- Joined
- Nov 20, 2022
- Messages
- 87
- Reaction score
- 683
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed> In many places it is not legal to carry that knife. A three is blade is the common maximum blade length.
Last edited by a moderator:
I Totally agree, A knife is personal,I feel like a gun is a drug dealers weapon of choice. Quick and efficient. Stabbing someone is personal. Up close and personal. Whoever did this wanted to be in the thick of it. They weren’t discouraged by the thought of being drenched in someone’s blood. They watched the life drain from these 4 people. They killed them each separately. They relished in this. This person is a full blown psycho.
That's like putting coke in a Pepsi glass.You can buy a KA-BAR brand sheath and put a non KA-BAR branded knife in it. That's what I did.
View attachment 381910
Not necessarily. You need to read about some of the assassinations in Mexico over the last few years. Many were committed with knives and machetes. Also, guns are noisy, even with a suppressor. An assassin with knife training, very quiet.I feel like a gun is a drug dealers weapon of choice. Quick and efficient. Stabbing someone is personal. Up close and personal. Whoever did this wanted to be in the thick of it. They weren’t discouraged by the thought of being drenched in someone’s blood. They watched the life drain from these 4 people. They killed them each separately. They relished in this. This person is a full blown psycho.
I’m still not sure if it’s someone who knew the victims or just a psychopath that was ready to graduate from animals to humans. They say the scene was sloppy but I’m not sure I understand that. No bloody footprints tracked through the place…apparently nothing to go on so I’m leaning towards a stranger who wants to be a serial killer. They were going to kill someone no matter what but they were prepared. It’s so easy to search ways to cover your tracks these days. If you watch enough crime shows then you know what NOT to do. But if it was someone the victims knew then that’s one smooth dude. I’m curious to know if this person is cocky enough to stick around thinking they got away with it.It’s like one of those “You ruined my life, so now I’m going to ruin yours..” crimes.
I also kind of wondered if they meant the dog returned Sunday night. Because that’s technically the night of the incident, since they have been referring to the murders taking place in the early morning hours of Sunday. Just my thoughts, but the wording struck me odd. I hope that makes sense.
I’m a first time poster and I’m intrigued by this case. I’m on the same page with you, the person who did this took advantage of going home early for Thanksgiving, so they wouldn’t get caught by the police. I wouldn’t be surprised if the person comes back from Thanksgiving break and attends the vigil like nothing ever happened. Or they lie and say they were affected by the tragedy and will do their learning remotely. This way the police won’t find them.If this guy is local to that neighborhood, I would suspect he's a night walker, he'd probably be the type to walk past that house at night when the cops are not there. You'd think the cops are patrolling that area at night and would have come across somebody looking suspicious at this point. Possibly this person went home on school break?
Poor Murphy. Can't imagine what he went through, saw, and did all through the night until at least noon the next day.No. I assume this is bad reporting and should be morning after the attack.
"On the night of the attack, officers located a dog at the residence that was unharmed. Police turned the dog over to Animal Services and it was later released to a responsible party."
![]()
University of Idaho murders: Here's what we know
Police revealed slightly more information on Sunday during a press conference about the 911 caller and affirmed the whereabouts of the victims that night.www.ktvb.com
Murders themselves were probably over relatively quick, but whether he left the crime or not entirely depends on the killer. There's no blood prints leading outside the house, so to me he definitely spend at least some time cleaning up. His whole attire, especially the sleeves and arms, should have been a bloody mess, yet there's nothing so far that we could see that would indicate that.Who knows, but I think these murders likely went down quickly. I mean Ted Bundy was only in the Chi Omega house maybe 15 minutes, and that had a sexual aspect to it. Without the sexual aspect, robbery, etc., I think this killer in Moscow was in and out. Point was just kill them. But why? Was it really personal? Or was it just a thrill kill?
I don't think they used the word "sloppy." I think they said "messy." Yes, tons of evidence. Maybe not the perp's evidence. Maybe only the victims' evidence.My theory still remains the same days after I originally posted it- this was done by someone the girls knew (either really well OR just very casually in passing). This wasn’t the work of a sophisticated serial killer or efficient murderer trained in the military. This was sloppy and careless, fueled solely by emotions such as jealousy, anger, and pure rage. The crime scene investigators have said the scene was very sloppy with tons of evidence left. The longtime FBI profiler also agrees. None of the facts as we know them line up with a well-prepared and trained serial killer. They instead point towards a more immature individual who was more concerned with exacting revenge and brutality than not potentially getting caught or hurt.
