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:
Is it worth it? Pretty long I see, close to an hour.

What are they basing their argument on? Since when is such DNA tracing/testing a problem? I'm sick of these defense attys, wasn't impressed from the start either and the Ann one is supposed to be so "good" and I sure haven't seen it.
Click to expand...
Boring. Trying to get the DNA thrown out that identifies the knife sheath at the CS to the suspects father. I just watched a little then dragged forward to Nate and another guy discussing the case but i didn't continue watching. Below is todays court and is still going on. Starts at timestamp 5.02 with first witness. Haven't watched yet. This sounds like you have watched it as they are asking the first guy up about a google warrant. Just posting for others. It is getting late here now so i won't be watching and will catch up on it by watching Nate's recap tomorrow.

 
Last edited:
Tresir said:
Boring. Trying to get the DNA thrown out that identifies the knife sheath at the CS to the suspects father. I just watched a little then dragged forward to Nate and another guy discussing the case but i didn't continue watching. Below is todays court and is still going on. Starts at timestamp 5.02 with first witness. Haven't watched yet.

Click to expand...

It is still going on today? Wow. Poor P and judge. I had it on hours ago and was fast bored and didn't even see the points of the questions I heard.

Of course they want the DNA thrown out, don't they all. Same with CB. I guess they have to try when they have guilty clients who left their DNA lol. Don't consider encouraging your client to plead guilty and try to get some perk in exchange like a peanut butter sandwich on Fridays lol. I don't think CB deserves butter but I'll shut up if it is peanut butter and he pleads guilty to all. Done deal.

GIve Kohberger a carrot.
 
Cousin Dupree said:
Wow, this lady is dumb!
Click to expand...
I watched this bit earlier and the judges point was that people load up their DNA voluntarily to these ancestral sites so they subsequentently have no expectation of privacy for the data. So a warrant isn't required as the info is already public in effect. She is just doing her job challenging everything. The D seem to do this all the time in many cases IMO. I like to call it clutching at straws.
 
Tresir said:
I watched this bit earlier and the judges point was that people load up their DNA voluntarily to these ancestral sites so they subsequentently have no expectation of privacy for the data. So a warrant isn't required as the info is already public in effect. She is just doing her job challenging everything. The D seem to do this all the time in many cases IMO. I like to call it clutching at straws.
Click to expand...

When a defense lawyer wants to challenge evidence, it's just stupid to challenge settled law.
 
Apparently when he was arrested he was in the kitchen in his underwear sorting trash into ziplock bags. Apparently his DNA was not found at the scene but his fathers DNA was found on a knife sheaf left at the CS. That's how they caught him. Via familial DNA on an ancestral site. This will probably be more detailed at the trial.
 
Cousin Dupree said:
23 minutes:

Click to expand...

Worth watching just for the judge. He is good, wise and well read on it all.

She on the other hand is a joke and is trying to make law where there isn't. She stands there and tries to act as if she knows more than the judge and that's not the case. She acts as if the judge should make brand new law for all the land.

It was said she is good but she's not. This isn't the first time I've seen the judge take apart her generally false arguments and sometimes lies and intentionally misinterpreting something...

Thanks for posting. Most of what I saw parts of was so dull but this was worth the watch.
 
Tresir said:
I watched this bit earlier and the judges point was that people load up their DNA voluntarily to these ancestral sites so they subsequentently have no expectation of privacy for the data. So a warrant isn't required as the info is already public in effect. She is just doing her job challenging everything. The D seem to do this all the time in many cases IMO. I like to call it clutching at straws.
Click to expand...
He also pointed out fingerprints are same and they can be taken from crime scene and matched with no warrant. It's like she expects this judge to make new law for all the land on her say so. STUPID.
 
Tresir said:
Apparently when he was arrested he was in the kitchen in his underwear sorting trash into ziplock bags. Apparently his DNA was not found at the scene but his fathers DNA was found on a knife sheaf left at the CS. That's how they caught him. Via familial DNA on an ancestral site. This will probably be more detailed at the trial.
Click to expand...
No.... It was his DNA at CS I am pretty sure. From garbage they got something that had his father's on it... Pretty certain... That's how dad's came in...
 
There are so many what I call talking heads out there. I don't consider John Kelly one of them. He has things he brings to the table and I've never regretted a single time watching one of his shows. He has the knowledge, the experience and has talked to some of the worst. @Mel70 I think you would enjoy this and it's not long and he talks of more than a few serial killers.

Linking for all. Not once have I felt I wasted my time watching one of his shows.

 
Cousin Dupree said:
Click to expand...

I watched this last night and I almost linked it but never did.

I had seen I thought most of the hearing and I think I did but there were a few parts in here that I think I may have missed of the hearing. It's a good one I guess for someone who doesn't want to watch the entire hearing.

I can't stand his attorney and she's full of b.s. and games and no real basis imo.

I really like the judge though. And the prosecution swings back pretty hard. The talking head at the end, an actual practicing attorney or public defender, I forget, had some very good points and it sounds like Ann Taylor is going down the wrong path, the wrong type of law and it isn't going to fly. He was talking tort law, civil law and rights and some different things. Said doesn't apply to 4th Amendment Rights as she keeps trying to claim.

Not too long and fairly interesting. Not a bit Levy or Law and Crime fan but this one wasn't too bad.
 
Hmmm. Defense wanted this sealed, now they want it unsealed. Prosecution does not want it unsealed. Not a big win but sealed hearing being released with redactions... I guess we will be getting some released to the public and guess we will get to see whatever it is with redactions of course...

