NYT Times interview with Brian Kohlberger’s sister

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a weird and kind of aloof brother who has never been violent and I would never jump to the conclusion that he had committed a mass murder in a neighboring town, even if the police were looking for someone who also drove a blue rav-4.

If that brother had a history of mental health problems and called you early in the morning after the murder occurred, and then later suddenly wanted to get his car out of the state, you wouldn't have gotten suspicious?

Well, on a different note, I've got a beautiful bridge you might be interested in...

He didn't call the sister early in the morning. He called his mom. And for his mom, it was not "the morning after the murder occurred." It was just... a morning. She lived on the other side of the country and knew nothing about the murders at the time. He'd called at odd hours before. She had no reason to believe his reason for calling this time was related to a news event she had not even heard about.

And he didn't "suddenly" want to get his car out of state. He had told them previously he wanted to get some things out of their house and drive them to his new place in Idaho, and his dad had offered to fly out and do the drive with him because it was so long. His dad had already bought a ticket when the murders occurred and, again, the family was not thinking about any of this in the context of the murders because to them, the murders were a separate news event that had nothing to do with their family.

A white Hyundai Elantra is a very, very common car. It is likely you know a person who drives that car. White is the most common car color. Elantras are affordable and have good resale value, so there are a lot of them on the road. If I heard about a horrific crime involving a Subaru Forester or a Nissan Sentra, I would not immediately assume that one of the people I know with those cars committed the crime. I would think "huh that car is very popular, it's going to be really hard for them to find the killer." Like it wouldn't even cross my mind.

You are making the common error of thinking that a piece of information you have already learned (that Brian Kohlberger killed four people) should always have been obvious to everyone even before literally ANYONE knew, including his family. In fact the only reason the police honed in on Brian is because his DNA was found on the knife, something it took weeks to learn because of how long DNA analysis takes. Before that, no one was looking at him and the fact that he drove a white Elantra and lived near the murder scene was not viewed as relevant by anyone.

You're being far too quick to dismiss the significance of the car. This isn't a highly populated area, there are only about 90,000 people in the census area that covers the two towns and surrounding area. The number of white 2011-2015 Elantras there is probably very roughly on the order of 50 or so cars (and some are probably fleet vehicles). That puts him in a very small set of suspects before even factoring in the other things.

There were lots of reasons to be suspicious, if someone was open to considering them. But the family probably wasn't.

2011-2015 wasn’t the date range put out, it was 2011-2013. It defies logic to suggest that the family should have done something with the information that he drove a white 2015 Elantra, or done some research into how many white Elantras were owned by people within that census area and assumed that the police were really looking for a 2015 and not a 2011-2013 model.

I agree with this. It was the wrong model. Of course the family was probably like, oh phew. If he drove a gray Elantra or a Toyota that looked like a white Hyundai would you also expect them to assume the police had it wrong and be suspicious anyway?

Cars often don't change their looks between years, so I would never assume the year implied specificity.

And honestly, I'd assume the same thing regarding color. White vs black or blue? No. White vs light grey? Yes.

Lol, you would never assume the actual years put out by law enforcement, 2011-2013, implied specificity? Then why would they have put out specific years? You have to be trolling at this point, because that argument is nonsensical.

Remember a few years ago when the police were looking for a white panel van with a ladder rack? Are you suggesting everyone that saw a white panel van without a ladder rack said "I'm cool with it."

Terrible deflection, the example of the sniper vehicle description is not applicable to an argument about whether people living across the country should have known/suspected their son was the killer because he drove the same make and model, but different year, of the common place vehicle that was identified as a vehicle of interest.

I really don't think the average person can tell the difference in model years for a boring Elantra. I guess a witness was a self-proclaimed Elantra expert.

They put that information out based on the video of the vehicle in the area. Obviously whoever the police consulted on that video believed they could identify that car as being a 2011-2013 model, it wasn’t some rando that made that conclusion. If the police say they are looking for a 2011-2013 vehicle, it is perfectly reasonable that someone would not connect that with their son’s vehicle from a different year.

OK. I mean, I guess that's understandable. Seems weird to me, but understandable.

To me that sounds akin to hearing that, say, the police are looking for a 6 ft white male with a rough sketch, seeing someone that matches the sketch, but dismissing it because you happen to know they're actually 5'10". I wouldn't expect the years or heights or weights or colors to be precise or confident. In practice these are regularly off. But maybe that isn't common knowledge.

This isn’t a lay person eyewitness conclusion, which obviously can be faulty due to a variety of factors. Some car person was consulted and said this is a 2011-2013 Elantra. They didn’t need to give a specific range of years but they did, and that was the information put out there. Again, the idea that the parents should have been like well they said specifically it’s a 2011-2013 Elantra and Bryan has a 2015 so he should be a suspect in these murders is ridiculous.

Well, he lived in the area. Drives same car. Incel. Was acting weird. And known for being aggressive and threatening to women he worked with. Seems like a few red flags, no?

What does it matter when the family became suspicious? The murders were already committed at that point. It's not like they could have saved anyone.

Uh, maybe he would do it again? He thought he got away with it the first time so why not attack some other pretty vivacious girls who wouldn’t give a creepy stalker type the time of day? He’s a classic incel with no social skills who couldn’t understand why he couldn’t have any girl he wanted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think what's surprising me about this discussion, and the NYT article, is that no one is talking about his long history of harassing and stalking women on campus.

Numerous women, including his own professors, tried to intervene but there was never quite enough evidence to act.

To me, that's a lot more interesting and worth exploring than the family's insistence he was autistic.

You are correct, I remember back when I read up on this case, that he had been banned from a bar for making female customers or the servers uncomfortable (can't remember if this was in PA or WA). Also, he was a TA at WSU and his students said he was grading them unfairly and I heard complaints were also coming in to where he was about to lose the TA position, or had been notified he was going to lose it (which I thought might have triggered the crime). I think he was getting rejected socially, getting banned from bars, his current PhD program was starting to have issues with his behavior.

But this was at his new campus. I don't remember any problems surfacing from his old campus, where 2 very honored female professors thought quite highly of him. And his family would know none of this. And WSU wasn't sending this info to the serial killer expert at DeSales and asking if she thought there was a concern.

I also think he was probably a voyeur. I think he targeted in on that house with so many windows in view from the street. It had a hidden back area where it was easy to park without being noticed and slip onto the back deck with access to the kitchen. It was a party house and I would not be shocked if he had wandered in during a crowded party where no one noticed him.

From his family's view, it was probably ASD or earlier drug use. I wouldn't be shocked if Schizophrenia was entering the picture, but his parents wouldn't have experience in suspecting that was affecting him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what's surprising me about this discussion, and the NYT article, is that no one is talking about his long history of harassing and stalking women on campus.

Numerous women, including his own professors, tried to intervene but there was never quite enough evidence to act.