A military trained killer would have killed with precision, not multiple haphazard and angry slashes and stabs to the torso. That many stabs indicates someone who has zero anger/rage control. Military assassins are disciplined and efficient killing machines.
And serial killers almost always have a signature or calling card MO. Most involve luring or tricking victims into close contact with them so that they can abduct and/or torture their victims. Most serial killers aren’t into rage killing houseloads of victims. I’m aware it’s happened before, so it wouldn’t be unheard of. But it’s just incredibly rare. A serial killer could strike any time he wanted to do so. But some vengeful and scorned incel wanting to punish Kaylee might have had no other choice than to murder her that night before she moved back in with her parents and out of state for good.
Maybe I’m just a boring and unimaginative slave to statistics, but I keep going back to the overwhelming percentage of murders being committed by someone acquainted with the victim.
Also, I think there are a few discussion points which others on here seem to find critical, but which I find completely inconsequential. For instance, the whole 911 call/unconscious person debate seems like a big nothing to me. There’s no way the roommates had anything to do with this. And there’s so many ways either they or their friends who made the 911 call could have used the phrase “unconscious”. Maybe it was the 911 operator who paraphrased that. Maybe the 911 operator asked them point blank if the person appeared conscious and they replied no. Maybe they didn’t even get a close look at their deceased roommates at first and just thought one or more were unconscious. There’s no malice or importance to the crime there, at least IMO.
And then there’s the dog. Kaylee’s dog survived. Not a big deal as it relates to the crime. Doesn’t necessarily signify anything at all. Pets survive murders all the time. Some dogs don’t bark at all. Most killers have no interest in killing a dog, especially if it’s just sitting there. If someone targeted one or more of the victims, the dog was not the aim of their rage. The killer murdered the object or objects of his rage, then killed anyone else he encountered who got in his way. Just like the girls downstairs shut up in their rooms, the dog posed no threat to him.
I’ll say lastly that so much seems to be focused on the inconsistencies and confusing statements coming from law enforcement. That really isn’t a surprise for three reasons: a) as investigations develop, theories change, b) law enforcement often says things and lies to confuse, frighten, or comfort the suspects, and c) much of what they’re saying seems confusing to us because we haven’t seen what they’ve seen (if we had walked the crime scene, seen the evidence, and talked to witnesses, a lot of our confusion to their statements and theories would be cleared up). I think it’s unfair to judge law enforcement’s inconsistent and sometimes illogical statements as proof they don’t know what they’re doing or have bungled the case. There is so, so much that not even the families have been told as of now that the police do know. I guarantee that there are very specific reasons they are saying what they’re saying.
I think 2 is very likely since police already confirmed in the Nov 20th update that the 911 operator spoke to multiple people in the callComing in late…
Been reading these threads about this case like crazy. So bizarre and tragic!!
I know many are questioning the 911 call. I have two theories…
1. Someone did see the gruesome crime scene and passed out and that was the unconscious person being called about
2. Sometimes 911 dispatchers have a hard time understanding what a caller could be saying (ie caller could be freaking out) and the dispatcher might report it an unconscious person to get backup out quickly.
Just my thoughts on that.
Don’t recall seeing this answered, but management is done by a big local real estate/property management company. They have their own maintenance crew, as I understand it, although they contract with others for non-routine maintenance.Watching more news and the Tik Tok videos IMO I still believe it is someone local. Fixed in one of the girls that he was watching on Tik Tok. He is local in Moscow, handyman, loner, etc.....Have we heard from owner of the house? Landlord? Were they paying rent on time or late, or behind rent? I see the Range Rover is parked outside the house???
Why at this point is there no reward for the killer? Usually at this point in a crime like this magnitude it would be around $100,000. IMO its someone local laying low and hasn't change a routine in his life. MOO
Is it a fact that there were no bloody prints? How could the public know that? How do you know that he wasn't a bloody mess?Murders themselves were probably over relatively quick, but whether he left the crime or not entirely depends on the killer. There's no blood prints leading outside the house, so to me he definitely spend at least some time cleaning up. His whole attire, especially the sleeves and arms, should have been a bloody mess, yet there's nothing so far that we could see that would indicate that.
IMO, one other similar kind of profile killer is the guy that did the Setagaya family murder and he spend at least an hour in the house after the murders, including cleaning himself up and patching his injuries. It's quite likely this killer did something similar.