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

[Boxer]

I wonder if there weren't complaints from the start (Aug/Sept/Oct) about the murderer, I think I remember a whole laundry list the students kept? I don't think they would have all happened in Nov.

WSU had a duty to respond immediately regarding the students who made official complaints. He was an acting agent (TA) of the University, in my humble opinion, he should have been put on Administrative Leave right away while the allegations were thoroughly investigated, not allowed to continue to interact and cause discomfort from these students.

Would this have kept the murderer from committing the act on Kings Road? I don't think so. Part of me says no, he came prepared to commit some type of crime by ordering and bringing the Kbar from PA to WA. Another part of me says maybe, he might have been more reluctant to commit the act if he was forced out of his position and his behavior being investigated.

Lawsuit aside, I'm just so sorry for the Maddie, Kaylee, Xana, Ethan and their families.

The killings are the responsibility of the convicted murderer no matter what was taking place. Not WSU, not his parents, or his childhood. He alone is guilty for stepping through that sliding glass door on a killing rampage.

JMO

MOO Classes started mid-October, I can't see anyone complaining before a couple of weeks and grades started accumulate.

 

[Chloegirl]

MOO Classes started mid-October, I can't see anyone complaining before a couple of weeks and grades started accumulate.

WSU classes begin towards the end of August as do UI's. They run until mid-December (after a Thanksgiving break) and pick back up mid-January through until early May.

 

[tricia]

THIS SATURDAY = GUARDIAN ZOOM MADNESS
It’s EPIC.
It’s 8 HOURS.
It’s our MONTHLY GUARDIAN ZOOM CALL — and you’re invited!
Saturday, January 17
12 NOON – 8 PM Eastern
(Yes, really. No, you don’t have to stay the whole time )

YOU MUST REGISTER FIRST — CLICK HERE to register
Pro tip: You do NOT have to use your real name. Your Websleuths username is perfect.
WHAT WILL WE TALK ABOUT?

(Here are a few ideas but we can talk about almost anything you want)​

What case drives you absolutely crazy — and why
What changes you’d like to see on Websleuths
Your brush with fame (we KNOW you have one)
And lots more laughs, surprises, and great conversation

FREE STUFF!​

We’ll be giving away FREE Guardian memberships
You can nominate Websleuths members you think deserve one — because kindness matters.

REGISTER HERE for the call
Want to become a Guardian? CLICK HERE — it’s easy and only $3/month

Come and go as you please.
Pop in. Pop out. Stay 10 minutes or all day — it’s totally up to you.

Check out the screenshot from our last Guardian call…
See? We’re a fun bunch! That's me in the middle in the "Alice" square if you are looking at this like the Brady Bunch

 

[Megnut]

With all do respect, we don't know what the University did and didn't do. We pocky know what we've heard. The court of law IMO IS the proper place for the victims' families to pursue inquiry.

We don't know what protections were in place and whether or not they were followed, we don't know how many reports were made or his much support was offered, we don't even know if any of his offenses rose to the level of charges.

I don't begrudge that families their right to pursue legal action.

Accountability and transparency.

It's how change and progress happen.

JMO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

The lawsuit seems to state WSU didn’t follow protocol regarding the complaints. Do you have another source stating WSU follow protocol?

IMO, it's irrelevant whether or not WSU followed their own protocol because these families have no standing with regard to that complaint, UNLESS they can prove a connection between them not following protocol and the murders. So the question at stake (to me anyway) is whether or not WSU is ultimately responsible for the crime of their student off campus in a different state, close as it may be. If so, then they can get into what they should have done per protocol, but frankly, I don't think they'll get past that first question if this goes to trial.

JMO.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

unpopular opinion from someone who experienced firsthand how useless university & campus PD responses are to violence committed by or against students, I support the lawsuit bc i believe it is being done to force changes that protect students. Sadly, in the USA, money is the only language that the people in charge speak.
If the lawsuit is even a tiny bit successful, whatever that looks like, it will force american universities to consider putting the safety of (female) students above the desire to keep taking in cash from the students who threaten or harm others.

IMO, it will also leave students who are easy targets vulnerable to false allegations and scapegoating. It's really hard to fire a TA/grad student for a reason.

