Tag Archives: Bryan Kohberger

Things have been relatively quiet in the Idaho 4 case for the most part over the last month or so.

While there have been some court tidbits that popped out, most of the news has in fact been no news. That is until Thursday when it was announced the home at 1122 would begin to undergo demolition on Dec. 28. That date was likely picked given the University of Idaho and its students will be on holiday break.

So, what is the rush to tear the home down when the trial date has not even been announced?

Having been to the home (outside of course) several times this year, I can tell you first-hand it is a totally different feel seeing it for your own eyes and walking around the outside perimeter (front and back) than it is seeing on television, online videos and pictures etc.

While the home has been altered to a degree inside since its five residents lived there, it can still prove valuable should a jury request and receive approval from the judge to tour it.

As for claims it is a biohazard, how many people have been in and out of that home in the last few months conducting tests etc? Were any of them wearing biohazard suits? The answer of course is no.

I’ve met several people from the University of Idaho this year during my two trips to Moscow. I can say that those I met were upstanding people and I would have nothing but good things to say about them no matter their role on the campus.

All that being said, here are a few of my takes on taking down the home starting Dec. 28:

* What’s the rush? – I get that neighbors (including some U of I students) have to see the home on a daily basis as they come and go around the neighborhood. That said, there are not thousands of students, staff etc. seeing the home daily. That is because it is NOT directly on campus. While we do not know the exact date of when the trial will start, leaving the home up is not going to hurt the majority of people tied to the U of I.

* Does the U of I administration give a damn about the four families? – It would appear the higher-ups at the U of I do not give a damn about the four families – Goncalves, Mogen, Kernodle, Chapin. They put out nice press releases etc. saying they do. If they really cared about the loved ones, they’d abide by the wishes of most of them whom want the home to remain standing until the end of the trial. Giving the families lip service is the ultimate slap in the face to those already suffering with the loss of their loved ones. Do us all a favor and stop with the press statements that you feel for the four families and understand their suffering etc. Quite frankly you don’t understand or care.

* Are you trying to hide something? – What remains in that home that is of concern to university officials and others tied to the case? – The home is secured 24 hours a day, seven days a week by campus security, boards on the windows, locks on doors etc. If you are saying security is an issue, put that fear to the side. While the home still needs security, heat, electricity, water etc. do not tell me the University of Idaho can’t afford those bills.

* What will be the outcry if defendant gets off on technicality or is even found not guilty due to home being torn down? – Finally, imagine the outcry from the Bryan Kohberger haters if he gets off on a technicality or is even found not guilty because a juror did not get to personally see the inside of the home (if the judge granted such a request) and thus could not convict the defendant. We know there will be countless photos, 3-D imaging etc, present at trial. That said, those are NOT the same as actually physically being in the home for most jurors. Being able to experience the home if allowed to would be a unique experience for a juror that thousands of photos and other images can’t provide. Looking at the rooms where the killings took place albeit without furniture etc. where Dylan allegedly was staying, the distance between rooms, the overall layout etc. There is still a lot there to see.

In conclusion, why not wait until the end of the school year (spring) and then make a decision on demolition? Who knows, we may get lucky and have a trial by then? 

While I would like to give the administration at the U of I the benefit of the doubt, this demolition in two weeks is nothing short of shady. Is there something in that home you do not want public?

So, would you leave the home up until the trial concludes if it were up to you?

The sad one-year anniversary of the deaths of the Idaho 4 took place on a Monday morning last month.

As we head into the holiday season, not much has changed with the case.

Of most note recently was the decision by the judge to limit cameras in the courtroom once a trial does start, notably press cameras. Instead, the court will control the camera feeds and not the various media outlets covering the event.

I have no issue with this, especially given I fully support cameras in the courtroom at any trial. Not having cameras there would open up even more theories of wrongdoing by authorities and others. With cameras in the courtroom, the public can for one see their tax dollars at work. Having that transparency and not having a blackout on coverage is the only way most of us can trust the system.