To me, that's a lot more interesting and worth exploring than the family's insistence he was autistic.

You are correct, I remember back when I read up on this case, that he had been banned from a bar for making female customers or the servers uncomfortable (can't remember if this was in PA or WA). Also, he was a TA at WSU and his students said he was grading them unfairly and I heard complaints were also coming in to where he was about to lose the TA position, or had been notified he was going to lose it (which I thought might have triggered the crime). I think he was getting rejected socially, getting banned from bars, his current PhD program was starting to have issues with his behavior.

But this was at his new campus. I don't remember any problems surfacing from his old campus, where 2 very honored female professors thought quite highly of him. And his family would know none of this. And WSU wasn't sending this info to the serial killer expert at DeSales and asking if she thought there was a concern.

I also think he was probably a voyeur. I think he targeted in on that house with so many windows in view from the street. It had a hidden back area where it was easy to park without being noticed and slip onto the back deck with access to the kitchen. It was a party house and I would not be shocked if he had wandered in during a crowded party where no one noticed him.

From his family's view, it was probably ASD or earlier drug use. I wouldn't be shocked if Schizophrenia was entering the picture, but his parents wouldn't have experience in suspecting that was affecting him.

You obviously don’t have a family member like this. There are a lot of weird interactions, delusions, strange texts, ranting phone calls, angry emails, they don’t put on a mask around family. This is who they are all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what's surprising me about this discussion, and the NYT article, is that no one is talking about his long history of harassing and stalking women on campus.

Numerous women, including his own professors, tried to intervene but there was never quite enough evidence to act.

To me, that's a lot more interesting and worth exploring than the family's insistence he was autistic.

You are correct, I remember back when I read up on this case, that he had been banned from a bar for making female customers or the servers uncomfortable (can't remember if this was in PA or WA). Also, he was a TA at WSU and his students said he was grading them unfairly and I heard complaints were also coming in to where he was about to lose the TA position, or had been notified he was going to lose it (which I thought might have triggered the crime). I think he was getting rejected socially, getting banned from bars, his current PhD program was starting to have issues with his behavior.

But this was at his new campus. I don't remember any problems surfacing from his old campus, where 2 very honored female professors thought quite highly of him. And his family would know none of this. And WSU wasn't sending this info to the serial killer expert at DeSales and asking if she thought there was a concern.

I also think he was probably a voyeur. I think he targeted in on that house with so many windows in view from the street. It had a hidden back area where it was easy to park without being noticed and slip onto the back deck with access to the kitchen. It was a party house and I would not be shocked if he had wandered in during a crowded party where no one noticed him.

From his family's view, it was probably ASD or earlier drug use. I wouldn't be shocked if Schizophrenia was entering the picture, but his parents wouldn't have experience in suspecting that was affecting him. [/quote]

+1 True, but he should have been closely monitored and treated by a psychiatrist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of you going on and on about the family have made a compelling case that the family should have known. And many of you are stating things that are outright wrong.

Don't quit your day jobs, folks. You suck at this.

I feel like people do this so they can feel control over these uncommon, headline grabbing incidents and tell themselves it could never happen to them. This killer was a heroin addict, so not particularly unforseen that he might become violent under the right conditions, but in other cases, the killer is just a run of the mill misfit or loser.

That's 100% why they do it. That's the appeal of true crime I think. It's a way of exercising control. This thread is about tearing apart the killer's family, arguing "well if it were me I would have known, I would have figured it out, I would have turned him in." But you see the same commentary around victims often. Often victims are portrayed as stupid or naive or too trusting, or people fixate on the fact that someone was drinking or had been in bad relationships before or was uneducated. Anything to other the victim and keep themselves from thinking it could happen to them.

Honestly even with the heroine addiction, I think this case really freaks people out because it is so random. There's no evidence Brian had ever directly interacted with the victims before. There is a very strong desire to find an explanation, which I think is why people are very eager to point to the family and say they missed something, or they covered it up, or they caused Brian to be the kind of person who did this. Because if we had an explanation like that, then we don't have to wrestle with the idea that sometimes people just do horrible, heinous things without any real warning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a weird and kind of aloof brother who has never been violent and I would never jump to the conclusion that he had committed a mass murder in a neighboring town, even if the police were looking for someone who also drove a blue rav-4.

If that brother had a history of mental health problems and called you early in the morning after the murder occurred, and then later suddenly wanted to get his car out of the state, you wouldn't have gotten suspicious?

Well, on a different note, I've got a beautiful bridge you might be interested in...

He didn't call the sister early in the morning. He called his mom. And for his mom, it was not "the morning after the murder occurred." It was just... a morning. She lived on the other side of the country and knew nothing about the murders at the time. He'd called at odd hours before. She had no reason to believe his reason for calling this time was related to a news event she had not even heard about.

And he didn't "suddenly" want to get his car out of state. He had told them previously he wanted to get some things out of their house and drive them to his new place in Idaho, and his dad had offered to fly out and do the drive with him because it was so long. His dad had already bought a ticket when the murders occurred and, again, the family was not thinking about any of this in the context of the murders because to them, the murders were a separate news event that had nothing to do with their family.

A white Hyundai Elantra is a very, very common car. It is likely you know a person who drives that car. White is the most common car color. Elantras are affordable and have good resale value, so there are a lot of them on the road. If I heard about a horrific crime involving a Subaru Forester or a Nissan Sentra, I would not immediately assume that one of the people I know with those cars committed the crime. I would think "huh that car is very popular, it's going to be really hard for them to find the killer." Like it wouldn't even cross my mind.

You are making the common error of thinking that a piece of information you have already learned (that Brian Kohlberger killed four people) should always have been obvious to everyone even before literally ANYONE knew, including his family. In fact the only reason the police honed in on Brian is because his DNA was found on the knife, something it took weeks to learn because of how long DNA analysis takes. Before that, no one was looking at him and the fact that he drove a white Elantra and lived near the murder scene was not viewed as relevant by anyone.

You're being far too quick to dismiss the significance of the car. This isn't a highly populated area, there are only about 90,000 people in the census area that covers the two towns and surrounding area. The number of white 2011-2015 Elantras there is probably very roughly on the order of 50 or so cars (and some are probably fleet vehicles). That puts him in a very small set of suspects before even factoring in the other things.

There were lots of reasons to be suspicious, if someone was open to considering them. But the family probably wasn't.

2011-2015 wasn’t the date range put out, it was 2011-2013. It defies logic to suggest that the family should have done something with the information that he drove a white 2015 Elantra, or done some research into how many white Elantras were owned by people within that census area and assumed that the police were really looking for a 2015 and not a 2011-2013 model.

I agree with this. It was the wrong model. Of course the family was probably like, oh phew. If he drove a gray Elantra or a Toyota that looked like a white Hyundai would you also expect them to assume the police had it wrong and be suspicious anyway?

Cars often don't change their looks between years, so I would never assume the year implied specificity.

