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:
Actually things like publicity, etc. are not enough reason to seal what should be public documents. I found a really good thing about it on break the other day but couldn't find it again after I goet home BUT the right to documents in a criminal proceeding for both press and the public are constitutional. You can't just go in and say because of publicity etc., this should be sealed, they need a lot more reason than that. That isn't to say they aren't WRONGLY doing it lately in some places. There are FEW causes that can be used and even then they have to be overwhelmingly more important than the public's right to access.
 
I watched this last night and it is worth watching. She is a lawyer. And she says how defenses are missing the boat wanting cameras out of courtrooms. She also says how lawyers just aren't up on and fear the online thing, etc. and behind the eight ball. I am definitely paraphrasing. She points out why they SHOULD want cameras.

It's good and she gets a bit feisty about it. Her points are good ones.

I think the same could apply to gag orders and sealed documents. In this case, it is regarding cameras.

 
She does go into gag orders and sealed documents at a point in this. And she says how most lawyers and judges are anti camera. She says lawyers are all about secrecy and confidentiality and that most lawyers are risk averse and they don't know how to do social media. so they figure safer to avoid it. No sh*t the system has not kept up with the times that's for sure but that was true even before social media. Imo they are as slow as a turtle and never adapted to anything and in fact have slowed the process ridiculously more. That's my side note, my opinion, not something she said.

Her rant is that their whole movement is wrong and why she thinks Kohberger's team and all others should be pushing for OPEN courtrooms i.e., cameras, and the works.
 
She says defense/defendants wanting courtrooms closed or things closed makes no sense at all. They are ignoring reality.

I'm going to stop here and just say again this is WELL WORTH a watch. Put it on while doing something and just listen if you have a chance.
 
Okay. One more.

Lawyers have not adjusted to the real world. Her words. No sh*t.

My words: Neither have judge our courts. Or the systesm.

It's just like govt. They are always many light years behind the times.

And it gets worse with every passing year and is becoming more noticeable than it has EVER BEEN and rapidly so.
 

Kohberger team asks for hearing Friday​

Bryan Kohberger’s attorney has requested a hearing be set for Friday to discuss a motion to remove cameras from the courtroom for future hearings regarding the Moscow quadruple murder suspect.

Anne Taylor asked Latah County District Judge John Judge to schedule the hearing for 1 p.m.

Kohberger’s attorneys filed a motion last week asking the judge to remove cameras from the courtroom because they believe the media’s focus on Kohberger creates a prejudice that harms his right to a fair trial. They also argue the media has violated a court directive asking reporters to not focus their cameras exclusively on the suspect.

Another hearing will be held Sept. 22 to discuss Kohberger’s effort to dismiss his grand jury indictment. This hearing, originally scheduled for Friday, was postponed after Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson asked Judge for more time to prepare.

News organizations to fight Kohberger defense team's attempt to remove cameras from courtroom​

A coalition of news organizations plans to fight a recent attempt by the Moscow murder suspect's defense team to have cameras removed from his court hearings.

A coalition of news organizations wants to fight against removing cameras from the courtroom.

Attorneys for the group, which includes KXLY and our parent company Morgan Murphy Media, filed a motion to intervene Wednesday, asking that the group's voice be heard in arguing against the motion.

The coalition includes other local and national news companies as well as state and national organizations like the Washington State Association of Broadcasters and the RTDNA (Radio Television Digital News Association.)

It previously argued that a gag order in the case was over-broad and limited public access to the proceedings.

At the time of those filings, Judge John Judge reserved judgment on allowing cameras in the courtroom, saying they were allowed now, but that could change at any time.

The press believe that media access can be done responsively and, especially in death penalty cases, is necessary to ensure that criminal proceedings are done fairly and in the public eye.

Judge Judge scheduled a hearing on the matter for this Friday.
 

Kohberger hearing over cameras in courtroom pushed back​

A hearing over whether to allow cameras in the Idaho courtroom where Bryan Kohberger is set to stand trial on murder charges has been postponed.

During a scheduling conference Friday, Latah County Judge John Judge rescheduled the hearing for Sept. 13.
 

Kohberger hearing over cameras in courtroom pushed back​

A hearing over whether to allow cameras in the Idaho courtroom where Bryan Kohberger is set to stand trial on murder charges has been postponed.

During a scheduling conference Friday, Latah County Judge John Judge rescheduled the hearing for Sept. 13.
I think it is kind of funny. Defense attorney wanted a hearing on Friday at 1, her request, her time, quickly. Judge went along with her short notice request and now has pushed it back. Speedy trial has been waived Ann Taylor, remember, you and your client did that? And news orgs and others get to be ready and respond to this. That's my guess of why it was pushed back, to allow all the time to argue or address it? Don't have time to read the link. Sorry.
 

UPDATE: King Road house demolition postponed, again​

Demolition of the King Roadhouse has been delayed by the University of Idaho once again. The decision came two weeks after Bryan Kohberger, the main suspect in the Moscow homicides, waived his right to a speedy trial and suspended his trial indefinitely.

The decision to demolish the house was initially supposed to happen in October, but due to Kohberger’s trial being postponed, so was the decision to demolish the crime scene.

