Four students murdered at University of Idaho *ARREST*

1668706399688.png


Got my Masters degree from here. :(

Killer who stabbed 4 Idaho students to death still at large​

The killer — or killers — who stabbed four University of Idaho students to death remained at large Tuesday, prompting many students to leave the campus in the idyllic small town despite police assurances that there was no imminent risk to the community.

So many students had left the scenic tree-lined campus in Moscow, Idaho, by Tuesday that university officials said a candlelight vigil scheduled for the next day would instead be held after the Thanksgiving break.

The students, all close friends, were found dead in an off-campus rental home around noon on Sunday, and officials said they likely were killed several hours earlier. Latah County Coroner Cathy Mabbutt told the Spokane, Washington-based television station KXLY that her preliminary investigation showed the students were stabbed to death. There is no indication that substance use was involved in the deaths, Mabbutt said.
 
Last edited:
Click to expand...
GrandmaBear said:
I wonder the same. Discovery generally all has to be turned over, however, since it likely contains other family member's info, DNA, etc. seems a bit like medical records BUT I guess any family member who did their DNA thing already put it out there. If that's how this was done...

But I'm surprised prosecutors would argue it too, turning over anything. So I'm guessing they have a basis for arguing it? There is little provided on what they say the reason is, just that they say they shouldn't have to turn it over.

Only other part of the article is defense saying it may have been planted which again is a downright dumb conspiracy ridiculous kind of thing that no juror nor anyone in their right mind would buy. Until hearing that, I wasn't even that down on this defense attorney and actually thought he had a good one but that's like cuz posted, grasping at straws, desperate kind of stuff. And if its Kohberger telling her it was planted and insisting she say such, well, I'm even less impressed. and that would be twice she's done something other attorneys have said some very negative things about.

I want to know what basis the prosecution gives for stating they shouldn't have to provide it. And of course that part is missing.
Click to expand...
Well, I’m sure they know more about the law than I do, but it just doesn’t make sense. The last thing we want is this whole thing overturned.
 
Kimster said:
Well, I’m sure they know more about the law than I do, but it just doesn’t make sense. The last thing we want is this whole thing overturned.
Click to expand...
I agree it doesn't make since. Everything we know is that all discovery gets turned over and this is so unusual I can only think there must be a valid reason or exception for it. So far they've done a great job of investigating and of taking this on against the defense, etc. and utilized LE partners. So I tend to or have to believe for the moment there is some solid reason behind this to argue it should not have to be turned over. I can't imagine what but there must be or I can't imagine them taking this stance.

I haven't had much time but haven't seen any attorney out there explaining this on this case, most people are wrapped up in the LISK thing. I'd like their take on it or to know what possible reason they could have. If you come across anything, please share it. I have the day "off" finally but it isn't one as usual. I have to take care of a very big thing and then am back to work.
 
Defense has been playing this tune and this game from the start. It's not the first time of hints they can say he wasn't there and then there is that thing where they subpoenaed D, the roommate. Whether they really have something or BK did something/planted something to ensure he could show he was elsewhere, who knows. I doubt it. I think it is a whole lot of hot air and his defense attorney is going to like try to show the cell phone experts and data aren't reliable, the sighting of the car isn't, etc. but honestly it is more so probably a lot of hot air and a nothingburger. We shall see I guess.

Here's what gets me. In this day and age basically all is to be shared with both sides and is discoverable. But here they are not sharing exactly "what" they feel will perhaps provide him an alibi with cross examination, etc. Why is it they don't have to tell what evidence there is or witnesses they know of that can provide that? Instead of stating an alibi as is the norm, we saw it in Daybell, they are not doing so but acting as if they have one and can bring it out on testimony and why should that not have to be shared with the prosecution IF THERE IS ONE BIT of truth to it?
 
Last edited:
So he has an alibi, but doesn't want to say what it is. :rolleyes: I think this is all just more stuff from yesterday's info.

www.abc15.com

Attorneys suggest possible alibi defense for Bryan Kohberger

Kohberger was indicted for four counts of first-degree murder and one count of burglary linked to the University of Idaho student stabbings.
www.abc15.com www.abc15.com

Attorneys suggest possible alibi defense for Bryan Kohberger​

Lawyers representing Bryan Kohberger, the man accused of fatally stabbing four University of Idaho students, have indicated a potential alibi defense in the case.

In a court filing submitted Tuesday, the attorneys suggested that there might be evidence supporting the claim that he was elsewhere on the day of the incident.

However, the specific location or details of his potential alibi were not disclosed in the filing.

"A defendant’s denial of the charges against him does not constitute an alibi, but as soon as he offers evidence that he was at some place other than where the crime of which he is charged was committed, he is raising the alibi defense," the filing, which was obtained by CNN, states.

 
Even though I have no time I do come across titles in the two like 12 minute breaks I get, etc.

This one today stopped me in my tracks but I had no time to watch it, anyone know anything about this? Just started it and something about a motion filed. I'm not even a minute in yet. And I had to search for it to find what I thought I saw as it didn't come up for me even though subscribed.

 
This is just three or so hours old and I've seen nothing else about it so far, but I was working and it came up on a YT refresh on my phone. I don't get enough time where I watch or anything, so after a long day and just trying to unwind and checking posts here on CW on cases, etc. it popped into my head to look for this thing about delays and here I am. Again I haven't watched it yet, just starting to. This is newer than the alibi stuff and I didn't see any other YTers with it either.
 