And honestly, I'd assume the same thing regarding color. White vs black or blue? No. White vs light grey? Yes.

Lol, you would never assume the actual years put out by law enforcement, 2011-2013, implied specificity? Then why would they have put out specific years? You have to be trolling at this point, because that argument is nonsensical.

Remember a few years ago when the police were looking for a white panel van with a ladder rack? Are you suggesting everyone that saw a white panel van without a ladder rack said "I'm cool with it."

Terrible deflection, the example of the sniper vehicle description is not applicable to an argument about whether people living across the country should have known/suspected their son was the killer because he drove the same make and model, but different year, of the common place vehicle that was identified as a vehicle of interest.

I really don't think the average person can tell the difference in model years for a boring Elantra. I guess a witness was a self-proclaimed Elantra expert.

They put that information out based on the video of the vehicle in the area. Obviously whoever the police consulted on that video believed they could identify that car as being a 2011-2013 model, it wasn’t some rando that made that conclusion. If the police say they are looking for a 2011-2013 vehicle, it is perfectly reasonable that someone would not connect that with their son’s vehicle from a different year.

OK. I mean, I guess that's understandable. Seems weird to me, but understandable.

To me that sounds akin to hearing that, say, the police are looking for a 6 ft white male with a rough sketch, seeing someone that matches the sketch, but dismissing it because you happen to know they're actually 5'10". I wouldn't expect the years or heights or weights or colors to be precise or confident. In practice these are regularly off. But maybe that isn't common knowledge.

This isn’t a lay person eyewitness conclusion, which obviously can be faulty due to a variety of factors. Some car person was consulted and said this is a 2011-2013 Elantra. They didn’t need to give a specific range of years but they did, and that was the information put out there. Again, the idea that the parents should have been like well they said specifically it’s a 2011-2013 Elantra and Bryan has a 2015 so he should be a suspect in these murders is ridiculous.

Well, he lived in the area. Drives same car. Incel. Was acting weird. And known for being aggressive and threatening to women he worked with. Seems like a few red flags, no?

It’s unclear what his family knew of the issues with women. Obviously he had a documented history at WSU that definitely would have been a big red flag, but as an adult student in a PhD program they weren’t going to be contacting his family about it. This isn’t the same as a 16 year old school shooter living with his parents. I also think being weird was his default, him acting weird wasn’t a new or strange thing to his family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a weird and kind of aloof brother who has never been violent and I would never jump to the conclusion that he had committed a mass murder in a neighboring town, even if the police were looking for someone who also drove a blue rav-4.

If that brother had a history of mental health problems and called you early in the morning after the murder occurred, and then later suddenly wanted to get his car out of the state, you wouldn't have gotten suspicious?

Well, on a different note, I've got a beautiful bridge you might be interested in...

He didn't call the sister early in the morning. He called his mom. And for his mom, it was not "the morning after the murder occurred." It was just... a morning. She lived on the other side of the country and knew nothing about the murders at the time. He'd called at odd hours before. She had no reason to believe his reason for calling this time was related to a news event she had not even heard about.

And he didn't "suddenly" want to get his car out of state. He had told them previously he wanted to get some things out of their house and drive them to his new place in Idaho, and his dad had offered to fly out and do the drive with him because it was so long. His dad had already bought a ticket when the murders occurred and, again, the family was not thinking about any of this in the context of the murders because to them, the murders were a separate news event that had nothing to do with their family.

A white Hyundai Elantra is a very, very common car. It is likely you know a person who drives that car. White is the most common car color. Elantras are affordable and have good resale value, so there are a lot of them on the road. If I heard about a horrific crime involving a Subaru Forester or a Nissan Sentra, I would not immediately assume that one of the people I know with those cars committed the crime. I would think "huh that car is very popular, it's going to be really hard for them to find the killer." Like it wouldn't even cross my mind.

You are making the common error of thinking that a piece of information you have already learned (that Brian Kohlberger killed four people) should always have been obvious to everyone even before literally ANYONE knew, including his family. In fact the only reason the police honed in on Brian is because his DNA was found on the knife, something it took weeks to learn because of how long DNA analysis takes. Before that, no one was looking at him and the fact that he drove a white Elantra and lived near the murder scene was not viewed as relevant by anyone.

You're being far too quick to dismiss the significance of the car. This isn't a highly populated area, there are only about 90,000 people in the census area that covers the two towns and surrounding area. The number of white 2011-2015 Elantras there is probably very roughly on the order of 50 or so cars (and some are probably fleet vehicles). That puts him in a very small set of suspects before even factoring in the other things.

There were lots of reasons to be suspicious, if someone was open to considering them. But the family probably wasn't.

2011-2015 wasn’t the date range put out, it was 2011-2013. It defies logic to suggest that the family should have done something with the information that he drove a white 2015 Elantra, or done some research into how many white Elantras were owned by people within that census area and assumed that the police were really looking for a 2015 and not a 2011-2013 model.

I agree with this. It was the wrong model. Of course the family was probably like, oh phew. If he drove a gray Elantra or a Toyota that looked like a white Hyundai would you also expect them to assume the police had it wrong and be suspicious anyway?

Cars often don't change their looks between years, so I would never assume the year implied specificity.

And honestly, I'd assume the same thing regarding color. White vs black or blue? No. White vs light grey? Yes.

Lol, you would never assume the actual years put out by law enforcement, 2011-2013, implied specificity? Then why would they have put out specific years? You have to be trolling at this point, because that argument is nonsensical.

Remember a few years ago when the police were looking for a white panel van with a ladder rack? Are you suggesting everyone that saw a white panel van without a ladder rack said "I'm cool with it."

Terrible deflection, the example of the sniper vehicle description is not applicable to an argument about whether people living across the country should have known/suspected their son was the killer because he drove the same make and model, but different year, of the common place vehicle that was identified as a vehicle of interest.

I really don't think the average person can tell the difference in model years for a boring Elantra. I guess a witness was a self-proclaimed Elantra expert.

They put that information out based on the video of the vehicle in the area. Obviously whoever the police consulted on that video believed they could identify that car as being a 2011-2013 model, it wasn’t some rando that made that conclusion. If the police say they are looking for a 2011-2013 vehicle, it is perfectly reasonable that someone would not connect that with their son’s vehicle from a different year.

OK. I mean, I guess that's understandable. Seems weird to me, but understandable.

To me that sounds akin to hearing that, say, the police are looking for a 6 ft white male with a rough sketch, seeing someone that matches the sketch, but dismissing it because you happen to know they're actually 5'10". I wouldn't expect the years or heights or weights or colors to be precise or confident. In practice these are regularly off. But maybe that isn't common knowledge.

This isn’t a lay person eyewitness conclusion, which obviously can be faulty due to a variety of factors. Some car person was consulted and said this is a 2011-2013 Elantra. They didn’t need to give a specific range of years but they did, and that was the information put out there. Again, the idea that the parents should have been like well they said specifically it’s a 2011-2013 Elantra and Bryan has a 2015 so he should be a suspect in these murders is ridiculous.