Speaking of the system, it goes without saying that countless documents, pictures, videos and more have been submitted over the last year. Many of these items will be used to try and convict Bryan Kohberger for the murders of Kaylee Goncalves, Maddie Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin.

While there is likely still a lot of evidence the public is not aware of, we’ve gotten glimpses into the case from both a prosecution and defense perspective.

With that in mind, could you convict Kohberger with what you know if you were a juror sitting in on the case?

For me, I do not have enough evidence to date to convict him, especially with the death penalty sitting there on the table.

Among the things I would need from the prosecution to be more inclined to convict would include:

• Clear video or eyewitness evidence of his vehicle with either him behind the wheel or his Pennsylvania license plate clearly seen leaving the scene from 1122 King Road. Keep in mind we have not seen such to date.
• Clear video or eyewitness evidence of him leaving the home right after the killings took place. Keep in mind we have not seen such to date.
• Any social media evidence that clearly shows he targeted one or more of the victims. To date, no such evidence has been put out there that I am aware of.

There is no doubt circumstantial evidence that the prosecution will rely on. With that to think about, people do get convicted on such evidence, so it is quite possible there could emerge a guilty verdict.

On the flip side of the coin, the defense will no doubt poke holes in what to me is a marginal conviction case at this point.

So, would you convict Kohberger today with what you know or do you need more to send him to a guilty verdict?

As many of us wait for a trial date to be set in the Idaho 4 murders case, news came out recently that Judge Judge would allow cameras in the courtroom at the time of trial.

Yes, while it sounds like Judge will be putting some restrictions on cameras, I applaud his decision to allow them in. Really, was there any other way to go?

Sure, he could have banned them and we could have been left with media pool reports, still photographs and so on. At the end of the day, this would have been a fraction of the valuable details cameras can provide to the public.

One of the big fears of having cameras televise the trial is that they would be too focused on defendant Bryan Kohberger. Given BK is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, having the cameras trained on him much of the trial could lead some to have biased views on him. It also can take away from focusing on those who will testify, the prosecution and defense teams and so on.

My guess is Judge will lean to having one camera set up at perhaps the back of the courtroom. This could be similar to watching a CSPAN hearing on television. In doing this, you do not have the camera locked in on one specific subject.

Given there is much to question about the prosecution’s case, having the cameras in the courtroom should help limit misinformation getting out there. With some of the misinformation out there now and doubts in how this case has been handled to date, transparency is of the utmost importance.

One thing that I will be curious to see is how much focus there will be on witnesses and others taking the stand to testify under oath.

For example, assuming roommates Dylan Mortensen and Bethany Funke get called to testify, how much camera time will they get? Their testimony may well prove critical to this case and whether or not BK is ultimately found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

With it looking like the trial will in fact be televised in some manner, are you for or against cameras in the courtroom when the Idaho 4 case goes to trial?

The holiday of Halloween means different things to different people.

Some people go all out on this big day in late October and others take little to no interest in it.

One thing that Halloween often conjures up is haunted thoughts. From scary movies to haunted homes and more, it can be easy to let one’s mind run a little wild on them.

With that thought in mind, why exactly would the FBI be inside of a quadruple murder scene almost a year after the tragic crime took place?

As authorities make their way in and out of the rental home at 1122 King Road in Moscow, Idaho this Halloween, this activity has created its share of buzz online.

As Brian Entin of News Nation reported on X (@BrianEntin), authorities were inside the home.

The reported goal is to create a version of the home that could be used at trial. Reconstructing the home where Kaylee Goncalves, Maddie Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin were found deceased on Nov. 13, 2022, is not something that goes unnoticed. Plenty of web sleuths have been wondering exactly why do this and even more so the timing of such action.

I’ve advocated for the home remaining up until the trial ultimately concludes. Of course we do not even have a trial date set at this point. It could be 2024 or even 2025 before a trial takes place. In the meantime, more emotional suffering for the four families of the victims.

