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

[BeginnerSleuther]

could be they had probable cause with 13 reports .

How many of those 13 complaints were about BK's criminal behavior?

 

[Boxer]

the bias in the grades was nothing compared to the harassment, stalking, spooking and eviscerative behavior...mOO

Is there a timeline of complaints somewhere?

 

[snooptroop88]

A lot of people are undoubtedly still furious BK walked away from these murders with a plea bargain, and this is unfortunately somewhat understandable with the avalanche of evidence they had against BK. Now, instead of the DP, he's in there whining about fruit cups and bananas. It really is beyond belief.

So it doesn't surprise me that this suit's been filed. BK does precious little to assuage the pain of those looking on. It's probably not possible for him to do so, but he certainly has behaved in a manner jmo that would almost exaccerbate the situation for those trying to recover. I just don't know on whether this suit's a good thing or bad thing, and it's jmo. But I don't think it is going to succeed, and that imo makes it potentially a bad thing. If the parents lose, there may be a sense of deflation with a setback, possibly adding to their grief (if that's possible), all of this may give BK what can be claimed as a sick courtroom "victory" after all is said and done (even if just in his head, but we've got a pretty good idea already of how things work in there), and could stoke the mad flames of Crazytown once again. (And Crazytown-- it's still out there. Why? Because it's crazy.)

Unless it's a slam-dunk, I'd try to restrain myself from pursuing such a lawsuit. But once it's set in motion, I'll hope it succeeds because these families have suffered so much at this point, it'd be heartbreaking to see them suffer further.

It feels like she is trying to humanise him, I understand it as a sister, but I wish she wouldn't. Talking about him being disgusted by the sight of blood, but then helping her dress her wound is pretty tactless imo.

I do feel sorry for his family though, he made them victims too just in a different way. The are not responsible for his actions yet they have to live with the consequences all the same .

Exactly. The murderer's whining about bananas and fruit servings, being humanized and understood. He arguably has manipulated his way through "the system" and the media, too. I definitely feel bad for his family, but I feel worse for these families, who live with the loss created forever-- by him. And they have to sit there and watch him being humanized, whining... Agreed the university shouldn't have to settle, jmo, I don't think that suit will succeed, but after the misery these families have been through, it'd be a tragedy imho to see them rebuffed.

 

[Dotta]

It feels like she is trying to humanise him, I understand it as a sister, but I wish she wouldn't. Talking about him being disgusted by the sight of blood, but then helping her dress her wound is pretty tactless imo.

I do feel sorry for his family though, he made them victims too just in a different way. The are not responsible for his actions yet they have to live with the consequences all the same .

This bit about BK being
"disgusted by the sight of blood"
honestly sounded like a sick "joke"
My poor jaw dropped while reading it.
"Tactless" is a huge understatement.
SMH at this interview.
There are times when it is better to stay silent IMO.

JMO

 

[minazoe]

Is there a timeline of complaints somewhere?

In the lawsuit documents , I think Brian Entin read it all in his podcast, but I feel like I saw it all somewhere. mOO

 

[Miss Poovy]

There was no other entity to put on notice once he was fired. Who were they going to notify? Certainly not LE in Moscow, Idaho, another state, and not even LE in Pullman Washington. He wasn't transferring to another university, and they also wouldn't notify LE in Pennsylvania for his firing. So who should they notify?

 

[Miss Poovy]

Sure there is. Another university, employer, etc. No references, short stay @ a position? Background checks are very comprehensive these days.

 

[MassGuy]

ISP has released a new batch of photos (2,790). In terms of blood, these are very graphic. Idaho State Police Public Portal - JustFOIA

 

[LinasK]

Sure there is. Another university, employer, etc. No references, short stay @ a position? Background checks are very comprehensive these days.

He wasn't transferring to another university. He was moving back in with his parents in PA. And it's rare to see a firing on a background check. Employers are afraid of getting sued.

 

[MassGuy]

ISP has released a new batch of photos (2,790). In terms of blood, these are very graphic. Idaho State Police Public Portal - JustFOIA

This link has been pulled, likely because one photo appeared to show Xana's body, to include part of her face.

 

[crhedBngr]

Idaho murder suspect Bryan Kohberger sent trove of prison love letters from fans

Latah County Jail insider told The Messenger that more than two dozen letters have arrived for suspect

www.the-independent.com

They won’t win this.

Win, no.

I suspect it may go to arbitration; if so, they may receive a settlement.