Well, he lived in the area. Drives same car. Incel. Was acting weird. And known for being aggressive and threatening to women he worked with. Seems like a few red flags, no?

It’s unclear what his family knew of the issues with women. Obviously he had a documented history at WSU that definitely would have been a big red flag, but as an adult student in a PhD program they weren’t going to be contacting his family about it. This isn’t the same as a 16 year old school shooter living with his parents. I also think being weird was his default, him acting weird wasn’t a new or strange thing to his family.

The family has been pretty tight lipped. They aren’t going to say at this point. But i don’t believe his sister at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what's surprising me about this discussion, and the NYT article, is that no one is talking about his long history of harassing and stalking women on campus.

Numerous women, including his own professors, tried to intervene but there was never quite enough evidence to act.

To me, that's a lot more interesting and worth exploring than the family's insistence he was autistic.

You are correct, I remember back when I read up on this case, that he had been banned from a bar for making female customers or the servers uncomfortable (can't remember if this was in PA or WA). Also, he was a TA at WSU and his students said he was grading them unfairly and I heard complaints were also coming in to where he was about to lose the TA position, or had been notified he was going to lose it (which I thought might have triggered the crime). I think he was getting rejected socially, getting banned from bars, his current PhD program was starting to have issues with his behavior.

But this was at his new campus. I don't remember any problems surfacing from his old campus, where 2 very honored female professors thought quite highly of him. And his family would know none of this. And WSU wasn't sending this info to the serial killer expert at DeSales and asking if she thought there was a concern.

I also think he was probably a voyeur. I think he targeted in on that house with so many windows in view from the street. It had a hidden back area where it was easy to park without being noticed and slip onto the back deck with access to the kitchen. It was a party house and I would not be shocked if he had wandered in during a crowded party where no one noticed him.

From his family's view, it was probably ASD or earlier drug use. I wouldn't be shocked if Schizophrenia was entering the picture, but his parents wouldn't have experience in suspecting that was affecting him.

You obviously don’t have a family member like this. There are a lot of weird interactions, delusions, strange texts, ranting phone calls, angry emails, they don’t put on a mask around family. This is who they are all the time.

Oh for goodness sake, my adult son was in a psych facility for over a month in his 20s and dx with some combo of BPD and schizophrenia (Psychiatrist said it didn't matter because the medication at that point would be similar). He went through a prior period where he wouldn't talk to me or his dad because we "triggered" him (his Dad voted for Trump in 2016 and I worked for the "military industrial complex"). He got his BS and MS in a STEM field, but his posts on Facebook were unintelligible to me. But until this point, I would have put the chances of Sz at 0. His full symptoms didn't emerge until late 20s, which is common.

I also have a sister who I believe has undiagnosed Paranoid Sz. She thought people were following her, servers were bugging her watch to listen to her and accused her husband of being the antichrist. I put her in the rear view mirror 30 years ago, and haven't looked back (for my safety).

I also have a cousin whose 19yo son robbed a customer in a gas station parking lot and the customer shot and killed him. It was a big defense case and eventually they decided not to charge the customer with murder. My cousin and his kids have never been "functional".

I occasionally get asked how I emerged from all this family dysfunction to get 3 STEM degrees and have a successful career with the same employer (yes, defense related). I don't know, but when I heard professionals tell me my son had a psychotic break and thought he was on another planet, etc, etc, I listened. But up until that point, he was just quirky, odd, tons of friends, but never violent and if a murder had happened at his college, I would never have suspected it might be him.

I still think at the time of the murder, Brian's family was seeing ex-addict who was probably ASD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what's surprising me about this discussion, and the NYT article, is that no one is talking about his long history of harassing and stalking women on campus.

Numerous women, including his own professors, tried to intervene but there was never quite enough evidence to act.

To me, that's a lot more interesting and worth exploring than the family's insistence he was autistic.

You are correct, I remember back when I read up on this case, that he had been banned from a bar for making female customers or the servers uncomfortable (can't remember if this was in PA or WA). Also, he was a TA at WSU and his students said he was grading them unfairly and I heard complaints were also coming in to where he was about to lose the TA position, or had been notified he was going to lose it (which I thought might have triggered the crime). I think he was getting rejected socially, getting banned from bars, his current PhD program was starting to have issues with his behavior.

But this was at his new campus. I don't remember any problems surfacing from his old campus, where 2 very honored female professors thought quite highly of him. And his family would know none of this. And WSU wasn't sending this info to the serial killer expert at DeSales and asking if she thought there was a concern.

I also think he was probably a voyeur. I think he targeted in on that house with so many windows in view from the street. It had a hidden back area where it was easy to park without being noticed and slip onto the back deck with access to the kitchen. It was a party house and I would not be shocked if he had wandered in during a crowded party where no one noticed him.

From his family's view, it was probably ASD or earlier drug use. I wouldn't be shocked if Schizophrenia was entering the picture, but his parents wouldn't have experience in suspecting that was affecting him.

You obviously don’t have a family member like this. There are a lot of weird interactions, delusions, strange texts, ranting phone calls, angry emails, they don’t put on a mask around family. This is who they are all the time.

Then they need to be under psychiatric treatment or hospitalized. We need to change the laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what's surprising me about this discussion, and the NYT article, is that no one is talking about his long history of harassing and stalking women on campus.

Numerous women, including his own professors, tried to intervene but there was never quite enough evidence to act.

To me, that's a lot more interesting and worth exploring than the family's insistence he was autistic.

You are correct, I remember back when I read up on this case, that he had been banned from a bar for making female customers or the servers uncomfortable (can't remember if this was in PA or WA). Also, he was a TA at WSU and his students said he was grading them unfairly and I heard complaints were also coming in to where he was about to lose the TA position, or had been notified he was going to lose it (which I thought might have triggered the crime). I think he was getting rejected socially, getting banned from bars, his current PhD program was starting to have issues with his behavior.

But this was at his new campus. I don't remember any problems surfacing from his old campus, where 2 very honored female professors thought quite highly of him. And his family would know none of this. And WSU wasn't sending this info to the serial killer expert at DeSales and asking if she thought there was a concern.

I also think he was probably a voyeur. I think he targeted in on that house with so many windows in view from the street. It had a hidden back area where it was easy to park without being noticed and slip onto the back deck with access to the kitchen. It was a party house and I would not be shocked if he had wandered in during a crowded party where no one noticed him.

From his family's view, it was probably ASD or earlier drug use. I wouldn't be shocked if Schizophrenia was entering the picture, but his parents wouldn't have experience in suspecting that was affecting him.

You obviously don’t have a family member like this. There are a lot of weird interactions, delusions, strange texts, ranting phone calls, angry emails, they don’t put on a mask around family. This is who they are all the time.