I have also said and will continue to say that a jury should be allowed to see the inside of the home for themselves if they request such and Judge Judge grants such a request. I do not care how many photos, videos and so on you take or if you do your best to have a physical recreation of the home at trial, it is NOT the same.

Yes, most of us know by now that the interior of the home is not what it was that fateful morning last Nov. 13.

Victim items are gone, some floorboards and walls were reportedly removed etc. Even with all that in mind, I would still want to see with my own eyes and hear with my ears the actual house if a juror and if approved by the judge.

With that in mind, why do you think officials are back at the home now?

If you were a juror on the case when it gets to trial, would you feel comfortable and find it beneficial going to the home if allowed to for a visit?

Yesterday (Oct. 13) was sadly the 11-month anniversary of the Idaho 4 murders.

On that fateful morning 11 months ago, Kaylee Goncalves, Maddie Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin were murdered in the rental home the three women shared at 1122 King Road. Chapin, who was dating Kernodle at the time, was spending the night there. Two other roommates, Dylan Mortensen and Bethany Funke, presumably home at the time of the murders, were not harmed.

Not too long after a suspect (Bryan Kohberger) was arrested and people were beginning to wrap their heads around the case, a gag order was put in place. The gag order is for both the defense and prosecution, law enforcement and so on.

One group not impacted by the gag order have been the families and friends of the four victims. As such, there has been a sizable amount of information put out there about what supposedly happened on the morning of Nov. 13, 2022 in the King Road home.

As someone who has followed notable crime cases for some 40+ years and has been a journalist for more than 30 years, I have seen my share of misinformation get out there to the public over time. This case has been no different.

Many of us following the case have our opinions on who did it, what might well have happened and more. Even with that in mind, it is safe to say that much of the information put out there on social media and the like is speculation at best. Until we get to trial, we will not know what is true and what is false.

Among some of the biggest pieces of information floating around social media circles NOT confirmed to date would be:

• Kohberger had at least one of the female victim’s I.D. in his possession after being arrested – This has never been proven to be true. Of course this could change at trial. In the meantime, some in the Kohberger is guilty faction run with it on a regular basis.
• Kohberger stalked one or more of the female victims – Once again, this has never been proven as a fact. Even if it is shown at trial that Kohberger’s vehicle was in the area of the home in 2022, that does not equate to stalking someone or walking in their home and killing them. I’ve driven by countless locations more than once over my 40+ years of driving. It does not mean I am stalking an individual or plan to kill them.
• Kohberger liked to go out for evening drives – One thing that many against the defendant have hung their hats on is that the defendant has no alibi the day of the murders. Granted, one or more credible people saying they were with Kohberger around the time of the murders and it was not at 1122 King Road would give the defense and the defendant a strong alibi. The fact it was stated he was out driving around during that time period in question last Nov. 13 looks bad on paper. Once again, driving around and actually being in a home murdering people are not the same.
• Kohberger followed a couple of the female victims on social media – One of the biggest topics of chatter for many months now has been Kohberger followed Goncalves and Mogen on one of their social media channels. Like many other things in this tragic case, this has never been proven to be legitimate. And if it is ultimately found to be true at trial, following someone of the opposite sex on social media and murdering them are two entirely different things.
• Mortensen took part in the murders – Mortensen has been the subject of much chatter when it comes to her statement to police in the PCA. There have been some who think she in fact was part of the murders. There is zero evidence to point to the Boise resident having taken part in the murders. While it is fine to question her actions or in fact inaction when it comes to that morning and not calling 911 once safe to do so, saying she may be involved is totally speculation at best.
• Goncalves family is cashing in on their daughter’s death – One of the hotter topics of late on social media is that the family of Kaylee is cashing in on her death. Yes, people have been sending the family gifts to remember their daughter/sister. Steve Goncalves has reportedly come up with a hoodie to honor his daughter. There is also reportedly Ethan Chapin merchandise out there and most of us know about the tulips program in place to honor the lone male victim in the killings (Chapin worked on a tulip farm in his native Washington). As I see it, there is nothing wrong with any of these things as long as any monies made go towards scholarships etc. to honor the four victims. Many people feel a connection to this case despite not knowing the victims and families personally. If buying credible merchandise or making a donation to do something positive and the families do not cash in on it, I think that is fine.