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

With respect, I feel that many commenters are making statements about the validity of this lawsuit or the culpability of WSU without having read the details of the lawsuit itself. As a PhD student, he was also an Employee of the University and on the payroll. Professors in his department were very aware and expressed concerns about Brian suing the University if he were terminated. They spoke about an intervention. I think they were scared of him as well. Complaints were made following appropriate channels and there was no follow up. They were within their rights to fully document and then terminate him, thereby sending him back home to Mom and Dad before the murders occurred. There were a series of dropped balls and as they put it "a deeply disturbing level of organizational paralysis and inaction " which ultimately kept him on campus and employed by the University. He should have been terminated. Could he have done something anyway? None of us will ever know. The suit also includes detail about the ineffectiveness of Campus police and their own well know history of tolerating and/or engaging in inappropriate sexual behavior in its own ranks. They should involved the Town's Police Department. I am not at this juncture going to dismiss their suit as without merit.

I read the lawsuit. I still disagree. Firing him doesn't mean he automatically goes back to mom and dad. It also doesn't mean he doesn't kill. He could have driven to Moscow the night he was terminated and done it. Maybe it would have been Bethany, Dylan, Kaylee, and Maddie instead. Or maybe it would have been Xana, Ethan, Dylan, and Kaylee. We have no idea what would have happened and that's kind of the point. Termination doesn't mean he wouldn't have killed. It just means it might not have happened on the night it did or exactly as it did.

MOO.

 

[Boxer]

WSU classes begin towards the end of August as do UI's. They run until mid-December (after a Thanksgiving break) and pick back up mid-January through until early May.

You are right. I don't know what calendar I must have been looking at.

 

[LinasK]

We don't actually know that as fact.

Someone on one of these threads (Can't remember where I saw it) pointed out a stalking case in Colorado- Counterman, where the stalker actually got his conviction overturned post-sentence by the US Supreme Court because they said that you couldn't determine his intentions from his text messages to the victim (although to me, it was clear that he was stalking her). So there's that. The Supreme Court has set the bar very high for pre-determining a criminal's intentions.

 

[LinasK]

I read the lawsuit. I still disagree. Firing him doesn't mean he automatically goes back to mom and dad. It also doesn't mean he doesn't kill. He could have driven to Moscow the night he was terminated and done it. Maybe it would have been Bethany, Dylan, Kaylee, and Maddie instead. Or maybe it would have been Xana, Ethan, Dylan, and Kaylee. We have no idea what would have happened and that's kind of the point. Termination doesn't mean he wouldn't have killed. It just means it might not have happened on the night it did or exactly as it did.

MOO.

Exactly and I agree with you. I fail to see WSU's responsibility for these murders that happened off-campus in ANOTHER STATE.

 

[minazoe]

does the University only care about skirting past this and being found free of responsibility in a court?

really? Even if they cannot be found responsible, even they know what wasn't done and you can't take that back, you can't take back the literally bizarre situation and what they KNEW. they KNEW ..and everyone can see this situation was totally out of control at the school..and all of this is a part of BK and part of the history of this massacre.

they have to settle. case or no case. the Optics override the technical aspects of the defenses claims.

mOO

 

[LinasK]

does the University only care about skirting past this and being found free of responsibility in a court?

really? Even if they cannot be found responsible, even they know what wasn't done and you can't take that back, you can't take back the literally bizarre situation and what they KNEW. they KNEW ..and everyone can see this situation was totally out of control at the school..and all of this is a part of BK and part of the history of this massacre.

they have to settle. case or no case. the Optics override the technical aspects of the defenses claims.

mOO

I sure hope that WSU wouldn't settle because of "bad optics". It's not their fault that a psychopath and budding serial killer chose their school.

 

[minazoe]

I sure hope that WSU wouldn't settle because of "bad optics". It's not their fault that a psychopath and budding serial killer chose their school.

question:

what if the victims were from his campus and not King's Road? what if they were 4 victims from his class?

 

[LinasK]

question:

what if the victims were from his campus and not King's Road? what if they were 4 victims from his class?