Oh for goodness sake, my adult son was in a psych facility for over a month in his 20s and dx with some combo of BPD and schizophrenia (Psychiatrist said it didn't matter because the medication at that point would be similar). He went through a prior period where he wouldn't talk to me or his dad because we "triggered" him (his Dad voted for Trump in 2016 and I worked for the "military industrial complex"). He got his BS and MS in a STEM field, but his posts on Facebook were unintelligible to me. But until this point, I would have put the chances of Sz at 0. His full symptoms didn't emerge until late 20s, which is common.

I also have a sister who I believe has undiagnosed Paranoid Sz. She thought people were following her, servers were bugging her watch to listen to her and accused her husband of being the antichrist. I put her in the rear view mirror 30 years ago, and haven't looked back (for my safety).

I also have a cousin whose 19yo son robbed a customer in a gas station parking lot and the customer shot and killed him. It was a big defense case and eventually they decided not to charge the customer with murder. My cousin and his kids have never been "functional".

I occasionally get asked how I emerged from all this family dysfunction to get 3 STEM degrees and have a successful career with the same employer (yes, defense related). I don't know, but when I heard professionals tell me my son had a psychotic break and thought he was on another planet, etc, etc, I listened. But up until that point, he was just quirky, odd, tons of friends, but never violent and if a murder had happened at his college, I would never have suspected it might be him.

I still think at the time of the murder, Brian's family was seeing ex-addict who was probably ASD.

That must have been incredibly hard-I hope your son is doing better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a weird and kind of aloof brother who has never been violent and I would never jump to the conclusion that he had committed a mass murder in a neighboring town, even if the police were looking for someone who also drove a blue rav-4.

If that brother had a history of mental health problems and called you early in the morning after the murder occurred, and then later suddenly wanted to get his car out of the state, you wouldn't have gotten suspicious?

Well, on a different note, I've got a beautiful bridge you might be interested in...

He didn't call the sister early in the morning. He called his mom. And for his mom, it was not "the morning after the murder occurred." It was just... a morning. She lived on the other side of the country and knew nothing about the murders at the time. He'd called at odd hours before. She had no reason to believe his reason for calling this time was related to a news event she had not even heard about.

And he didn't "suddenly" want to get his car out of state. He had told them previously he wanted to get some things out of their house and drive them to his new place in Idaho, and his dad had offered to fly out and do the drive with him because it was so long. His dad had already bought a ticket when the murders occurred and, again, the family was not thinking about any of this in the context of the murders because to them, the murders were a separate news event that had nothing to do with their family.

If I had a very odd brother who drove a white Elantra, regardless of model year, I'd be highly suspicious.

A white Hyundai Elantra is a very, very common car. It is likely you know a person who drives that car. White is the most common car color. Elantras are affordable and have good resale value, so there are a lot of them on the road. If I heard about a horrific crime involving a Subaru Forester or a Nissan Sentra, I would not immediately assume that one of the people I know with those cars committed the crime. I would think "huh that car is very popular, it's going to be really hard for them to find the killer." Like it wouldn't even cross my mind.

You are making the common error of thinking that a piece of information you have already learned (that Brian Kohlberger killed four people) should always have been obvious to everyone even before literally ANYONE knew, including his family. In fact the only reason the police honed in on Brian is because his DNA was found on the knife, something it took weeks to learn because of how long DNA analysis takes. Before that, no one was looking at him and the fact that he drove a white Elantra and lived near the murder scene was not viewed as relevant by anyone.

You're being far too quick to dismiss the significance of the car. This isn't a highly populated area, there are only about 90,000 people in the census area that covers the two towns and surrounding area. The number of white 2011-2015 Elantras there is probably very roughly on the order of 50 or so cars (and some are probably fleet vehicles). That puts him in a very small set of suspects before even factoring in the other things.

There were lots of reasons to be suspicious, if someone was open to considering them. But the family probably wasn't.

2011-2015 wasn’t the date range put out, it was 2011-2013. It defies logic to suggest that the family should have done something with the information that he drove a white 2015 Elantra, or done some research into how many white Elantras were owned by people within that census area and assumed that the police were really looking for a 2015 and not a 2011-2013 model.

If I had a very odd brother who drove a white Elantra, regardless of model year, I'd be highly suspicious.

You'd be suspicious that he stabbed four college kids in the middle of the night? Really? It would be extremely hard for me to believe that anyone I was related to or close friends with had committed this crime unless I'd seen them be violent before. This is a very, very heinous crime. I can't imagine anyone doing this, not even the oddest or most troubled person I know. It is unfathomable.

I'm still confused why you find an apparent lack of prior violent behavior to be suggestive of innocence.

If this was a domestic violence situation, or some sort of heat-of-the-moment attack, then sure. Maybe even if it looked like some sort of revenge killing. But it never looked like that. It quickly looked like a planned murder of people chosen opportunistically and somewhat randomly.

I wouldn't expect such a murderer to have an openly violent history. I would expect them to look something more like a sociopath.

PP here. I don't think his lack of prior violent behavior is proof of his innocence. I don't think he's innocent. He pled guilty. His DNA was at the crime scene. His car was seen at the crime scene. He ordered a knife matching the murder weapon prior to the murder. He did it.

But I only know all that because I am NOW privy to details from the investigation. The family didn't know any of that. All they knew is that some college kids who lived somewhere in the vicinity of Brian were murdered and that both the killer and Brian drove a similar, fairly nondescript vehicle. And that Brian had never physically harmed anyone before. They didn't know about the knife. He had no connection to these kids at all. His behavior was the same as it always was -- weird but normal *for Brian*.

The idea that they should have suspected he was the killer when he had ZERO history of violent behavior and the only connection the family could possibly have made was a car that I'm sure did not seem terribly unusual to them is a huge leap. You don't discount of a lifetime of knowing, living with, even fighting with and being exasperated by a person you have never been known to be physically violent, and suddenly suspect they are a murderer because they also drive a similar but pretty nondescript white sedan.

He's guilty, and also it is unreasonable to expect his family on the other side of the country to have figured that out before or even at the same time as the police who were investigating the crime, given his lack of connection to the victims and, at the time, the total lack of public evidence connecting Brian specifically to the crime.

That's not what I meant. I meant the nature of the murders didn't seem to fit someone with a violent history. So why would the lack of a violent history make them less likely consider him as a potential suspect?

I still think the car on its own would be enough to start thinking about it. Even if it's initially more from the perspective of being worried the police might falsely suspect him. I know the year didn't match. And I think the sister mentioned at. But I just can't fathom someone really thinking "oh, they're looking for a 2011 or 2013 white Elantra, which could never be confused for a 2015 white Elantra." Maybe people really would think that? Seems nuts, but perhaps if you know cars well you might think other people should know cars well?