Scott then touches on how judge was not with the defense on IGG and such and how Kohberger can't expect privacy or his ancestors can't, etc. when a genetic database and so on. He says quite a bit about ID and their sealing of records and secrecy and I'd agree on that. Meaning it should not be going on so much and again I agree. Generally cases and court hearings ARE TO BE PUBLIC, OPEN to NEWS, the PUBLIC, ETC. and Scott says as much... And I so agree.

He says the public has a right to go into any courtroom throughout the country for the most heinous of crimes and watch the hearing and this sealing of such lately, and making such private in many a state is going to create serious appellate issues. I have bitched about this a LOT. Court is to be open, and open to the public and we are seeing all these sealed documents and hearings these days in many cases in many states. Idaho is BAD for such. They are DEFINITELY ONE of them in recent years. Seen such in MORE than one case.

He goes on to the DA in Arbery. SCott always covers many cases in one video... I'd recommend listening to that part too... Hmmm. The DA's atty is claiming she never knew **** and she never helped Greg McMichael, and that she was not aware of or told all. Etc., etc. Sure the heck is not what we have always heard, what she and her D is saying...

I haven't gotten around to it but I am pretty sure one day I am going to join Scott's channel. I've never done a paid membership for anyone on YT and when I do, I think it will likely be his channel. I can't stand most defense attorneys but he is SO well versed and on other areas of the law too--even though he is not civil or family/divorce, he knows plenty about all, and about the laws in other states as well or if he does not, he can look into and comment very well on. For being a defense atty he is not all defense on every case, not ever, like the idiots like Bob Motta are. He gives great insight to both sides. If I join a channel as a paid member I decided it will be a good attorney where one can ask so many questions I and we have quite often in cases and I wish there was an attorney we could ask. For one example of many, like in Delphi, I would ask him if the P did not subpoena RA's wife because I am guessing she invoked spousal privilege? It has NEVER been said but it has been my guess. I'd like to know how that works and if that is the case and that is something I would ask him. Many a question in many a case would I ask, even of those he has not followed. I am pretty sure he will be my pick when I first do a membership with someone. Imo he is a straight up guy, great attorney, law abiding and understands the b.s. and shares it with the public. Even though he is a D atty he has never jumped on the crazy O train in Delphi that D attorneys and public defenders did and those with news shows or YT channels did everywhere to milk it. The Mottas, the Vinnie's, you name it. Even the Melanies and the Lawyer You Know and Grizzly and so on. I am disgusted by all of them. He has a solid following and does not have to go that route.

His channel is the best to watch a trial at by the way. He won't even be there but will televise any he can access and his mods are great. You watch a trial through like Law and Crime or Court TV, you can't comment or even keep up with comments or reading them--tons of nationwide trolls and b.s. and mods not present or keeping up. Watch the same trial on Scott's channel live, you have a good decent bunch, mods are keeping it sane, and discussion is awesome, adult and intelligent. Even if not in agreement. Sane.

It is the place to watch trials IF he has it on.

 
www.fox13seattle.com

Prosecutors get Bryan Kohberger’s mental health records as he fights death penalty

Mental health records for University of Idaho quadruple murder suspect Bryan have been provided to prosecutors, newly unsealed court documents reveal.
www.fox13seattle.com www.fox13seattle.com

Prosecutors get Bryan Kohberger’s mental health records as he fights death penalty​

Medical and mental health records for Bryan Kohberger, the suspect in a quadruple murder at the University of Idaho, and his family members have been provided to prosecutors, newly unsealed court documents reveal.

Prosecutors and lawyers for Kohberger had both agreed to keep the protective order referencing the records sealed, but Ada County Judge Steven Hippler unsealed it last week, finding there was "no compelling basis" to keep the public in the dark.

The contents of the records, however, remain confidential.

The unsealed protective order states that "medical and mental health records of the Defendant and his family members," which were given to prosecutors by the defense on Jan. 9, are not to be shared beyond the prosecution team.

What they're saying:

"It’s interesting that the order specifically references mental health records – a more generic, less telling, term could certainly have been used," said Edwina Elcox, a Boise-based defense attorney who has been following the case.

"I would imagine those records were given to the prosecution because there is something the defense wants them to consider. Obviously, there is no insanity defense in Idaho. So, whatever those records show is likely as some sort of mitigation."

The court records show the mental health records were initially handed over on Jan. 9, almost two months after Hippler ruled Kohberger, 30, can face the death penalty if convicted.

The unsealing marks the second major move in favor of transparency Hippler has made in recent days.

Last week, the judge ordered the transcript of a closed-door hearing regarding the defense's opposition to investigative genetic genealogy evidence to be made public, at least in part.
 
Scott figures a deal might at least be being discussed based on the above in part. It says as much there too when it mentions mitigation.

They were given mental health records of FAMILY members? I guess that must have been voluntary from the D because I can't see where the P could obtain or access such, or have the right to do so...

And what difference would the records of FAMILY make? Maybe show one parent or both had issues which affected how he was raised and how he was affected or showing he and siblings maybe all had issues due to some reason...? No idea.

I wonder if the P and the families for that matter would okay a deal of guilty to all four in return for removing the DP.
 
GrandmaBear said:
Scott figures a deal might at least be being discussed based on the above in part. It says as much there too when it mentions mitigation.

They were given mental health records of FAMILY members? I guess that must have been voluntary from the D because I can't see where the P could obtain or access such, or have the right to do so...

And what difference would the records of FAMILY make? Maybe show one parent or both had issues which affected how he was raised and how he was affected or showing he and siblings maybe all had issues due to some reason...? No idea.

I wonder if the P and the families for that matter would okay a deal of guilty to all four in return for removing the DP.
Click to expand...

If people in the family did have issues, did they kill anyone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
3,051
Messages
248,459
Members
993
Latest member
Curi/geo
Back
Top Bottom