Doesn't matter. WSU still isn't responsible for his behavior. (And I did talk my daughter out of U of Rochester because of a professor who was a sexual harasser there.)

 

[Megnut]

I sure hope that WSU wouldn't settle because of "bad optics". It's not their fault that a psychopath and budding serial killer chose their school.

It'll be bad optics if, for instance, complaints went uncounted, if protocols were missed, if BK was granted latitude or favors, etc. IMO it's not enough to ask the school how well it received, documented and responded to complaints and accept their assessment at face value. A lawsuit, if deemed to have merit, will give access to behind the curtain. It is the proper way, in a democracy, to hold another party to the law.

I choose to trust the system (of law) (even though, in general, I haven't great faith in it). The families can file a suit. The University can answer. A judge will determine where it goes from there.

JMO

 

[LinasK]

It'll be bad optics if, for instance, complaints went uncounted, if protocols were missed, if BK was granted latitude or favors, etc. IMO it's not enough to ask the school how well it received, documented and responded to complaints and accept their assessment at face value. A lawsuit, if deemed to have merit, will give access to behind the curtain. It is the proper way, in a democracy, to hold another party to the law.

I choose to trust the system (of law) (even though, in general, I haven't great faith in it). The families can file a suit. The University can answer. A judge will determine where it goes from there.

JMO

I fail to see how they have standing.

 

[Ghostwheel]

nowhere in any handbook does it say that professors at the university should take the security of students into their own hands and make their own decisions among themselves , outside of the governing body of the school to intercede in harassment ,stalking and sexually threatening behavior by escorting students to their cars and leaving office doors open.

mOO

This is correct from what I read, but they are REQUIRED to report anything that goes against Professional Conduct (in the docs I posted above).

Which presents me with a new question. Did any staff member who did anything to mitigate anyone's fears regarding BK report that someone felt they were in danger? Are there reports that we don't know about yet?

 

[Megnut]

I fail to see how they have standing.

You could very well be right.

They might not even party to it.

I leave that to the Court to hear.

A curious thing, I wonder if any individuals have more direct standing -- individuals who may have been forced into BK's orbit at the university and were impacted by his subpar behaviors. Ones who were likely promised an environment free of harassment, whether in their classrooms, offices and homes, and weren't afforded one.

JMO

 

[Ghostwheel]

Real question. Would WSU be liable if protocol indicated they were required to notify LE of a criminal action (I don't know if there was a criminal act specifically or if protocol ever has WSU going to LE, just positing if it did) and they did not notify LE, resulting in no arrest or possibly being put in jail, could it be extrapolated that if he was in jail at the time of the murders, then he could not have committed them?

I acknowledge he could have done it later or to someone else and that he may not have committed anything that would have landed him in jail, but that isn't my question. Since I don't know what all they have for evidence, I'm just wondering if there would be any merit to "If WSU knew about a crime and did not report it to LE, had he actually been in jail on x charges then he could not have done this." As opposed to WSU being liable for his actions off campus (which I would say no).

 

[Megnut]

Real question. Would WSU be liable if protocol indicated they were required to notify LE of a criminal action (I don't know if there was a criminal act specifically or if protocol ever has WSU going to LE, just positing if it did) and they did not notify LE, resulting in no arrest or possibly being put in jail, could it be extrapolated that if he was in jail at the time of the murders, then he could not have committed them?

I acknowledge he could have done it later or to someone else and that he may not have committed anything that would have landed him in jail, but that isn't my question. Since I don't know what all they have for evidence, I'm just wondering if there would be any merit to "If WSU knew about a crime and did not report it to LE, had he actually been in jail on x charges then he could not have done this." As opposed to WSU being liable for his actions off campus (which I would say no).

Good questions. Unknowable in many ways. Any action had the capacity to act on another action. An object at rest, and all that. Had he been arrested for something, maybe he wouldn't have been able to kill anyone, but might have, upon release. Maybe he'd have gone postal.

He may have done less. He may have done more. He may have done it at a different time entirely.

I truly think this lawsuit is about accountability, as an agent for change.

Is there a better way, in civilized society, to learn what the University did and didn't know and when they did or didn't know it?

This is about scrutiny IMO.

I'll be watching closely to see what comes of it.

JMO