Also, the phone call still looks odd to me. I know they said he would call early, but how often did that really happen? Even if it's once a week, that's an awfully big coincidence. That makes it unusual enough that the mother and father would probably remember he had called early in the morning the same day there were murders early in the morning. Even if you don't view that with suspicion, it seems like something you'd remember. e.g., if he called from out of the house, their minds might jump to worry at the thought of him potentially crossing paths with the murderer. That kind of thinking seems consistent with other things the sister said.

Why do I think that matters if it wouldn't be (initially) viewed with suspicion? Because if they have that thought initially, they'd probably recall that thought after hearing about the car.

Don't get me wrong, I've come around to thinking they didn't suspect him. I'm just a little confused why they didn't suspect him.

Again, you are thinking about this from the perspective of someone who is very focused on the murders. Someone for whom the murders were something on their mind a lot of the time.

If Brian's family had lived in the area where the murders occurred, I do think they would have suspected him. But they didn't. They lived far away. They weren't thinking about the murders. They weren't thinking about "the day of the murders" as an important date, and thus the fact that Brian called that day didn't register.

I wonder if the people making these arguments are just used to following true crime cases where the family and friends all live near where the murder happens and might even know the victims. Obviously that's going to greatly change your investment. But in this case the murderer was a very recent transplant to where the murder happened and almost all his family and friends were very far way. It absolutely made it harder for anyone to be 2 and 2 together here even though obviously Brian was not really that careful with this crime and was ultimately easy to tie to the murder. But entirely because of his own choices and not because people in the community were going to be able to tie him to the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a weird and kind of aloof brother who has never been violent and I would never jump to the conclusion that he had committed a mass murder in a neighboring town, even if the police were looking for someone who also drove a blue rav-4.

If that brother had a history of mental health problems and called you early in the morning after the murder occurred, and then later suddenly wanted to get his car out of the state, you wouldn't have gotten suspicious?

Well, on a different note, I've got a beautiful bridge you might be interested in...

He didn't call the sister early in the morning. He called his mom. And for his mom, it was not "the morning after the murder occurred." It was just... a morning. She lived on the other side of the country and knew nothing about the murders at the time. He'd called at odd hours before. She had no reason to believe his reason for calling this time was related to a news event she had not even heard about.

And he didn't "suddenly" want to get his car out of state. He had told them previously he wanted to get some things out of their house and drive them to his new place in Idaho, and his dad had offered to fly out and do the drive with him because it was so long. His dad had already bought a ticket when the murders occurred and, again, the family was not thinking about any of this in the context of the murders because to them, the murders were a separate news event that had nothing to do with their family.

A white Hyundai Elantra is a very, very common car. It is likely you know a person who drives that car. White is the most common car color. Elantras are affordable and have good resale value, so there are a lot of them on the road. If I heard about a horrific crime involving a Subaru Forester or a Nissan Sentra, I would not immediately assume that one of the people I know with those cars committed the crime. I would think "huh that car is very popular, it's going to be really hard for them to find the killer." Like it wouldn't even cross my mind.

You are making the common error of thinking that a piece of information you have already learned (that Brian Kohlberger killed four people) should always have been obvious to everyone even before literally ANYONE knew, including his family. In fact the only reason the police honed in on Brian is because his DNA was found on the knife, something it took weeks to learn because of how long DNA analysis takes. Before that, no one was looking at him and the fact that he drove a white Elantra and lived near the murder scene was not viewed as relevant by anyone.

You're being far too quick to dismiss the significance of the car. This isn't a highly populated area, there are only about 90,000 people in the census area that covers the two towns and surrounding area. The number of white 2011-2015 Elantras there is probably very roughly on the order of 50 or so cars (and some are probably fleet vehicles). That puts him in a very small set of suspects before even factoring in the other things.

There were lots of reasons to be suspicious, if someone was open to considering them. But the family probably wasn't.

2011-2015 wasn’t the date range put out, it was 2011-2013. It defies logic to suggest that the family should have done something with the information that he drove a white 2015 Elantra, or done some research into how many white Elantras were owned by people within that census area and assumed that the police were really looking for a 2015 and not a 2011-2013 model.

I agree with this. It was the wrong model. Of course the family was probably like, oh phew. If he drove a gray Elantra or a Toyota that looked like a white Hyundai would you also expect them to assume the police had it wrong and be suspicious anyway?

Cars often don't change their looks between years, so I would never assume the year implied specificity.

And honestly, I'd assume the same thing regarding color. White vs black or blue? No. White vs light grey? Yes.

Lol, you would never assume the actual years put out by law enforcement, 2011-2013, implied specificity? Then why would they have put out specific years? You have to be trolling at this point, because that argument is nonsensical.

I mean, with the benefit of hindsight, they obviously didn't know with certainty the year. Why were you so sure they were sure? Whether they're giving descriptions of people or cars, the descriptions provided often don't perfectly match what they're ultimately trying to find. That's certainly not unique to this case, and I would think would be common knowledge.

Because that is the description the police put out? They didn’t need to narrow it down by year, but yet they gave a range, which did not include 2015. People are acting like the parents should have known because of the car, but their son’s car wasn’t in the range of years provided! Obviously we all know he did it, but this whole argument has been about whether the parents should have known or suspected their son, and you just can’t use the car to support that conclusion when the year of the car didn’t match what the police said they were looking for.

With the police being so certain about the model years, are we sure they found the right person?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a weird and kind of aloof brother who has never been violent and I would never jump to the conclusion that he had committed a mass murder in a neighboring town, even if the police were looking for someone who also drove a blue rav-4.

If that brother had a history of mental health problems and called you early in the morning after the murder occurred, and then later suddenly wanted to get his car out of the state, you wouldn't have gotten suspicious?

Well, on a different note, I've got a beautiful bridge you might be interested in...

He didn't call the sister early in the morning. He called his mom. And for his mom, it was not "the morning after the murder occurred." It was just... a morning. She lived on the other side of the country and knew nothing about the murders at the time. He'd called at odd hours before. She had no reason to believe his reason for calling this time was related to a news event she had not even heard about.

And he didn't "suddenly" want to get his car out of state. He had told them previously he wanted to get some things out of their house and drive them to his new place in Idaho, and his dad had offered to fly out and do the drive with him because it was so long. His dad had already bought a ticket when the murders occurred and, again, the family was not thinking about any of this in the context of the murders because to them, the murders were a separate news event that had nothing to do with their family.

If I had a very odd brother who drove a white Elantra, regardless of model year, I'd be highly suspicious.

A white Hyundai Elantra is a very, very common car. It is likely you know a person who drives that car. White is the most common car color. Elantras are affordable and have good resale value, so there are a lot of them on the road. If I heard about a horrific crime involving a Subaru Forester or a Nissan Sentra, I would not immediately assume that one of the people I know with those cars committed the crime. I would think "huh that car is very popular, it's going to be really hard for them to find the killer." Like it wouldn't even cross my mind.