Ooohh boy. I am about halfway in/through. The first several minutes about what it all means was legal mumble jumble or not clear at least to me but now he is dialing into it under the midway mark in the video but approaching midway and this is making perfect sense. Hmmm.
 
He did say in the early on parts, defense not right about a few things and they caused one delay, etc. But not with other parts as it goes on. A speedy trial is six months. Prosecution can't charge and start that clock ticking and then manipulate it.

This is giving me hints of Vallow (BOTH of THESE are ID cases) where I believe to this day the speedy trial thing was USED. Chad didn't want one, Lori did. All a big game and what ended up happening??? The DP DROPPED against Lori when Boyce was against a wall.

Speedy trial is a constitutional right.

I would tell the families right now, they had better buckle up. This is all going to be a hard fought bumpy ride and will add far more trauma than the worst of which they've already endured on top of fresh grief and anger.

Like Kay and Larry in Vallow, they are going to have had it with the sides by the end of it and in Daybell that included the judge, at times the prosecution, etc. with all the ups and downs. And Lori's mental things. And time. And more. They still are only approaching the end of step one of a closing in a few days (Lori's sentencing) with much more to come. And that's without appeals probably starting on her before Chad even is tried.
 
Now it's playing into that the State can't refuse the genetic thing they did and if I am getting his lawyer gist, causing more time delays because they are fighting it which will put off speedy trial? I need someone else's take on this. That's how I'm hearing the reason now or one of them as he reads the motion.

We need an attorney on this site experienced in criminal law number one but all law for everything any of us go through lol.

And a plumber... Etc.
 
And he is talking delays in the justice system in general. :pickme: And the problems with it and all sides and how it creates the ridiculous delays and time that goes on forever before a case is ever tried. He is a bit hyped and passionate over it.
 
RoundPeg said:
If Kohberger had an alibi, he wouldn't be sitting in jail. He doesn't have one.
Click to expand...
I don't think he does either but it has been hinted at a few times even in the beginning before the court part of notice of alibi came up if I recall. I think at BEST he did something or may have something that shows some activity elsewhere like at home or some such. I have no idea what. Maybe he left his vacuum running lol like with the neighbor that said he'd be doing such things late at night, etc. or at all odd hours. Maybe he found a way to make a Roomba loud and so the neighbor hears it moving and thinks he is home.

I am joking of course but just saying at BEST they have something or can do something that they think will give some doubt. Making mincemeat of the cell phone data would be another, etc. I think though more likely it is all games and bluster and cat and mouse, typical.

The speedy trial thing IS more worrisome. Even though the defense is not 100 percent being fair in their filing on that one, there is some meat to it if I understood correctly, even though he said one delay they caused, not the State or judge. We saw it in Daybell.

That lawyer in that YT got pretty ratcheted up about how things delay in courts and scheduling and the next thing you know a trial takes years to be held. I sooo agree with that as all know. It NEEDS to change. But that's a sidetrack.

ID had better be ready to try Kohberger in I think it is October and the judge had better keep that on track AND ensure his time frame for decisions, etc. do so. It told me also or I intuit that just as I thought, Boyce then imo is a big reason for the dismissal of the DP in Daybell. No one or reporter I ever saw would mention that he did a hearing to have a hearing to schedule a hearing to then hear argument on every motion and then took more time to come to a decision and never made one almost the day of. The guy didn't say this but he said in this case here, BK, the judge taking some time for a decision does play into that speedy trial short time frame and SO that means Boyce did many, many, many times in Daybell is how I figure it. No one ever put it on him though, isn't that interesting? I never heard a reporter or talking head say such a single time.

Anywho, I predict like Daybell, the defense will argue or WARN they'd better watch the speedy trial thing and the prosecution not play games to then delay. Next I predict they will hit the court and prosecution with as many motions in these short months as they can and which all will overload the other side and the judge. Basically all defenses do in murder trials. Of course they should represent their client but this is a tactic of course as much is with filing a slew of motions after demanding a speedy trial.

Just how I interpret it all, certainly no expert.
 
RoundPeg said:
If Kohberger had an alibi, he wouldn't be sitting in jail. He doesn't have one.
Click to expand...

OMG!! How did I forget that I wasn't even there at the time! I was (Whatever made up 🐮 :poop: he comes up with.) I think I'll tell my lawyer to save what it is for the trial. I really enjoy sitting in jail when I could be a free man.

Bored Season 3 GIF by The Office
 
Cousin Dupree said:
OMG!! How did I forget that I wasn't even there at the time! I was (Whatever made up 🐮 :poop: he comes up with.) I think I'll tell my lawyer to save what it is for the trial. I really enjoy sitting in jail when I could be a free man.

Bored Season 3 GIF by The Office
Click to expand...
Yah, it's games. Kind of obvious ones lol. Duh.

I do think if we ever get to trial that his attorney will play it or try to perhaps but it will be a very ineffective obvious thing and ploy. Imo.
 
Uhm we have a very active, probably b.s. filled, but active defense going on here... Did I say earlier they'd go on about speedy trial but then start flinging motions, etc...


 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
3,006
Messages
240,510
Members
965
Latest member
tanya
Back
Top Bottom