JMVHO.

 

[crhedBngr]

Bryan Kohberger's latest documented complaint:"The coaxial connection to my cell is likely pushed back into the wall maintenance passage. Would you be able to assist me in fixing this issue? Thank you for your consideration."

IDOC - Google Drive

drive.google.com

View attachment 635955

[SARCASM]

Awwwww . . .

Poor little Bry.

[/SARCASM]



JMVHO.

 

[arielilane]

 

[Emerald1328]

Another big reason why defendants may settle a lawsuit, even if they feel they can win, is that the cost of defending the suit oftentimes does significantly exceed what they may have been able to settle the suit for. Most decisions for businesses (and universities are essentially businesses) are decided based on financial risks/rewards.

I’m not a lawyer, but I imagine that the university will attempt to get the suit thrown out. If they aren’t successful, they may participate in it for a little while, but if it drags on for very long and/or they start to lose a lot of motions, they will probably cut their losses and settle.

 

[Aquabot13]

The photos that were released by ISP today missed redactions SEVERAL times across multiple victims.

I understand the sheer volume of photos is overwhelming and redaction is a manual effort, but IMO this is something ISP absolutely cannot get wrong. The stakes are too high.

I'm floored that there aren't better controls around this, not to mention a better system for communicating with victims and their families about upcoming releases.

Nobody is making them release thousands of photos at a time, as far as I'm aware. Why wouldn't they chip away at the total and release more vetted redactions in smaller batches?

I would be FURIOUS if I was the family. Or even the judge, for that matter.

Thinking of the victims and their families today.

MOO

 

[Tragg]

Win, no.

I suspect it may go to arbitration; if so, they may receive a settlement.

JMVHO.

I'm not sure how the lawsuit will transform into an arbitration proceeding without mutual consent. Most plaintiff attorneys prefer juries over any kind of judge, including arbitrators.

Courts do press parties to make an effort to settle before a trial date is set, but negotiations don't get serious until the final stage when all significant motions have been resolved. I think the state will not engage in mediation voluntarily while it has viable motions to dismiss for lack of standing and for failure to state a viable claim, and if those are unsuccessful for summary judgment after discovery is complete.

The State of Washington has waived sovereign immunity for most common claims for relief like breach of contract and negligence, allowing citizens to sue the state and its legal entities just as they would sue a private business. There are limits, nuances and exceptions but they don't seem to apply to Goncalves, et al, v. Washington. It seems unlikely that the case will be decided on grounds of immunity.

More likely the court will determine that the plaintiffs may not have standing to sue. Like most states, Washington evaluates standing under the test summarized by the SCOTUS in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992):

"Over the years, our cases have established that the irreducible constitutional minimum of standing contains three elements: First, the plaintiff must have suffered an 'injury in fact'..... Second, there must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of — the injury has to be 'fairly . . . trace[able] to the challenged action of the defendant, and not . . . th[e] result [of] the independent action of some third party not before the court.' (Citations omitted) Third, it must be "likely," as opposed to merely 'speculative,' that the injury will be "redressed by a favorable decision.(Citations omitted)." (emphasis supplied)

The state will likely argue that the Goncalves complaint fails to establish a causal connection because the independent action of a third party caused the subject harm. This seems to me a sound argument that should result in dismissal as a matter of law, early in the proceedings. If it doesn't, there are other dispositive motions the state can pursue. IMO, a settlement is not on the horizon.​

 

[Arkay]

The photos that were released by ISP today missed redactions SEVERAL times across multiple victims.

I understand the sheer volume of photos is overwhelming and redaction is a manual effort, but IMO this is something ISP absolutely cannot get wrong. The stakes are too high.

I'm floored that there aren't better controls around this, not to mention a better system for communicating with victims and their families about upcoming releases.

Nobody is making them release thousands of photos at a time, as far as I'm aware. Why wouldn't they chip away at the total and release more vetted redactions in smaller batches?

I would be FURIOUS if I was the family. Or even the judge, for that matter.

Thinking of the victims and their families today.

MOO

I’m grateful I didn’t look.

I know myself——if I saw those young people and how they were brutalized, I would have trouble sleeping.

IMO, we know they are dead, we know how they died, and I think it’s so invasive that we should be able to see them in extremis.

If they were my family and their horrific death scenes were public, I would lose my mind.

JMO

 

[Tragg]

It seems likely the State will remove the Goncalves complaint to Federal court and - if the plaintiffs have standing to sue - ask for summary judgment based in part on the case of Barlow v. Washington, among others.