You are making the common error of thinking that a piece of information you have already learned (that Brian Kohlberger killed four people) should always have been obvious to everyone even before literally ANYONE knew, including his family. In fact the only reason the police honed in on Brian is because his DNA was found on the knife, something it took weeks to learn because of how long DNA analysis takes. Before that, no one was looking at him and the fact that he drove a white Elantra and lived near the murder scene was not viewed as relevant by anyone.

You're being far too quick to dismiss the significance of the car. This isn't a highly populated area, there are only about 90,000 people in the census area that covers the two towns and surrounding area. The number of white 2011-2015 Elantras there is probably very roughly on the order of 50 or so cars (and some are probably fleet vehicles). That puts him in a very small set of suspects before even factoring in the other things.

There were lots of reasons to be suspicious, if someone was open to considering them. But the family probably wasn't.

2011-2015 wasn’t the date range put out, it was 2011-2013. It defies logic to suggest that the family should have done something with the information that he drove a white 2015 Elantra, or done some research into how many white Elantras were owned by people within that census area and assumed that the police were really looking for a 2015 and not a 2011-2013 model.

If I had a very odd brother who drove a white Elantra, regardless of model year, I'd be highly suspicious.

You'd be suspicious that he stabbed four college kids in the middle of the night? Really? It would be extremely hard for me to believe that anyone I was related to or close friends with had committed this crime unless I'd seen them be violent before. This is a very, very heinous crime. I can't imagine anyone doing this, not even the oddest or most troubled person I know. It is unfathomable.

I'm still confused why you find an apparent lack of prior violent behavior to be suggestive of innocence.

If this was a domestic violence situation, or some sort of heat-of-the-moment attack, then sure. Maybe even if it looked like some sort of revenge killing. But it never looked like that. It quickly looked like a planned murder of people chosen opportunistically and somewhat randomly.

I wouldn't expect such a murderer to have an openly violent history. I would expect them to look something more like a sociopath.

PP here. I don't think his lack of prior violent behavior is proof of his innocence. I don't think he's innocent. He pled guilty. His DNA was at the crime scene. His car was seen at the crime scene. He ordered a knife matching the murder weapon prior to the murder. He did it.

But I only know all that because I am NOW privy to details from the investigation. The family didn't know any of that. All they knew is that some college kids who lived somewhere in the vicinity of Brian were murdered and that both the killer and Brian drove a similar, fairly nondescript vehicle. And that Brian had never physically harmed anyone before. They didn't know about the knife. He had no connection to these kids at all. His behavior was the same as it always was -- weird but normal *for Brian*.

The idea that they should have suspected he was the killer when he had ZERO history of violent behavior and the only connection the family could possibly have made was a car that I'm sure did not seem terribly unusual to them is a huge leap. You don't discount of a lifetime of knowing, living with, even fighting with and being exasperated by a person you have never been known to be physically violent, and suddenly suspect they are a murderer because they also drive a similar but pretty nondescript white sedan.

He's guilty, and also it is unreasonable to expect his family on the other side of the country to have figured that out before or even at the same time as the police who were investigating the crime, given his lack of connection to the victims and, at the time, the total lack of public evidence connecting Brian specifically to the crime.

That's not what I meant. I meant the nature of the murders didn't seem to fit someone with a violent history. So why would the lack of a violent history make them less likely consider him as a potential suspect?

I still think the car on its own would be enough to start thinking about it. Even if it's initially more from the perspective of being worried the police might falsely suspect him. I know the year didn't match. And I think the sister mentioned at. But I just can't fathom someone really thinking "oh, they're looking for a 2011 or 2013 white Elantra, which could never be confused for a 2015 white Elantra." Maybe people really would think that? Seems nuts, but perhaps if you know cars well you might think other people should know cars well?

Also, the phone call still looks odd to me. I know they said he would call early, but how often did that really happen? Even if it's once a week, that's an awfully big coincidence. That makes it unusual enough that the mother and father would probably remember he had called early in the morning the same day there were murders early in the morning. Even if you don't view that with suspicion, it seems like something you'd remember. e.g., if he called from out of the house, their minds might jump to worry at the thought of him potentially crossing paths with the murderer. That kind of thinking seems consistent with other things the sister said.

Why do I think that matters if it wouldn't be (initially) viewed with suspicion? Because if they have that thought initially, they'd probably recall that thought after hearing about the car.

Don't get me wrong, I've come around to thinking they didn't suspect him. I'm just a little confused why they didn't suspect him.

Again, you are thinking about this from the perspective of someone who is very focused on the murders. Someone for whom the murders were something on their mind a lot of the time.

If Brian's family had lived in the area where the murders occurred, I do think they would have suspected him. But they didn't. They lived far away. They weren't thinking about the murders. They weren't thinking about "the day of the murders" as an important date, and thus the fact that Brian called that day didn't register.

I wonder if the people making these arguments are just used to following true crime cases where the family and friends all live near where the murder happens and might even know the victims. Obviously that's going to greatly change your investment. But in this case the murderer was a very recent transplant to where the murder happened and almost all his family and friends were very far way. It absolutely made it harder for anyone to be 2 and 2 together here even though obviously Brian was not really that careful with this crime and was ultimately easy to tie to the murder. But entirely because of his own choices and not because people in the community were going to be able to tie him to the case.

I thought the family was thinking about the murders. Didn't the sister say she was worried for him because he would go on runs and not lock his door? I assume that sort of concern wasn't unique to her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a weird and kind of aloof brother who has never been violent and I would never jump to the conclusion that he had committed a mass murder in a neighboring town, even if the police were looking for someone who also drove a blue rav-4.

If that brother had a history of mental health problems and called you early in the morning after the murder occurred, and then later suddenly wanted to get his car out of the state, you wouldn't have gotten suspicious?

Well, on a different note, I've got a beautiful bridge you might be interested in...

He didn't call the sister early in the morning. He called his mom. And for his mom, it was not "the morning after the murder occurred." It was just... a morning. She lived on the other side of the country and knew nothing about the murders at the time. He'd called at odd hours before. She had no reason to believe his reason for calling this time was related to a news event she had not even heard about.

And he didn't "suddenly" want to get his car out of state. He had told them previously he wanted to get some things out of their house and drive them to his new place in Idaho, and his dad had offered to fly out and do the drive with him because it was so long. His dad had already bought a ticket when the murders occurred and, again, the family was not thinking about any of this in the context of the murders because to them, the murders were a separate news event that had nothing to do with their family.

A white Hyundai Elantra is a very, very common car. It is likely you know a person who drives that car. White is the most common car color. Elantras are affordable and have good resale value, so there are a lot of them on the road. If I heard about a horrific crime involving a Subaru Forester or a Nissan Sentra, I would not immediately assume that one of the people I know with those cars committed the crime. I would think "huh that car is very popular, it's going to be really hard for them to find the killer." Like it wouldn't even cross my mind.

