NYT Times interview with Brian Kohlberger’s sister

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would she do this interview? Seems like she’s just in it for the money.

What money? The NYT does not pay for interviews. That said, she should not have done it. It didn’t help her family plus her alternative look does not lend itself to sympathy.

She’s speaking her truth and has the right to do so. She never helped her brother commit crimes and doesn’t defend him and feels terribly for the victims. And yes the NY Times doesn’t pay for interviews. Only tabloids like the Daily Mail do stuff like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't this basically the story of Rob Reiner's son, except that one is more acceptable because he turned on his own parents, making the family more sympathetic?

Yes, and I wonder if either Brian or Nick were in Special Ed.

Well, that's quite a stretch isn't it? To be fair, 99.999% of special ed students do not become murderers. Let's at least use common sense in this discussion and not vilify huge groups of innocent individuals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't this basically the story of Rob Reiner's son, except that one is more acceptable because he turned on his own parents, making the family more sympathetic?

Yes, and I wonder if either Brian or Nick were in Special Ed.

Well, that's quite a stretch isn't it? To be fair, 99.999% of special ed students do not become murderers. Let's at least use common sense in this discussion and not vilify huge groups of innocent individuals.

+1.

Stephen Paddock, who killed 50+ people in a mass shooting in Las Vegas, had no discernible mental illness-he just wanted to be famous (infamous.)

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna964066

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the killer is in a Ph.D. program and decides to drive home for winter break and has his father fly to Washington so they could drive across country together. But they take the long way home because there are news reports to be on the lookout for that type of car.

It might be understandable for summer break but it makes no sense for winter break when he has to drive back to school. It would make more sense for him to fly home. And what do they do with the car. They put the college kid's car in the garage to hide it.

It is despicable the NYT article that is sympathetic. The family knows more and isn't saying anything to help the grieving families.

I would really like to know what some of you weirdos think his family owes the victims' families? There is nothing they can say or do to bring those kids back. The victim's parents probably want on the guy's family as well as all you weirdo strangers on the internet to shut their mouths and leave it alone.

They owe the family answers to why he called his mother the day of the murders and spoke for hours. What did they speak about?

Or they owe the family silence. If they aren’t going to say anything helpful to the families then say nothing about the case.

But to try to get sympathy about their situation when their family member killed 4 people in cold blood? Absolutely despicable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn't this basically the story of Rob Reiner's son, except that one is more acceptable because he turned on his own parents, making the family more sympathetic?

Yes, and I wonder if either Brian or Nick were in Special Ed.

Well, that's quite a stretch isn't it? To be fair, 99.999% of special ed students do not become murderers. Let's at least use common sense in this discussion and not vilify huge groups of innocent individuals.

+1.

Stephen Paddock, who killed 50+ people in a mass shooting in Las Vegas, had no discernible mental illness-he just wanted to be famous (infamous.)

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna964066

Lacking any empathy or compassion for human life is most certainly a mental illness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would she do this interview? Seems like she’s just in it for the money.

What money? The NYT does not pay for interviews. That said, she should not have done it. It didn’t help her family plus her alternative look does not lend itself to sympathy.

She’s speaking her truth and has the right to do so. She never helped her brother commit crimes and doesn’t defend him and feels terribly for the victims. And yes the NY Times doesn’t pay for interviews. Only tabloids like the Daily Mail do stuff like that.

You don't know how truthful she's being. In particular, you don't know what details she is withholding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean… come on. She said all the right things (she thinks of the victims at holidays, she remembers their birthdays, etc) but the one thing Goncalves’ father wants - to know what the family knew, what happened in their house after the raid, etc - she’s not willing to give him. She’s holding back and thinking of herself and not what the victim families need.

And I sense she’s holding back. Normal people don’t snap like that. I bet he tortured pets, had no friends, and never showed emotion to his family. And they just ignored it and she’s all, we had a great upbringing! He was a great brother! Give me a break.

Why would she lie at this point? The worst has happened and people already think the worst of her family. He was a heroin addict. Addicts do awful things.

If the family knew what he did, and provided any support after the fact, they could be charged as accessories. That's a pretty big reason to lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the killer is in a Ph.D. program and decides to drive home for winter break and has his father fly to Washington so they could drive across country together. But they take the long way home because there are news reports to be on the lookout for that type of car.

It might be understandable for summer break but it makes no sense for winter break when he has to drive back to school. It would make more sense for him to fly home. And what do they do with the car. They put the college kid's car in the garage to hide it.

It is despicable the NYT article that is sympathetic. The family knows more and isn't saying anything to help the grieving families.

I would really like to know what some of you weirdos think his family owes the victims' families? There is nothing they can say or do to bring those kids back. The victim's parents probably want on the guy's family as well as all you weirdo strangers on the internet to shut their mouths and leave it alone.

They owe the family answers to why he called his mother the day of the murders and spoke for hours. What did they speak about?

Or they owe the family silence. If they aren’t going to say anything helpful to the families then say nothing about the case.

But to try to get sympathy about their situation when their family member killed 4 people in cold blood? Absolutely despicable.

Absolutely not. You condemning the family members for the actions of another person is despicable. They didn't kill anyone. They didn't hurt anyone. The way the public crucifies the families in these situations in despicable. The world in the age of social media has gone mad. Check yourself, you psycho.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would she do this interview? Seems like she’s just in it for the money.

What money? The NYT does not pay for interviews. That said, she should not have done it. It didn’t help her family plus her alternative look does not lend itself to sympathy.

She’s speaking her truth and has the right to do so. She never helped her brother commit crimes and doesn’t defend him and feels terribly for the victims. And yes the NY Times doesn’t pay for interviews. Only tabloids like the Daily Mail do stuff like that.