Given we do not have a definitive date for a trial yet, safe to say more misinformation will litter social media in the weeks and months to come.

As you follow this case, what one piece of misinformation gets your attention the most?

Yes, sooner or later there will be a trial in the Idaho 4 murder case.

That is short of the defendant Bryan Kohberger confessing and accepting a possible plea deal.

Honestly, given the circumstantial evidence against BK, I highly doubt he would confess to anything. It is up to Idaho to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Pennsylvania native carried out the killings of four students (Kaylee Goncalves, Maddie Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin) back on Nov. 13.

Trust me, I am no BK fan boy. If the guy is proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, by all means I hope he gets the death penalty.

Having said that, I have serious doubt as of now the prosecution would get a 12-0 jury vote to convict him.

There are too many loose holes right now in my mind to call this a slam dunk case.

So, once we do get to trial, who are you most interested in seeing and hearing from?

Among the possibilities could be:

Bryan Kohberger – Wouldn’t it be something if the defendant himself got up there and answered questions? Of course doing so would open himself up to cross-examination from the prosecution. My gut tells me lead defense attorney Anne Taylor will not allow her client to get on the stand. Then again, hearing from the man who allegedly killed four people would make for a fascinating trial.

MPD – Hearing from one or more of the Moscow Police Department members on the scene at 1122 King Road that fateful day would be compelling too. My guess is we will absolutely hear from one or more of them. Among the things I’d want to know would be did they possibly contaminate the scene? Did authorities have all the proper gear on when they went in and out of the home? It is known by most accounts that the two surviving roommates and Ethan’s friend Hunter were in the home at some point before police arrived in the afternoon. How many other University of Idaho students were in that home before authorities got there?

Coroner/medical examiner – We are most definitely going to hear from the coroner/medical examiner. Their testimony is critical to determining how and approximately when the four victims died. Speaking of that, where is the toxicology report? We are now past 10 months since these tragic deaths and no toxicology report to my knowledge has been made public. And before someone says it is no business of the public, I say BS. Taxpayers have a right to see and hear their local governments in action. Not doing so leads to conspiracy theories among other things. The public has a right to know if any drugs were found in the systems of the four victims. If there were, such a thing could change how this case is looked at. I bought the lone stalker theory early on but now feel totally different as to what went down in those early morning hours at 1122 King Road. That does not make the four victims bad people IF drugs were involved and they sure as hell did not deserve to die.

Dylan Mortensen and Bethany Funke – Last; many people will be interested to see if the two survivors take the stand. If I am Taylor, I absolutely call them to testify. While I do not believe either were involved in the crimes, I 100 percent think Mortensen’s comments in the PCA are sketchy. One can’t have it both ways. Either the Boise native and U of I student was drunk and/or high and her statement to police is flawed at best or she was totally sober and not calling 911 once safe to do so was a major gaffe on her part. And before anyone screams they’re just kids, it has been documented “kids” under 10 have called 911 before in distress. Mortensen said she saw a figure with a mask on come towards her bedroom as she stood nearby. It was NOT a frat prank nor was the mask on due to COVID. Sorry, but most people are dialing 911 when safe to do so if they spot an intruder in their home at 4 ish in the morning. Doing so may have led to the arrest of a perp or perps much sooner. It also MIGHT have given at least one of the victims a fighting chance to get help and to the local hospital. I will be quite interested to hear from the medical experts at trial if any of the victims likely bled out. If so, getting them help as soon as possible could well have meant the difference between possibly living and more than likely dying.

As we eventually do get to what is sure to be one of the biggest trials in recent memory, who do you want to see and hear from on the stand?