that BK's phone "touched" their wifi" I myself posted the proposition that routers do, or at least could be set to, log that data. After I posted that, someone asked me if I know of any routers that actually do this.

That led me on a mission of discovery. First, I checked all my own router logs. They definitely record any attempts to log in, but there is nothing about all the phones that pass within range but never try. Then I set about trying to find if there is a setting to enable such a thing. There is not. Then I started searching the internet for information on the subject. I was never able to find any model of consumer modem/router that has that capability.

I welcome others to try.

If he had personal hotspot enabled on his phone, would the students’ house Wi-Fi router perhaps picked up his IP address on an attempted connection log?

 

[seemstome]

But they don't know that yet. All they know is that he was there. Corporate Albertson's involved in delving into receipts.

Ongoing. Must be based on more than visuals. So, LE knows (and probably knew while the PCA was being prepared) exactly what he bought. Many reasons why it didn't need to be in the PCA. For one, they were probably in communication with the judge about his overall sense of what was needed to be in the PCA. Everyone has an interest in not revealing stuff until court convenes properly (Prelim then Trial).

Well someone who works at Albertsons certainly knows what he bought. My guess is he didn’t buy a giant cart of groceries so if it was a few items someone probably remembers. I wish they would join this site and tell us!

 

[Auntie Cipation]

If he had personal hotspot enabled on his phone, would the students’ house Wi-Fi router perhaps picked up his IP address on an attempted connection log?

I think it's the other way around -- if he was using his phone as a personal hotspot then his phone would show up as a network to other nearby devices! (and what would it be called -- probably "BK's iphone" or similar, based on how mine works. Wouldn't that be something if someone had noticed or even screenshot that!)

 

[Zella]

Re: the wifi comment

Is it possible SG mentioned “touching the WiFi” just to reiterate how close BK was to the house, like a figure of speech?

He also has a history of making garbled comments that are hard to parse and end up being retracted or corrected. I could see it being possible that BK did indeed connect to their WiFi--and if he did, that's a pretty damning placement of him--but I also am hesitant to say it conclusively happened without it being confirmed from another source. MOO

 

[CSIDreamer]

Yep. So instead of your cell going through ATT, goes straight to the FBI. Nifty.

Then it goes to your provider, as I understand. It's a physical piece of equipment, also only as I understand it. So MOO.

I'd like to see you cite your source for Pegasus. The FBI has strongly denied using what I believe to be an Israeli spy program. JMO

 

[seasideForest]

If you examine the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5-TR), you'll find yourself and most if not all your friends there.

RSBM for focus.

You have me laughing! But there is a great deal of truth in what you write here. MOO JMO

 

[Walela]

It’s in the PCA

On page 17 it only says the car drove past Kate's Cup of Joe..not that it was in the drive-thru. IMO the drive-thru statement came from somewhere else.
Affidavit

 

[r3d-ros3]

IMO, we really have no information on any camera activity or cell phone activity that places BK in Moscow after the 14th and that is mainly because it could possibly be exculpatory and no DA in his right mind is going to allow anything even remotely exculpatory to be included in a probable cause affidavit. He could have made several trips that we are unaware of.

I agree with you, but the PCA does specifically say that the phone "hasn't connected to any towers that provide service to Moscow since [Nov. 14th]."