True crime thread

That one brings images of the taller kidnapper feeding the shorter one into the wood chipper as the police approach from behind in Fargo.

Not interested in giving tips to homicidal types but anything anybody would consider social media would be better thought of as The Big Snitch and we’re going to have AI monitoring it soon to make sure nothing relevant goes unseen.

 

Ha, I know I've mentioned this but I've been a true crime junkie for years. I can't tell you how many times I've said, "Forget about the murder. That person deserves to be executed based on their stupidity alone."

I'm not even talking about the age of cell phones, the internet, and DNA, the last being just as integral for exonerating people as it is for convicting people. I saw some schlocky episode of the 'Forensic Files' about this woman who was really into tropical fish but she didn't have the money for the setup she wanted.

At the same time, she was sick of her husband's shit, so she comes up with this brilliant plan (meaning it wasn't brilliant at all) that she'd take out a $50,000 life insurance policy on him and then knock him off . . . drum roll. . . . to buy the tropical fish tank and stock it with the tropical fish of her dreams.

So how does she kill him? I bet you're thinking blunt force trauma lmwith a hammer, a push down the stairs, something like that. Wrong! She poisons him with fish tank chemicals.

The cops show up to her house and she has a new tank and they find all the receipts for the fish and everything else including the chemicals that killed him. The cost of it all? $49,999.99. THEY'LL NEVER THINK IT WAS ME!!! I know that poor schlub is dead and all but I got a real laugh out of that one.

This Walshe guy, it's even better than you think. He actually looked up how to dispose of a 115 lb body. Specifically. I wish I had a cannon to shoot off a dumbass of the year salute. The they'll never think it was me angle, I know there's a huge dose of narcissism and ego in there but next overriding personality trait is fucking stupidity.

 

Idiot. Ed Kemper got fed up with police because they weren't putting it together so he turned himself because he got sick of waiting for his infamy. Who knows how long he would have continued to have sex with his dead mother's severed head otherwise. Kemper was smart and he's exceedingly intelligent.

This guy? lol

 

Gives him time to try to think his way out of this. He probably has a very small chance to do that but it's better than getting the ball rolling now. Also if he isn't the guy there is a chance the real culprit repeats somewhere and if he is the guy there's a chance a copycat steps in.

I think he's very screwed at this point but a little bit more time before the festivities commence is probably better for him.

 

Odds are really good they caught the right guy. However we go through the process because it's about more than looking guilty. It's about proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

It's also important that the prosecution has the extra time to explore all the angles. Were there accomplices? Was there motive for anybody else to have any of the 4 victims killed?

If Goncalves was the target how did the killer know she was back in town? Was anybody an unwitting accomplice?

It's just such a strange case due to the apparently random extreme violence. It's worth it for all of us to get a better handle on what happened and why it happened.

 

Just a couple of things:

1. I'd be shocked if they ever hold a preliminary hearing. In most states, the handing up of an indictment eliminates the right to a preliminary hearing, and I'll bet the prosecutor obtains an indictment before the preliminary-hearing date. The judge set the date to put a little pressure on the prosecutor to go before the grand jury in a timely manner.

2. The judge will undoubtedly let some time -- maybe a lot of time -- pass before scheduling a trial date. Right now, the pervasive publicity would make it nearly impossible to pick an unbiased jury. The lapse of time will allow the effects of that publicity to dissipate.

3. The defense will undoubtedly move for a change of venue, but the entire state of Idaho has been saturated by the publicity so I'm not sure a change of venue would accomplish anything. The best bet is to let time pass and memories fade.

4. The defense will have to play it coy until it obtains pre-trial discovery. Until it gets discovery, it won't know exactly what evidence the State has.

 

What the state has on display right now is a strong circumstantial case.

If they presented what they have right now as their case at trial I would probably be a not guilty vote.

 

From the judge's order sealing the search warrant for Kohberger's apartment until March: "Premature public disclosure of the details of this law enforcement investigation will create a serious and imminent threat to law enforcement, and could result in the premature end of this investigation which could create a threat to public safety."

Anybody have a clue what might be going on here?

 

Bombs?

 

The Sixth Amendment gives a defendant the right to the effective assistance of counsel, and the rules of ethics require an attorney to zealously represent the client even if he/she knows the client is guilty.

In the situation your posit, the attorney would have an ethical duty to do his/her damnedest to beat the case.

 

What if we interpret the statement as: "Premature public disclosure of the details of this law enforcement investigation will create a serious and imminent threat to [enforcement of the law], and could result in the premature end of this investigation which could create a threat to public safety."?

In that situation you have to believe that the warrant for the search of his apartment was legally unsound and that as a result all of the evidence recovered from his apartment will be thrown out. This possibly ending the prosecution and allowing Kohberger to go free, which would represent a threat to public safety.

The question I have is if this is the case isn't the prosecution already in deep trouble and possibly unable to proceed?

In that scenario they have until whenever the warrant is unsealed to find ways to independently verify, apart from the tainted warrant, the evidence that they uncovered in the search.

 

If this is the case it likely would have been in the provenance for the warrant. They didn't dot an i or cross a t and as a result the warrant is technically deficient. This means that all the evidence gathered under that warrant is non-admissible.

Things that they could have used to obtain the warrant that would have caused problems:

1) Using the 2011-2013 white Elantra as probable cause without specifically identifying Kohberger's 2015 white Elantra as the car in question beforehand. Knowing that a white Elantra was near the crime scene doesn't justify using it as probable cause unless they have positively identified Kohberger's white Elantra as the vehicle in question. This BTW is a huge hanging thread in the overall evidence chain. If the authorities cannot positively identify Kohberger's Elantra as the vehicle in question then it must be excluded from the evidence chain and all other things that came from instruments using that vehicle as probable cause are at risk.

2) Using the knife sheath as probable cause if Kohberger had legal access to the residence beforehand. This assuming none of his blood was found on it or on the victims. If it's just a skin trace that they identified him from then the fact that it was there in the residence just means that at some point he brought it into the residence and discarded it, maybe by lending or giving it to one of the residents. The witness DM recognized him after the fact as somebody who came around the house at other times although she knew him by another name. Therefore it is at least possible that the sheath got into the house by some mechanism other than coming in attached to the hip of a knife-wielding murderer.

3) Using the eyewitness identification of a 5'10" tall masked assailant with bushy eyebrows as probable cause. DM both witnessed Kohberger unmasked at times when he was around the house and also witnessed the masked assailant with bushy eyebrows. If she cannot positively identify Kohberger as the assailant then the eyewitness testimony of that assailant's appearance probably cannot be used as probable cause.

Basically this is an extraordinarily circumstantial case at this point. There is a lot of potential evidence that points at the defendant but all of it is circumstantial until the prosecution tightens some things up.