You are making the common error of thinking that a piece of information you have already learned (that Brian Kohlberger killed four people) should always have been obvious to everyone even before literally ANYONE knew, including his family. In fact the only reason the police honed in on Brian is because his DNA was found on the knife, something it took weeks to learn because of how long DNA analysis takes. Before that, no one was looking at him and the fact that he drove a white Elantra and lived near the murder scene was not viewed as relevant by anyone.

You're being far too quick to dismiss the significance of the car. This isn't a highly populated area, there are only about 90,000 people in the census area that covers the two towns and surrounding area. The number of white 2011-2015 Elantras there is probably very roughly on the order of 50 or so cars (and some are probably fleet vehicles). That puts him in a very small set of suspects before even factoring in the other things.

There were lots of reasons to be suspicious, if someone was open to considering them. But the family probably wasn't.

2011-2015 wasn’t the date range put out, it was 2011-2013. It defies logic to suggest that the family should have done something with the information that he drove a white 2015 Elantra, or done some research into how many white Elantras were owned by people within that census area and assumed that the police were really looking for a 2015 and not a 2011-2013 model.

I agree with this. It was the wrong model. Of course the family was probably like, oh phew. If he drove a gray Elantra or a Toyota that looked like a white Hyundai would you also expect them to assume the police had it wrong and be suspicious anyway?

Cars often don't change their looks between years, so I would never assume the year implied specificity.

And honestly, I'd assume the same thing regarding color. White vs black or blue? No. White vs light grey? Yes.

Lol, you would never assume the actual years put out by law enforcement, 2011-2013, implied specificity? Then why would they have put out specific years? You have to be trolling at this point, because that argument is nonsensical.

I mean, with the benefit of hindsight, they obviously didn't know with certainty the year. Why were you so sure they were sure? Whether they're giving descriptions of people or cars, the descriptions provided often don't perfectly match what they're ultimately trying to find. That's certainly not unique to this case, and I would think would be common knowledge.

Because that is the description the police put out? They didn’t need to narrow it down by year, but yet they gave a range, which did not include 2015. People are acting like the parents should have known because of the car, but their son’s car wasn’t in the range of years provided! Obviously we all know he did it, but this whole argument has been about whether the parents should have known or suspected their son, and you just can’t use the car to support that conclusion when the year of the car didn’t match what the police said they were looking for.

With the police being so certain about the model years, are we sure they found the right person?

He confessed days before his trial was to start. They had his DNA. It’s the right killer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think what's surprising me about this discussion, and the NYT article, is that no one is talking about his long history of harassing and stalking women on campus.

Numerous women, including his own professors, tried to intervene but there was never quite enough evidence to act.

To me, that's a lot more interesting and worth exploring than the family's insistence he was autistic.

You are correct, I remember back when I read up on this case, that he had been banned from a bar for making female customers or the servers uncomfortable (can't remember if this was in PA or WA). Also, he was a TA at WSU and his students said he was grading them unfairly and I heard complaints were also coming in to where he was about to lose the TA position, or had been notified he was going to lose it (which I thought might have triggered the crime). I think he was getting rejected socially, getting banned from bars, his current PhD program was starting to have issues with his behavior.

But this was at his new campus. I don't remember any problems surfacing from his old campus, where 2 very honored female professors thought quite highly of him. And his family would know none of this. And WSU wasn't sending this info to the serial killer expert at DeSales and asking if she thought there was a concern.

I also think he was probably a voyeur. I think he targeted in on that house with so many windows in view from the street. It had a hidden back area where it was easy to park without being noticed and slip onto the back deck with access to the kitchen. It was a party house and I would not be shocked if he had wandered in during a crowded party where no one noticed him.

From his family's view, it was probably ASD or earlier drug use. I wouldn't be shocked if Schizophrenia was entering the picture, but his parents wouldn't have experience in suspecting that was affecting him.

You obviously don’t have a family member like this. There are a lot of weird interactions, delusions, strange texts, ranting phone calls, angry emails, they don’t put on a mask around family. This is who they are all the time.

Oh for goodness sake, my adult son was in a psych facility for over a month in his 20s and dx with some combo of BPD and schizophrenia (Psychiatrist said it didn't matter because the medication at that point would be similar). He went through a prior period where he wouldn't talk to me or his dad because we "triggered" him (his Dad voted for Trump in 2016 and I worked for the "military industrial complex"). He got his BS and MS in a STEM field, but his posts on Facebook were unintelligible to me. But until this point, I would have put the chances of Sz at 0. His full symptoms didn't emerge until late 20s, which is common.

I also have a sister who I believe has undiagnosed Paranoid Sz. She thought people were following her, servers were bugging her watch to listen to her and accused her husband of being the antichrist. I put her in the rear view mirror 30 years ago, and haven't looked back (for my safety).

I also have a cousin whose 19yo son robbed a customer in a gas station parking lot and the customer shot and killed him. It was a big defense case and eventually they decided not to charge the customer with murder. My cousin and his kids have never been "functional".

I occasionally get asked how I emerged from all this family dysfunction to get 3 STEM degrees and have a successful career with the same employer (yes, defense related). I don't know, but when I heard professionals tell me my son had a psychotic break and thought he was on another planet, etc, etc, I listened. But up until that point, he was just quirky, odd, tons of friends, but never violent and if a murder had happened at his college, I would never have suspected it might be him.

I still think at the time of the murder, Brian's family was seeing ex-addict who was probably ASD.

That must have been incredibly hard-I hope your son is doing better.

He is and he isn't. Of course he stopped the psych meds after 6 months because they made him lethargic and gain a lot of weight.

In 2020, he moved in with his Dad and quit working due to obsession with catching Covid. He has never returned to a professional job in his STEM field.

He works part-time at a coffee shop and walks dogs for minimum pay. He fully realizes it's because he doesn't need to pay rent. And as his dad got a cancer dx, the tables have turned and he is probably helping Dad more than Dad is helping him.

But the best news is he has not had another psychotic breakdown. I believe it's possible pot caused the first one, as did the psychiatrist doc at the mental hospital. She said it can be either using pot to manage emerging Sz symptoms, or it's possible the pot caused the psychotic break, that was either lurking inside him, or just mimicked Sz. I fully expected another episode, but it hasn't happened after 6 years (he quit pot). I also think if he were financially on his own, the stress might lead to more breaks. He is still very social, very active in local social issues and is a kind and gentle person. Still quirky and odd, but with a great sense of humor.

But if he were accused of murder, I bet our past would get picked apart. We should have realized he was delusional when he said he had the secret to world peace if only everyone would hold up a peace sign at the same time (well yeah, he was delusional about that). And why hasn't he had a long term girlfriend (or boyfriend)? We should have realized he was stalking women, and on and on. All we know is what we know and we do our best as parents of a troubled, but hopefully stable and improving adult child.