Though the house will not be demolished this semester, discussions regarding when the house should be demolished will begin in December.
 

Prosecutors Agree With Defense About No Cameras for Kohberger Trial​

Prosecutors in the murder trial of Bryan Kohberger, charged with killing four University of Idaho students last fall in their off-campus rental, responded positively this week to the defense motion to bar cameras from the court room.

But rather than a 7-page motion complaining that amateur criminologists focused on the 28-year-old suspect’s crotch, Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson said that he was more concerned with the “chilling effect” intrusive cameras could have on “young and vulnerable” witnesses and the possibility that jurors could see evidence not put before them in the course of overwhelming media coverage.

“The State fully understands the enormous value that responsible media has in helping the public to understand the true facts of what occurs in court,” the prosecutor wrote. “The State believes, however, that those ends can be accomplished without the need for camera/video images, or the physical presence of cameras in the courtroom.”

Thompson wrote that he is “concerned that allowing the presence of cameras in the courtroom will have a substantial chilling effect on the ability of witnesses to openly, fully and candidly testify about some horrible occurrences.”

He cited Judge Steven Boyce’s ruling barring cameras during the trial of Lori Vallow Daybell, also in Idaho, saying that his ruling “provides a thorough examination of the issues before the court.”

“The State respectfully submits that the appropriate course of action would be for the court to prohibit cameras in the courtroom, both still and video, at a minimum during trial and during any other court proceedings at which victims such as described above might be called to testify,” Thompson concluded.
 

Prosecutors Agree With Defense About No Cameras for Kohberger Trial​

Prosecutors in the murder trial of Bryan Kohberger, charged with killing four University of Idaho students last fall in their off-campus rental, responded positively this week to the defense motion to bar cameras from the court room.

But rather than a 7-page motion complaining that amateur criminologists focused on the 28-year-old suspect’s crotch, Latah County Prosecutor Bill Thompson said that he was more concerned with the “chilling effect” intrusive cameras could have on “young and vulnerable” witnesses and the possibility that jurors could see evidence not put before them in the course of overwhelming media coverage.

“The State fully understands the enormous value that responsible media has in helping the public to understand the true facts of what occurs in court,” the prosecutor wrote. “The State believes, however, that those ends can be accomplished without the need for camera/video images, or the physical presence of cameras in the courtroom.”

Thompson wrote that he is “concerned that allowing the presence of cameras in the courtroom will have a substantial chilling effect on the ability of witnesses to openly, fully and candidly testify about some horrible occurrences.”

He cited Judge Steven Boyce’s ruling barring cameras during the trial of Lori Vallow Daybell, also in Idaho, saying that his ruling “provides a thorough examination of the issues before the court.”

“The State respectfully submits that the appropriate course of action would be for the court to prohibit cameras in the courtroom, both still and video, at a minimum during trial and during any other court proceedings at which victims such as described above might be called to testify,” Thompson concluded.
ID is wrong and I vehemently disagree and it's time they get out of the dark ages or quit insulting jurors with these excuses. I've heard PLENTY of practicing attorneys give the reasons there should be cameras, etc. and live proceedings.

And they are modeling after Boyce? Well that wins no points imo.

Of course it isn't decided yet but when you have the prosecution agreeing with the defense, it gives the judge an easy out to say no cameras ALTHOUGH the media and public do have rights and a side as well.
 
The only reason that I think that a defense team has a leg to stand on regarding cameras in the courtroom is if they’re looking ahead far enough for an appeal.
 
Why are they still talking?

Parents of University of Idaho student Kaylee Goncalves claim they have evidence that she tried to escape killer but was trapped and brutally murdered​

The parents of Kaylee Goncalves claim their daughter was 'trapped' by the body of her best friend as she tried to escape their killer.

Steve Goncalves said that his daughter was stuck in her bedroom because of the property layout in Moscow, Idaho, on the night she was murdered.

Both Kaylee and Maddie were sleeping in the same bed the night of the murders, with Kaylee's parents claiming they have evidence showing she 'tried to get out of the situation', before being killed.

He believes Kaylee was stuck between her friend's body and the wall before the assailant attacked her, citing the coroner's report.

Speaking to CBS News' Peter Van Sant, he said: 'There's evidence to show that she awakened and tried to get out of that situation, [but] she was assaulted and stabbed.

'The bed was up against the wall. The headboard was touching the wall and the left side of the bed was touching the wall.

'And we believe that Maddie was on the outside and Kaylee was on the inside. The way the bed was set up…[Kaylee] was trapped.'

Xana's father said that he believes his daughter fought back against her killer, adding, 'It's upsetting to think about'.



The Goncalves family have been undertaking their own investigation and were regularly speaking out before a gag order was put in place.

The gag order means that any information about the case is scant, but legal filings have revealed the alleged killer's lawyers are questioning the genealogy used to arrest him.

His team has also argued that the alleged footage of his Hyundai Elantra was misidentified.
 
I don't even know where to start, so many comments and thoughts came as I read that very long article. I won't even remember them all due to its length. Pretty good timeline though at the end. And detailed.