Like Goncalves, this case was emotionally compelling. Just days after the plaintiff (MB) arrived in Pullman to attend her freshman year of classes at WSU in 2017, she was raped by a fellow student (TC) when she attended a party at his apartment.

TC had recently transferred campuses from WSU Vancouver while student disciplinary proceedings were pending there based on two complaints of sexual misconduct. Like the witnesses in Goncalves who reported their concerns, the Vancouver witnesses initially did not want the University to pursue investigations. When they changed their minds, the CCR promptly investigated and recommended charges. TC was ultimately found in violation of student conduct standards and disciplined. However, he was put on probation, not expelled. The transfer to Pullman had been approved before the case was finally adjudicated, but it didn't matter because the transfer did not affect his supervision on probation and he never lost his student status before the rape.

WSU had no policy that would prevent a transfer when disciplinary cases were pending.

Like BK, TC was eventually convicted of a felony for the rape of MB. Like the Goncalves plaintiffs, MB believed WSU unreasonably failed to protect her from a forseeable risk.

MB sued the state of Washington in state court based on claims of negligence (state common law) and for violations of her civil rights under Title IX (Federal law) and its state counterparts. Because the complaint contained a claim under Federal law, the State exercised its procedural right to remove the case to the US District Court. After the discovery phase, the state moved for summary judgment, arguing based on facts that were undisputed the state was entitled to dismissal as a matter of law.

The US District court dismissed the claims (for those who use Pacer.gov the case number is C20-5186), and the 9th Circuit upheld the dismissal in an unpublished decision, after referring the negligence questions to the Washington State Supreme Court, which did publish its opinion on the scope of a university's duty of care to students.

The Supreme Court of Washington concluded that a university has a special relationship with its students, but that such a relationship only imposes a duty when a student is on campus or participating in a university-controlled activity. The case is described in a article on a law firm web page, "When Must a University Protect a Student from Harm Inflicted by a Third Party?"

Here's an excerpt.

"The Court based this special relationship on Restatement (Second) of Torts § 344, which imposes a duty on a university, “as a business operator and possessor of land,” to protect students as business invitees.

In reaching its decision, the Court rejected three of Plaintiff’s arguments for a special relationship that would have imposed an obligation on WSU to protect her from the other student, even when off campus.

First, the Court rejected Plaintiff’s argument for an expansion of the common law duty for K-12 schools to protect their students. Washington case law that imposed a duty on K-12 schools relied “on the nature of the relationship, where K-12 schools have almost complete control over their students and their activities.” K-12 students must attend school, and K-12 schools generally have closed campuses, with more ability to exclude the public. A K-12 student’s time is structured, controlled, and monitored by the school, and the school takes custody of the student, “standing in as [a] parent[] during the school day.” It is this control that “gives rise to the duty that the school owes children.”

Universities, in contrast, do not have the same “protective custody over their adult students.” Attendance at a university is voluntary, and students choose their classes and how to spend their time outside of class. A university simply lacks “the requisite control over students’ decisions” that would impose a duty like that imposed on K-12 schools.

Next, Plaintiff argued for the Court to apply the duty to protect vulnerable people under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 315(b) to universities. The Court noted, however, that the duty imposed by § 315(b) applies to limited circumstances, where a person is helpless, totally dependent, or completely under the control of someone else. The Court determined that the relationship between a university and its students lacks the requisite level of dependence and control for a heightened duty to exist under § 315(b).

Third, the Court rejected Plaintiff’s argument that a special relationship existed between the university and the student who raped her. The university-student relationship would not provide a university with sufficient insight into the dangerousness of a student, or help identify potential victims, and the relationship does not grant sufficient control over a potential wrongdoer.

Ultimately, the Court concluded that a university simply has no ability to control off-campus, non-school-sponsored interactions, and therefore, its duty is limited to on-campus, or school-sponsored activities."

It would appear that the attorneys for the Goncalves plaintiffs have their work cut out...if they didn't settle Barlow, I don't see them settling Goncalves. MOO

 

[BeginnerSleuther]

Sure there is. Another university, employer, etc. No references, short stay @ a position? Background checks are very comprehensive these days.

There are federal laws against that. No place is going to do something like that.

MOO

 

[Vaderman]

This link has been pulled, likely because one photo appeared to show Xana's body, to include part of her face.

Have they re-released the document dump with properly redacted photos?