GUILTY PLEA DEAL ACCEPTED - ID - 4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #114

[LinasK]

he skirted laws that he was well aware of..but it's also like he was testing..testing the waters, he was on a big ego trip with his "position".

that's the thing..we can't ever know what effect more action against Bryan would have had. in the best outcome? maybe he could have been scared straight, maybe he would have had a psych intervention maybe he would have been locked up for awhile preventing the murders on King road and his obsession abandoned.. we can't measure the potential an intervention could have held.

4 lives.

mOO

Nor can we lock someone up for a potential crime. Yes, there were red flags, still doesn't mean that WSU holds any responsibility.

 

[minazoe]

it will be interesting to see what happens.

 

[Warwick7]

I disagree. The police do decide if a crime has been committed. Every day. Universities decide whether of not a student complaint has merit. Every day. You have stated that the Goncalves complaint has sufficient merit that the University should settle.

Why single out Goncalves? There are 4 families suing WSU.

 

[Tragg]

the police do decide, but they can't if not given the opportunity, and being spoken to by the police regarding your reported behavior is a big deal and a huge warning...the law is the law...sometimes you get a warning, because you have no record and no one was harmed and it's a petty issue but if you get caught doing it again you better watch out. It comes out on the radio..someone knows that guy, they have been called before...etc. mOO

Again, according to the Supreme Court even egregious harassment of women is not a crime. The police would have had nothing to say, even assuming a word to the wise would influence an obsessive to give up his obsession.

 

[Tragg]

Why single out Goncalves? There are 4 families suing WSU.

Goncalves has been the leader of and spokesman for the group, and he is the lead plaintiff. When the case is reported by name, it will be Goncalves, et al, v WSU. If you prefer, I will use all four names, but it seems grammatically awkward to me.

 

[Chloegirl]

Again, according to the Supreme Court even egregious harassment of women is not a crime. The police would have had nothing to say, even assuming a word to the wise would influence an obsessive to give up his obsession.

13 reported issues in like 90 days!

I am in no way saying for WSU to hand over the money and I do know they were reacting to the reports. But it IS egregious.

For a University, I think they acted fairly quickly. No one has the right to harass me as I try to traverse the world and gain an education. I would have called the police myself and not leave it to just the University. That would help them see the entire picture of a BK. JMOO

 

[girlhasnoname]

Zero tolerance for threatening, physical, or sexual misbehavior, anywhere by anyone in any workplace. WSU dropped the ball here having had so many complaints from students and even the murderer's professor had authority/confrontational issues with him. He was given a verbal warning or was on probation IIRC? Would it have stopped him from murdering, I doubt it. He brought that KaBar knife with him when he moved from PA to WA and I believe he had this sick fantasy in mind for a long time.

First time living away from home unsupervised. It was always going to be someone(s) somewhere. Sadly, it was Maddie, Kaylee, Xana and Ethan.

No winners here . 4 brutally murdered innocent college kids, 4 sets of deeply grieving parents who lost their lovely children, and a University who probably had absolutely no idea of what the murderer was capable of. Considering all that has come to light, WSU should have taken swifter and more severe actions against him. JMO

 

[Megnut]

If the University in any way promotes a culture where victims aren't heard or believed, that is a problem. Maybe this University followed all its protocols or maybe they didn't, but the fact is, there is always room for improvement. Things that cost money (on an institutional level) tend to push improvement. Even if the impetus is protection from future lawsuits.

Lawsuit or none, the wider cultural issue remains personal safety -- men and women should be able to go to college without fear of unfair or unsafe untreatment. Coworkers and colleagues should be able to work in their offices, go to and from their cars without unwanted attention following them.

If this University had a policy or procedure that emphasized handling matters in house, maybe that needs to be reviewed. File the reports, support victims from first report to criminal report.

Uncomfortable truth -- stalking, following, peeping are not victimless pursuits. Moreover, frequently, they are gateway behaviors.

We will never know whether different actions by the University could have prevented these murders, but this lawsuit may go a long way toward preventing the next ones.

I don't see this suit as grieving families seeking someone to blame -- that falls squarely on BK -- but I do it as a collective effort to turn their grief into action in the hopes that no family experience what their families did. Be the change --

JMO

 

[girlhasnoname]

My point is WSU did not follow their written policies & procedures. The lawsuit states under .99, the CCR process and under .198 numerous complaints had been submitted to CCR, but CCR had not acted on them nor even met with BK.

Link: https://ccr.wsu.edu/file-a-report/

In general, in today’s university’s setting, there are GA & TA orientations, onboarding with various forms regarding policies that must be electronically signed as acknowledgement of reading & understanding the policy. This is in addition to student employees receiving a handbook outlining policies & procedures & expected behavior.

The lawsuit states most of an entire faculty meeting was spent on discussing BK’s behavior. As stated in the lawsuit, sections 301 & 302, paraphrased, one professor stated the concern about granting BK a degree because he would be a stalker & involved in sexual harassment as a professor. His supervising instructor was concerned about BK filing a lawsuit against the university if BK was dismissed. Will jurors be impressed with this information? What is the culpability of the university?

