Idaho Murder Suspect Bryan Kohberger - arrest warrant affadavit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the college forum, several posters slammed the police; swore the roommates did it; called it a murder suicide.

I just remember the state has to prove guilt. The accused does not have to prove himself a innocence.

All of that speculation was made in an information vacuum prior to release of the affidavit.

The evidence cited in the affidavit that led to the suspect’s arrest is very strong. For one, there is no reasonable explanation for a knife sheath with his DNA on it to be next to one of the victims other than him accidentally leaving it there at the time the crimes were committed. And keep in mind, the affidavit very likely does not contain ALL the evidence that exists in this case. There will be more to come if this goes to trial.

I suspect there is additional DNA evidence in this case. The perpetrator was in direct contact with the four victims, and it’s hard to not leave DNA behind in that scenario due to transfer. There may also have been things like shed hairs found by the victims. And if any of the victims struggled with him, his skin may have been under their fingernails or similar. And of course, the victim’s DNA almost certainly ended up on his clothes, and was transferred into his vehicle via his clothing and the knife. How much of that he was able to clean up before law enforcement was in possession of his car remains to be seen.

We’ll see, but I will be interested to learn about any other biological evidence that exists in this case.

He lost the knife, it was stolen, he bought it and returned it—we don’t know what evidence he is giving to his defense attorney. I think you’re underestimating the way the defense can plant doubt in the jurors’ minds. I agree that there must be more biological evidence (not to mentioned his computer, car, and apartment that investigators probably searched after his arrest), but we probably won’t know for a while.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the college forum, several posters slammed the police; swore the roommates did it; called it a murder suicide.

I just remember the state has to prove guilt. The accused does not have to prove himself a innocence.

All of that speculation was made in an information vacuum prior to release of the affidavit.

The evidence cited in the affidavit that led to the suspect’s arrest is very strong. For one, there is no reasonable explanation for a knife sheath with his DNA on it to be next to one of the victims other than him accidentally leaving it there at the time the crimes were committed. And keep in mind, the affidavit very likely does not contain ALL the evidence that exists in this case. There will be more to come if this goes to trial.

I suspect there is additional DNA evidence in this case. The perpetrator was in direct contact with the four victims, and it’s hard to not leave DNA behind in that scenario due to transfer. There may also have been things like shed hairs found by the victims. And if any of the victims struggled with him, his skin may have been under their fingernails or similar. And of course, the victim’s DNA almost certainly ended up on his clothes, and was transferred into his vehicle via his clothing and the knife. How much of that he was able to clean up before law enforcement was in possession of his car remains to be seen.

We’ll see, but I will be interested to learn about any other biological evidence that exists in this case.

He lost the knife, it was stolen, he bought it and returned it—we don’t know what evidence he is giving to his defense attorney. I think you’re underestimating the way the defense can plant doubt in the jurors’ minds. I agree that there must be more biological evidence (not to mentioned his computer, car, and apartment that investigators probably searched after his arrest), but we probably won’t know for a while.

Fair enough if you’re considering the knife sheath in isolation. But combined with even only the other evidence presented in the affidavit? It seems like his attorney(s) are going to have a hard time getting to reasonable doubt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What I'm really waiting to find out is how & why those girls were targeted.

I saw on TikTok that he followed at least one of the girls on Instagram. Anyone know if this is true or heard it confirmed elsewhere?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the college forum, several posters slammed the police; swore the roommates did it; called it a murder suicide.

I just remember the state has to prove guilt. The accused does not have to prove himself a innocence.

All of that speculation was made in an information vacuum prior to release of the affidavit.

The evidence cited in the affidavit that led to the suspect’s arrest is very strong. For one, there is no reasonable explanation for a knife sheath with his DNA on it to be next to one of the victims other than him accidentally leaving it there at the time the crimes were committed. And keep in mind, the affidavit very likely does not contain ALL the evidence that exists in this case. There will be more to come if this goes to trial.

I suspect there is additional DNA evidence in this case. The perpetrator was in direct contact with the four victims, and it’s hard to not leave DNA behind in that scenario due to transfer. There may also have been things like shed hairs found by the victims. And if any of the victims struggled with him, his skin may have been under their fingernails or similar. And of course, the victim’s DNA almost certainly ended up on his clothes, and was transferred into his vehicle via his clothing and the knife. How much of that he was able to clean up before law enforcement was in possession of his car remains to be seen.