You don't know how truthful she's being. In particular, you don't know what details she is withholding.

And you have no basis for saying she is withholding anything. See how that works.

Go write some fan fiction. it would be healthier for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the killer is in a Ph.D. program and decides to drive home for winter break and has his father fly to Washington so they could drive across country together. But they take the long way home because there are news reports to be on the lookout for that type of car.

It might be understandable for summer break but it makes no sense for winter break when he has to drive back to school. It would make more sense for him to fly home. And what do they do with the car. They put the college kid's car in the garage to hide it.

It is despicable the NYT article that is sympathetic. The family knows more and isn't saying anything to help the grieving families.

I would really like to know what some of you weirdos think his family owes the victims' families? There is nothing they can say or do to bring those kids back. The victim's parents probably want on the guy's family as well as all you weirdo strangers on the internet to shut their mouths and leave it alone.

They owe the family answers to why he called his mother the day of the murders and spoke for hours. What did they speak about?

Or they owe the family silence. If they aren’t going to say anything helpful to the families then say nothing about the case.

But to try to get sympathy about their situation when their family member killed 4 people in cold blood? Absolutely despicable.

Absolutely not. You condemning the family members for the actions of another person is despicable. They didn't kill anyone. They didn't hurt anyone. The way the public crucifies the families in these situations in despicable. The world in the age of social media has gone mad. Check yourself, you psycho.

Being forthcoming about what they know about a brutal set of murders is an awfully low bar to meet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would she do this interview? Seems like she’s just in it for the money.

What money? The NYT does not pay for interviews. That said, she should not have done it. It didn’t help her family plus her alternative look does not lend itself to sympathy.

She’s speaking her truth and has the right to do so. She never helped her brother commit crimes and doesn’t defend him and feels terribly for the victims. And yes the NY Times doesn’t pay for interviews. Only tabloids like the Daily Mail do stuff like that.

You don't know how truthful she's being. In particular, you don't know what details she is withholding.

And you have no basis for saying she is withholding anything. See how that works.

Go write some fan fiction. it would be healthier for you.

She's absolutely withholding. We just don't know what she won't say. Maybe it's interesting and relevant, maybe it isn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would she do this interview? Seems like she’s just in it for the money.

What money? The NYT does not pay for interviews. That said, she should not have done it. It didn’t help her family plus her alternative look does not lend itself to sympathy.

She’s speaking her truth and has the right to do so. She never helped her brother commit crimes and doesn’t defend him and feels terribly for the victims. And yes the NY Times doesn’t pay for interviews. Only tabloids like the Daily Mail do stuff like that.

You don't know how truthful she's being. In particular, you don't know what details she is withholding.

And you have no basis for saying she is withholding anything. See how that works.

Go write some fan fiction. it would be healthier for you.

She's absolutely withholding. We just don't know what she won't say. Maybe it's interesting and relevant, maybe it isn't.

How do you know?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And the killer is in a Ph.D. program and decides to drive home for winter break and has his father fly to Washington so they could drive across country together. But they take the long way home because there are news reports to be on the lookout for that type of car.

It might be understandable for summer break but it makes no sense for winter break when he has to drive back to school. It would make more sense for him to fly home. And what do they do with the car. They put the college kid's car in the garage to hide it.

It is despicable the NYT article that is sympathetic. The family knows more and isn't saying anything to help the grieving families.

I would really like to know what some of you weirdos think his family owes the victims' families? There is nothing they can say or do to bring those kids back. The victim's parents probably want on the guy's family as well as all you weirdo strangers on the internet to shut their mouths and leave it alone.

They owe the family answers to why he called his mother the day of the murders and spoke for hours. What did they speak about?

Or they owe the family silence. If they aren’t going to say anything helpful to the families then say nothing about the case.

But to try to get sympathy about their situation when their family member killed 4 people in cold blood? Absolutely despicable.

If crazy people on the internet, like you, didn't get so invested in these cases that have absolutely nothing to do with their own lives, they wouldn't feel the need to speak out. I guarantee it. But dopes like you are out there posting all your sick hypotheses and make the lives of family members miserable so that they feel the need to defend themselves.

People like you are the real problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would she do this interview? Seems like she’s just in it for the money.

What money? The NYT does not pay for interviews. That said, she should not have done it. It didn’t help her family plus her alternative look does not lend itself to sympathy.

She’s speaking her truth and has the right to do so. She never helped her brother commit crimes and doesn’t defend him and feels terribly for the victims. And yes the NY Times doesn’t pay for interviews. Only tabloids like the Daily Mail do stuff like that.

You don't know how truthful she's being. In particular, you don't know what details she is withholding.

And you have no basis for saying she is withholding anything. See how that works.

Go write some fan fiction. it would be healthier for you.

She's absolutely withholding. We just don't know what she won't say. Maybe it's interesting and relevant, maybe it isn't.

How do you know?

Did you bother to read the article?

[Anonymous]

I have a hard time believing that the cops didn't extensively interrogate the parents about their interactions with him after the murders, and that if there was ANY indication they knew he was the killer and acted to help him conceal his crime or hid from the police, they wouldn't be charged.

The idea that the police just let it go because he pled guilty doesn't make sense. Aiding and abetting a murderer after the fact is a serious crime and if they had evidence that the family did this, I think they'd be charging them even with the guilty plea. In part because of what people are saying here -- if the parents helped him try to get away with it, that does real harm to the families of the victims.

Which leads me to conclude that the evidence simply doesn't support this hypothetical. The family may be deeply imperfect, there may have been signs they missed, they may even have understood on some level that things were not quite right, but I really don't think they knew and I definitely don't think they tried to help him get away with it.