There were mistakes in it, one is that the surviving roommates were not both on the bottom floor as DM says. They also said both roommates had went to bed prior to the others coming home and did not awaken until the next morning. While the killings did happen in the wee morning hours, they give the impression the roommates slept through it and this is not true of Dylan who was awake and saw him.

I don't know that I will get or can take time for all the remarks I want to make and I also don't want to make one convoluted post so let's start with this one. From the article:

Steve Goncalves said that his daughter was stuck in her bedroom because of the property layout in Moscow, Idaho, on the night she was murdered.

Daily Mail can be hard to trust as to exactness sometimes and I haven't seen the show but I wonder if this is direct quote of Steve? The "because of the property" layout makes it sound as if the bed HAD to be against the walls due to how the room was or property was, etc. And we can intuit that may be also means she couldn't get out of the room due to layout or some such, hard to say.

IF this is a direct quote and that's a big IF, this sounds like lawsuit talk, as if they are going to sue the property owner, house builder, etc. or whomever, but most likely the owner. If it is NOT a direct quote or he misspoke and just mean how the bed was in the room, etc. then forget everything I just said.

While I ENTIRELY understand how stressful and awful it is to hold in all details and stay silent, I am having trouble understanding this family's need for one to tell of the gore, for another to believe their daughter was not the target but also a need to believe she fought back or would have escaped and the need to believe he intended to kill only one person. ALL of this may be true but even if it is, the NEED to convince others of not his guilt but these other things that are not necessarily to do with his guilt so much as their need to believe something AND share it is odd to me and I don't understand it.

IF he only intended one victim and IF things went awry, then that negates a lot of the overkill buzz and attention and focus of out there things like serial killers, other victims, budding serial killer, Dennis Rader connections and more doesn't it? It makes him not normal but more of a "normal" killer, obsessed with, rejected by or knowing ONE victim and intending her as the target. I can only assume they mean Maddie was his target and of course her body was in their daughter's way to safety. I have to say that if she had managed to spring from the bed I find it doubtful she would have survived., made it out of the room, much less out of the home or to safety. Xana and Ethan did not and there were two of them. To be fair, this is probably somewhat normal in such an awful grief process as a murder brings with it I guess although I don't entirely understand the need of some of it or to say it publicly. The need to blame may be normal BUT they aren't really focusing on him so much and are even saying he only intended to kill one which may be the case but still...

So as to the serial killer talk and things like that, it all goes out the window pretty much and the idea of him intending to be a known mass murderer goes out the window too IF he only had one victim in mind. This changes every thought we and the rest of the public have had for almost a year. It may mean he had NO IDEA Kaylee was visiting or there on the second floor. IF THE GONCALVES MOTHER'S STATEMENT IS TRUE AND NOT JUST A NEED TO BELIEVE IT OR CONJECTURE. It means he only had murderous intent on ONE that he maybe knew, obsessed with, was rejected by, fantasized about, etc. AND it may mean he did not even intend to kill but to rape and strike fear into, WHO KNOWS? But he found Kaylee present. AND a DOG TOO. He wouldn't have necessarily known that either then. He may well have believed Maddie lived alone on the top floor and he'd just enter and go up and then leave and go out.

That's enough for now. It is enough to point out what this statement DOES. And it does a whole lot more than that. It harkens back to the police saying there was no danger to the community and this family stating they thought there was one intended target etc. It doesn't lessen that BK killed four people but it lessens in a way his intent and the grand scheme of it all, etc. and how bad even he appears.

I don't know that what they are doing and saying is wise.

I have a lot of other thoughts about the defense attorney and some of the stuff in here. And about the show and publicity and them speaking on it etc. I don't though have hours to share those thoughts and probably won't get around to it. We will see.

I'll mention just one. They say the defense atty. accused the cops basically of planting the DNA on the sheath. This is downright DUMB for a lot of reasons I can mention. Absolutely asinine. It is dumber than the no alibi alibi that may appear but not sure so they don't know if he has one but maybe he does depending on what others say or comes up, etc. People can laud her all they want. In the beginning I bought into her reputation and thought oh NO, they gave him a GREAT attorney. I'm not on that page any longer. Far from it.

In closing, I feel Kaylee's parents are blaming Maddie and whatever brought this one without blaming Maddie or quite saying it. HE is to blame. The layout of the home is not and Maddie is not. And I know they do blame him, I'm not saying they don't but they are also looking to blame other things and people it seems to me. I do think this is normal and a part of the process for sure but the getting on TV and doing it etc. is a step beyond that by far. You are to keep it to yourself per LE. Our family leaked or came close at times. It is VERY difficult not to when it goes on for years, etc. I don't know about my other family members but I found a friend or two I trusted to keep it and let me vent and leak privately. Ideally you would not even do that but that need is THERE., holding such in is not almost HUMANLY possible, let me tell you, and it is a very big expectation to expect victim's families to do so.

I think I haven't wandered too far and have kept it pretty clear and focused on each topic. So I will stop here.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,006
Messages
240,515
Members
965
Latest member
tanya
Back
Top Bottom