GUILTY PLEA DEAL ACCEPTED - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #111

[wildblue]

Great! Then we agree!

Bryan is sentenced to life in prison, no parole, no appeals. Four consecutive sentences of the same. Plus 10 years for robbery.

This will be official at the next and last court date.

He was NOT sentenced to die. That issue is now defunct. If he lives to be 500, he will still be in prison.

The judge was very careful in closing all possible loopholes. This won’t go to a higher court because Bryan signed off on no appeals.

If you are in fact “a proponent of guilty parties facing the punishment to which they are sentenced,” then you are no longer wishing he’d get the death penalty.

I too am in favor of the death penalty, but this was a balancing act. The important issue was to prove Bryan guilty. He has confessed. Game over.

IMO

Meaning sentenced by a jury of his peers, not some hurried plea deal so the murderer gets what he wants…

 

[wendy44]

I believe all the parents have made their opinions known. Xana's mom has been against the death penalty from the start so she would obviously support the deal. Maddie's parents both support the deal (as does her stepfather). Ethan's parents both support the deal. Kaylee's parents don't. Xana's aunt spoke against it and implied her father felt the same.
JMO

 

[Megnut]

LWOP is a death sentence - just a slow one.

Agreed.

Just like the death penalty is a death sentence -- a slow one.

There is no guarantee twelve jurors would have voted for it. There is no guarantee it would have withstood appeals. There is no guarantee it would have been carried out in this decade or the next.

BK will be incarcerated for life. The bar for rescinding/restricting an American's right to freedom (life, liberty, happiness) is rightfully very high. BK walked right under it, voluntarily surrendering all of that without further argument or appeal.

It doesn't get tidier than that.

JMO

 

[Magic8Ball]

Hmm, Oxford says remorse means “deep regret.”
The prosecutor sending off an email, with a plea attachment, is reprehensible and stating that they spoke with only “available” family members in this day and age of technology, without waiting to speak with ALL family members as if they had no time to waste, is reprehensible. This is from the prosecution team not SG.
SG does indeed have every right to be angry and to express it, about whatever he wants IMO. It was his child that was slaughtered not the child of random people on the internet trying to tell him he should be grateful to a court he feels dishonored his child, telling him how to feel and what he’s allowed to say and criticizing him for normal human emotions.

Remorse is deep regret for wrongdoing. You forgot to add that last bit, and it's actually pretty important.

Regret is a feeling of sadness, repentance, or disappointment. It does not perforce involve feelings of remorse.

When I used the term regret in suggesting that SG may regret at some point not having attended BK's plea hearing, I meant he may feel sadness or disappointment in retrospect that he didn't sit in the courtroom to hear BK admit his guilt in person.

It's obviously not an act of wrongdoing for SG to take a pass on the hearing. It's a personal choice.
One which he has every right to make for himself. So I would not expect him to feel remorse.

Nobody is telling SG how to feel. He has every right to feel angry about the murder of his daughter.

His right to feel angry doesn't mean that his anger being directed at LE, the prosecution and/or the judge is justified or rational.

JMO.

 

[Megnut]

20 minutes

 

[wendy44]

I’m a proponent of guilty parties facing the punishment to which they are sentenced. If a future court wants to let out elderly inmates, for example, even those with LWOP, then it shouldn’t be retroactive.

I think changing laws and due process violations are two different animals. One is much more likely than the other to be retroactive and for good reason.
JMO

 

[Sundog]

Looking ahead to the sentencing hearing when victims' impact statements are made, I have been wondering if DM and BF will give statements if they choose to, also Hunter (Ethan's friend), the boyfriend of Maddie, and others who are not family but close friends of the victims who were significantly impacted by the murders. There are others besides those I listed above, but just thinking about who might ask the court to be included in giving victim impact statements at the sentencing hearing later this month.

 

[Ghostwheel]

Random question: If any of the families wish to pursue a civil suit against BK, does anyone know if presenting (or not presenting) an impact statement in the sentencing hearing would mean anything in the civil suit?

ETA: Remember, this is an IF. I am only wondering.

 

[wildblue]

Remorse is deep regret for wrongdoing. You forgot to add that last bit, and it's actually pretty important.

Regret is a feeling of sadness, repentance, or disappointment. It does not perforce involve feelings of remorse.

When I used the term regret in suggesting that SG may regret at some point not having attended BK's plea hearing, I meant he may feel sadness or disappointment in retrospect that he didn't sit in the courtroom to hear BK admit his guilt in person.

It's obviously not an act of wrongdoing for SG take a pass on a hearing. It's a personal choice.
One which he has every right to make for himself. So I would not expect him to feel remorse.

Nobody is telling SG how to feel. He has every right to feel angry about the murder of his daughter.

His right to feel angry doesn't mean that his anger being directed at LE, the prosecution and/or the judge is justified or rational.

JMO.

He has every right to express his anger at the prosecution team, the judge and the court system in general. It is justified as he feels wronged and that the aforementioned entities enabled a murderer to get what he wanted.

 

[MassGuy]

Random question: If any of the families wish to pursue a civil suit against BK, does anyone know if presenting (or not presenting) an impact statement in the sentencing hearing would mean anything in the civil suit?

ETA: Remember, this is an IF. I am only wondering.

From what I can gather, no, it doesn't have any negative effect. I guess it could help slightly because as it's both formal and documented.

What helps immensely is that liability has already been established as a result of his guilty plea, so that's a big hurdle gone.

 

[QB2022]

SG has every right to his feelings and views. As do the other 3 families, BF and DM. SG views are very very valid, but we can't let his view and the way he opts to express them over power the views of everyone else. I'm not going to criticise or judge anyone for how they are feeling and are responding, I hope to never know what I would do.