There may be “good things” from this lawsuit; specifically, a faculty & staff review of how to facilitate the university’s policies & procedures in this type of circumstance.

ITA, and in 2022 WSU should have had their P&P's etched in stone especially when the subject matter here was so obviously grave. It's not like the 90's or 00's when sexual harassment was hard to define, although I don't know why it was even back then. It should be pretty simple to understand unwanted stalking, harassing and sexually inappropriate behavior period.

MOO

 

[minazoe]

when you can not measure the potential effect an action could have or would have had..and it becomes a liability.

there has to be a legal term for this ..my legals are telling me there is no way to win it. mOO

 

[Tragg]

13 reported issues in like 90 days!

I am in no way saying for WSU to hand over the money and I do know they were reacting to the reports. But it IS egregious.

RSBM. I do not disagree with you at all. But the Supreme Court has in many ways declared war on women, and Counterman v Colorado is only one of the problematic decisions. I am posting so that people can be informed, not because I support these changes.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

There may be some additional degree of culpability on the part of WSU considering that BK, as a PhD student, was an employee.

Should admissions screenings for PhD programs rise to the level of hiring screenings?

SBMFF.

How would that have changed anything in this case?

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

let me help you. stalking, harassing and intimidating behavior towards women, young women, students, fellow employees, girlfriends etc...is illegal. it is predatory behavior that often times leads to dangerous behavior and sometimes violence.it is up to a judge to decide if the behavior rises to punishment , incarceration, probation, court ordered sex offender or anger management courses, ankle monitor with home confinement etc..

I didn't say that stalking, harassing and intimidating behavior isn't illegal? But that isn't really what I said/asked.

now a teenage girl or young woman is driving from bar to bar trying to run into her crush, maybe a broken up boyfriend..she drives by his house to see what he's doing..sounds harmless and probably is..unless she's Jodi Arias.

now Bryan, an older PHD student at a college is breaking into the apartment of a coworker and violating her space and rearranging her things...

Bryan was never accused or investigated for this until after the murders, so the above has nothing to do with WSU's culpability.

he corners another woman in her car in a parking lot, follows another one frightening her., another young woman has to hide to escape him, all in all 13 reports regarding this student who is a grown man. also take into consideration that he also has a record of burglary and heroin addiction, yet they put him in this elevated position in his school.

IMO the police could have been helpful and it would have been a good thing to make them aware of this loser in their jurisdiction.

you know they can say they can't do anything until he does something...but what he was doing IS something..that's why there are laws about this, mOO

We'll have to agree to disagree. I suspect WSU will settle because no one likes fighting grieving parents, but they shouldn't. I maintain they did nothing wrong and I believe they'll set a dangerous precedent by settling.

MOO.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

he skirted laws that he was well aware of..but it's also like he was testing..testing the waters, he was on a big ego trip with his "position".

I don't know, I'm glad universities aren't clogging police case logs with reports of a student making people uncomfortable. That isn't a crime and none of the reports actually rises to "stalking" by the legal definition of the term. MOO.

that's the thing..we can't ever know what effect more action against Bryan would have had. in the best outcome? maybe he could have been scared straight, maybe he would have had a psych intervention maybe he would have been locked up for awhile preventing the murders on King road and his obsession abandoned.. we can't measure the potential an intervention could have held.

4 lives.

mOO

There is no psych intervention that would have stopped him from murdering, and even if he was locked up for a while, there is no way to know if that would have prevented the murders on King Road.

Hindsight is 20/20. We always think we know the answer after the fact.

MOO.

 

[Aquabot13]

SBMFF.

How would that have changed anything in this case?

To be clear - I don't think it would have. I think Bryan was a sociopath in a way that would be unreasonable or even impossible to catch. That said, his behavior was concerning and showed signs of escalation.

My comment was more of a rhetorical question in regards to the lawsuit. Depending on the outcome of this case, PhD programs and other funded grad programs could have some sort of demonstrated liability for the actions of their students, even outside the scope of their programs.

In that case, schools would potentially have to add things like criminal background checks or even moral references to the already lengthy list of admission requirements. PhD programs are several years long. How can you as an admissions counselor ensure that this candidate isn't going to commit a crime in the next 7 years? And, at the end of the day, would the extra requirements have even caught someone like BK? Someone who's murderous but relatively socially passable, at least until he got to WSU?

As I said, there may be something in the specifics of this case that does put the school partially at fault - his employment as a PhD student, the failure of the Department to escalate the case to Title IX, or even a failure to provide appropriate psychological support. Overall, though, I don't agree that WSU is responsible for or could have prevented BK's actions.

MOO

 

[katydid23]

look at it like this.. a young waitress at a coffee shop is being stalked and harassed by the cook. so as the owner you fire the cook immediately and do nothing else.

feels like the waitress is in even more danger now...doesn't it?

The problem is, who was actually being stalked? All I have seen is vague examples ---him walking behind a student out to the parking lot. Or him popping up at the same restaurant, etc. I don't think that is enough to be considered actual stalking.

Maybe I have missed some concrete examples of him stalking someone from the University though. I'm just going by the examples I read about. Him leering or staring, or blocking a doorway, or walking out to parking lot at same time to stand by a woman's car as she exits.

