If you spend a ton of time on social media as I do for both work and personal interests, you may well have seen the hashtag #BryanKohberger. Another popular one is #Idaho4.
Sadly, both hashtags and others like them refer to the Nov. 13, 2022 killings of four young adults in an off-campus home in Moscow, Idaho. 
Sometime in the 3 a.m. – 4:30 a.m. time frame that Sunday, four lives were ended in a matter of minutes. Kaylee Goncalves, Maddie Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin would not live to see the sun come up. For the four families of these University of Idaho students, their lives were taken that day in a manner too.
As we are now some seven months past the tragedy, those following the case continue to have opinions. Those opinions are often found on various social media platforms on a daily basis. Among the most popular for such opinions are Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, You Tube and more.
While social media can be great for sharing information, learning about topics, and even helping in time of crimes such as kids gone missing, the social networking world has its dark side too.
If you go into various chat groups regarding the Idaho 4 case, you will discover that Kohberger has already been convicted in the court of social media. No trial, no presumed innocent until proven guilty etc. To many people partaking in these social media chats, the Pennsylvania native should get what may be coming to him. If this was the Old West, I think we would already have had a hanging if up to many of these folks.
I honestly do not know like the majority of others out there if Kohberger in fact did kill these four students. He may well have. If so, I hope he gets the maximum sentence and I would not bat an eye if that meant the death penalty.
On the flip side of the coin, I’m not ready to convict him or anyone else for that matter until I have heard and seen all the evidence from both the prosecution and defense.
What seemed to many (including myself early on) like an open and shut case has opened some eyes of late.
Like many individuals, I’m guilty of repeating myself at times. As such, cut me a little slack if you have read or heard the following from me before:
- How does one individual go into a home in presumably dark conditions or limited lighting at best and wipe out four healthy young adults with only a knife in 13 minutes or so and on two different floors? Is it possible? By all means it is possible. Is it a slam dunk case for the prosecution? Hell no. Even if you assume all four students were drunk or even had drugs in their systems, you would have to catch them at just the right time, take out a key artery in a matter of seconds, not having to worry about any of them putting up a defense. Mind you this is all the while as you don’t know how many others are in the home and may be alerted to what one would think would be some screaming and other such commotion.
- How does a person then after committing such a heinous crime leave the home with no trail of blood? If these murders were as ugly as we were led to believe from initial police reports, the killer should have blood all over them. Did they take a change of clothes with them and disrobe after killing the four? Seems like the last thing you would want to do would be take time to change clothes, especially when you could have others still alive in the home and a dog also.
- Speaking of others in the home alive, why no attack on the two surviving roommates we’ve come to know as Dylan Mortensen and Bethany Funke? Hey, I am certainly happy both survived this early morning terror. But why did they live and the other four die? This is where my mind begins to drift to the possibility of this being some sort of drug hit and certain lives were left unharmed for a reason.
- Why have toxicology results on the four victims and the infamous 911 call some 7-8 hours after the attacks not been released? How could one or both compromise the case and BK’s right to a fair trial? I am especially interested in the toxicology reports on the four. If one, several or all of them had drugs in their systems, this would lend more credibility to this being a drug hit.
- When it comes to the infamous video most of us have seen now, what exactly did Mogen tell Adam (the bartender at a local club)? Goncalves is seen with Mogen and a male downtown hours before the two women are killed. In that video (https://tinyurl.com/3hu8pdu5), Mogen tells Goncalves she told Adam everything. Was it just talk about a guy or something involving drugs?
- Did the University of Idaho and City of Moscow officials want a quick arrest following the Nov. 13 murders? While BK wasn’t arrested for nearly six weeks after the crimes, you can bet U of I and Moscow businesses were happy. Having an alleged serial killer roaming Moscow is not good for business on many fronts. With that in mind, did they get the right guy? Better yet, if BK in fact is the guy, did he have help? If yes, then we still have one or more criminals walking the streets of Moscow or are long gone by now.
While I participate in different social media chats regarding the case, I always go into them with an open mind. You are always going to have some people who want a conviction based more on emotion than the facts.
Time will tell if authorities got the right guy.
Meantime, some on social media are hoping BK and the death penalty go hand in hand.
So, with the evidence we have today (no doubt the police have more), would you easily convict BK in the murders of the Idaho 4?
DavidAlanThomas 