I do, personally, think the plea deal was the right outcome. I would like to see him locked away and his name never mentioned again. No stories, no coverage, just disappearing to carry out his sentence. I would like BF and DM to have the freedom from the plea deal to build successful and happy lives, free of guilt and the chains of a death penalty and all it's processes hanging over them.

 

[jepop]

Send me your recipe. I need to eat my hat as well. In all of my years here, I cannot think of a more surprising twist to a case that coming back from dinner the other evening and seeing 'PLEA DEAL REACHED'' at the top of the thread.

I opted out and decided to cheat; so looking for some choccy hats instead. Once I buy them, well hey it's technically still my own hat I'm eating! (ps Honey and soy is my favourite marinade but I fear it won't make my current hat -a Woolen beenie- any more palatable).

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

This post lands at random.

General discussion of the death penalty is not allowed at Websleuths. It is a social justice issue that will never be resolved through arguing here and it results in nothing but bickering and hard feelings among members.

Also, stop the snark. There is absolutely no reason to be sarcastic or nasty in this conversation.

Members who persist in either of the above will be removed from this discussion.

 

[jepop]

You are correct. A prosecutor can reject a deal. Either side can reject the deal.

It's the prosecutor's job to represent the state of Idaho. The decision to accept a plea is not just about the families. It's about what is in the interest of the state. In this case, that means making sure Bryan Kohberger never walks among ordinary people again.

A prosecutor would be a moron to reject 4 consecutive sentences of LWOP with no chance of appeal and throw the dice on getting a conviction and the death penalty. AT's whole effort in the last weeks was to develop a case for the penalty phase post-trial to keep BK off death row.

A trial is to determine whether an accused person is guilty. A guilty plea accomplishes that goal for society. It's not all about the families. It's about the citizens of Idaho.

I don't see how the state could refuse such a water tight plea, they would not be doing their job to do so IMO. The DA and PA had to make the decision and weigh the possible alternative outcomes. The plea as it stands comes out as the right and proper course. Jmo

Also, having the murderer unequivocally confess is surely at least part, and a big part, of what might constitute justice? Accountability with or without remorse is still accountability; and who is able to force someone into feeling and admitting remorse if they simply don't?

 

[Absoluterubbish]

Did the DNA from the sheath make investigators look at everything else? They knew a car, they knew it did not have a front license plate. At what point did they tie BK in and access the phone records, that he drove an Elantra? Can anyone identify the order?
When they found the relative through the DNA and built the tree, I think they found an individual in BK who lived nearby, owned the right car, had connected to the King Rd wifi, had issues at school, and so on. I am not as sure that the process would have ended in arrest if there was no DNA. Maybe years from now.

He’s was already their main suspect before the DNA. Thats what allowed them to go through his trash to obtain DNA

 

[Megnut]

Question of the hour: will Judge Hippler make an address at sentencing?

 

[wildblue]

Question of the hour: will Judge Hippler make an address at sentencing?

Judge Boyce didn’t make a statement at Chad Daybell’s sentencing, stating that the victims’ statements, to paraphrase, said it all despite being severely restricted. Perhaps Judge H will do the same.

 

[Observe_dont_Absorb]

She may have done her job but the smiling at, laughing with and touching and petting her murderous client are reprehensible displays in front of the families who lost their loved ones. <modsnip: name calling>

I wonder if it's a form of 'method acting' that when a defence lawyer has agreed to take the case of their client, they put all their time and effort into rigorously defending that person 'as if' they truly believe they're innocent? A bit like how if one joins the debating society at college and is tasked to argue a point of view, one doesn't actually have to truly believe it but take a stance and argue it?

JMO MOO

 

[snooptroop88]

I think SG is giving BK exactly what he craves: living rent free in his head. The more SG rages, the happier BK is JMO

Couldn't agree more, and SG alienating himself from the parties that just helped him, AND a victory of sorts for Crazytown Probergers (which is... I'm finding it hard to believe such a thing would have been possible, but I really do think it is probably the case).

But just noting, I do hope BK is kept in conditions that ensure his safety. And after watching BK at that hearing, he ought to be in conditions to ensure the safety of other inmates from him as well. He is definitely at the very least fairly intelligent, so yes, you absolutely would want to consider the potential for escape, jmo.

I see no point in the hysterical debate over the DP generally if someone escapes DP only to receive a makeshift DP from another prisoner, That is not justice for anyone.

You are correct. A prosecutor can reject a deal. Either side can reject the deal.

It's the prosecutor's job to represent the state of Idaho. The decision to accept a plea is not just about the families. It's about what is in the interest of the state. In this case, that means making sure Bryan Kohberger never walks among ordinary people again.

A prosecutor would be a moron to reject 4 consecutive sentences of LWOP with no chance of appeal and throw the dice on getting a conviction and the death penalty. AT's whole effort in the last weeks was to develop a case for the penalty phase post-trial to keep BK off death row.

A trial is to determine whether an accused person is guilty. A guilty plea accomplishes that goal for society. It's not all about the families. It's about the citizens of Idaho.

100%,

 

[Ghostwheel]

I don't know if there was ever posted here, but I thought it had some interesting information

"This all adds to a reality where it’s nearly double the cost to house someone on death row than it is to house someone for a life sentence.

A study from Torin McFarland at Susquehanna University found it costs around $1.12 million more to keep someone on death row versus held in a federal detention facility. The average annual cost for federal detention worked out to $37,500 per year, compared to $60,000-$70,000 per year on death row."

Legal experts weigh in on Kohberger plea agreement

A plea bargain offered in the Brian Kohberger case creates a predictable, quicker, cheaper—and to some—a more ethical outcome, according to legal experts following the proceedings.

www.kiro7.com