I'm only saying what I'm saying about doubting contacting the police at that point because I've dealt with two stalking situations and w/both situations it was next to impossible to get any LE attention because their definition of stalking or harassment is a pretty high bar. Maybe only in California though?

I just don't see how the university could be held responsible for not contacting the police about BK. I'd think a specific student or staff member would have to make a police report if she felt that he was stalking or threatening them. imo

 

[katydid23]

let me help you. stalking, harassing and intimidating behavior towards women, young women, students, fellow employees, girlfriends etc...is illegal. it is predatory behavior that often times leads to dangerous behavior and sometimes violence.it is up to a judge to decide if the behavior rises to punishment , incarceration, probation, court ordered sex offender or anger management courses, ankle monitor with home confinement etc..

now a teenage girl or young woman is driving from bar to bar trying to run into her crush, maybe a broken up boyfriend..she drives by his house to see what he's doing..sounds harmless and probably is..unless she's Jodi Arias.

now Bryan, an older PHD student at a college is breaking into the apartment of a coworker and violating her space and rearranging her things..

At that time, even the co-worker admitted she had no idea if it was Bryan. It wasn't until after the murders that she became convinced it was him. If she had gone to LE and said she suspected he was breaking into her apt, maybe something could have been done. But there was no evidence at that time, showing it was him.

.he corners another woman in her car in a parking lot,

Again, that was not illegal. It is a college campus and I bet dozens of people followed other students to cars or classrooms , hoping to get a phone number or a coffee date. That is not an actionable offence unless he actually groped or grabbed her or said something threatening.

follows another one frightening her., another young woman has to hide to escape him, all in all 13 reports regarding this student who is a grown man.

But each time, he avoided crossing any legal lines that would be criminal offences. Did any of these 13 women make police reports ? That was what needed to be done in order to get police engagement. It's not up to WSU to contact police and say he is making women feel uncomfortable.

They did take steps to remove him from the campus. First step was to fire him.

also take into consideration that he also has a record of burglary and heroin addiction, yet they put him in this elevated position in his school.

It is not constitutionally allowed to hold someone's past deeds from childhood against them in college.

He was accepted into the advanced program. Should every student applicant that had a history of drugs or petty crimes from childhood be rejected from the program?

IMO the police could have been helpful and it would have been a good thing to make them aware of this loser in their jurisdiction.

you know they can say they can't do anything until he does something...but what he was doing IS something..that's why there are laws about this, mOO

I agree he was acting horribly and bordering on illegal actions but I am not sure he had actually broken any laws yet, that could be pinpointed. I don't think WSU can be held liable for not contacting LE yet.

Who knows, maybe they would have at some point.

Those 13 reports---over 3 months---I do wonder if they took action on any of them.

 

[katydid23]

13 reported issues in like 90 days!

I am in no way saying for WSU to hand over the money and I do know they were reacting to the reports. But it IS egregious.

For a University, I think they acted fairly quickly. No one has the right to harass me as I try to traverse the world and gain an education. I would have called the police myself and not leave it to just the University. That would help them see the entire picture of a BK. JMOO

YES, that's exactly what needed to happen. Women needed to file police reports against him.

 

[katydid23]

To be clear - I don't think it would have. I think Bryan was a sociopath in a way that would be unreasonable or even impossible to catch. That said, his behavior was concerning and showed signs of escalation.

My comment was more of a rhetorical question in regards to the lawsuit. Depending on the outcome of this case, PhD programs and other funded grad programs could have some sort of demonstrated liability for the actions of their students, even outside the scope of their programs.

In that case, schools would potentially have to add things like criminal background checks or even moral references to the already lengthy list of admission requirements. PhD programs are several years long. How can you as an admissions counselor ensure that this candidate isn't going to commit a crime in the next 7 years? And, at the end of the day, would the extra requirements have even caught someone like BK? Someone who's murderous but relatively socially passable, at least until he got to WSU?

As I said, there may be something in the specifics of this case that does put the school partially at fault - his employment as a PhD student, the failure of the Department to escalate the case to Title IX, or even a failure to provide appropriate psychological support. Overall, though, I don't agree that WSU is responsible for or could have prevented BK's actions.

MOO

I would hate to see students, or PHD candidates, be rejected from the program, because they had used drugs or gone joy riding in their teens.

I think that would possibly happen if they tried to change their rules about not accepting candidates with red flags from the past.

Plenty of ex-cons have gone on to college and graduated and done well for themselves----becoming lawyers, social workers, etc.

 

[Rosydecember]

he skirted laws that he was well aware of..but it's also like he was testing..testing the waters, he was on a big ego trip with his "position".

that's the thing..we can't ever know what effect more action against Bryan would have had. in the best outcome? maybe he could have been scared straight, maybe he would have had a psych intervention maybe he would have been locked up for awhile preventing the murders on King road and his obsession abandoned.. we can't measure the potential an intervention could have held.

4 lives.

mOO

Most of your posts contradict each other.

If he’s skirting laws, then he’s technically not breaking any laws thus he can’t be arrested or charged.

MOO