We’ll see, but I will be interested to learn about any other biological evidence that exists in this case.

He lost the knife, it was stolen, he bought it and returned it—we don’t know what evidence he is giving to his defense attorney. I think you’re underestimating the way the defense can plant doubt in the jurors’ minds. I agree that there must be more biological evidence (not to mentioned his computer, car, and apartment that investigators probably searched after his arrest), but we probably won’t know for a while.

Nicole Simpson's death. We still have no idea who killed her.

The hell we don't.

[Anonymous]

Is there any information on how BK was even linked to the roomates? Did they take any classes together? Assuming he stalked one of them, how did their paths even cross in the first place?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there any information on how BK was even linked to the roomates? Did they take any classes together? Assuming he stalked one of them, how did their paths even cross in the first place?

He stalked them. He drove by their house 12 times in weeks before the murder. Guessing he ran into them at one of the local places, and maybe one of the girls turned him down, and he became enraged. None of this will come out until the trial. Not sure why all four were murdered, or how he knew the house layout, or where the girl he was targeting was sleeping. Again, this will come out during the trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there any information on how BK was even linked to the roomates? Did they take any classes together? Assuming he stalked one of them, how did their paths even cross in the first place?

They were at different universities so they didn’t have classes together. But I think one or two of the girls were servers at a local cafe or the like? He may have encountered them that way and then he became obsessed. Horrible.

[Anonymous]

Again the accused must be proven guilty by the state. The speculation continues in this thread based on his looks of what someone thinks they know about the case. Police make mistakes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again the accused must be proven guilty by the state. The speculation continues in this thread based on his looks of what someone thinks they know about the case. Police make mistakes.

WTH are you taking this personally??? Creepy!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again the accused must be proven guilty by the state. The speculation continues in this thread based on his looks of what someone thinks they know about the case. Police make mistakes.

WTH are you taking this personally??? Creepy!!

DP. What's creepier is your eagerness to convict someone without giving them a chance to defend themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again the accused must be proven guilty by the state. The speculation continues in this thread based on his looks of what someone thinks they know about the case. Police make mistakes.

WTH are you taking this personally??? Creepy!!

DP. What's creepier is your eagerness to convict someone without giving them a chance to defend themselves.

We aren’t the jury. We don’t have to keep an open mind. We can decide who did it whenever and however we like. BK is as guilty as the day is long. So so so guilty.

[Anonymous]

https://slate.com/technology/2023/01/bryan-kohberger-university-idaho-murders-forensic-genealogy.html

Here’s an interesting Slate piece about the use of genetic genealogy in this case. It had been reported by CNN and others that, according to sources, genetic genealogy was used in the case - but then it was not mentioned in the affidavit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again the accused must be proven guilty by the state. The speculation continues in this thread based on his looks of what someone thinks they know about the case. Police make mistakes.

WTH are you taking this personally??? Creepy!!

DP. What's creepier is your eagerness to convict someone without giving them a chance to defend themselves.

We aren’t the jury. We don’t have to keep an open mind. We can decide who did it whenever and however we like. BK is as guilty as the day is long. So so so guilty.

Good for you. It's still creepy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://slate.com/technology/2023/01/bryan-kohberger-university-idaho-murders-forensic-genealogy.html

Here’s an interesting Slate piece about the use of genetic genealogy in this case. It had been reported by CNN and others that, according to sources, genetic genealogy was used in the case - but then it was not mentioned in the affidavit.

Maybe the link is not precise enough to hold up as evidence in court, but it is used by police to find suspects that they can then investigate to find strong evidence (which is what happened here, such as getting the father's DNA).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again the accused must be proven guilty by the state. The speculation continues in this thread based on his looks of what someone thinks they know about the case. Police make mistakes.

WTH are you taking this personally??? Creepy!!

DP. What's creepier is your eagerness to convict someone without giving them a chance to defend themselves.

We aren’t the jury. We don’t have to keep an open mind. We can decide who did it whenever and however we like. BK is as guilty as the day is long. So so so guilty.

+1