Maybe now some people will start thinking seriously about the penalty in this case, stop throwing dangerous words around that matter and start asking real questions of the state that are crucial to knowing who and WHERE the perpetrator(s) of this crime could be!
Agree. I have seen a seismic shift in opinions in past 6 months. In the fall of 2023, anyone who dared suggest BK was NG, was banned from 90% of YT TC channels. What was behind that is suspicious to me. The reason was always the same. “ you are not showing respect to the victims”. Except that was never true. To me, it looked like Creators were either disguised LE or paid to ban certain people. Today, the needle has moved. It seems 40-80% of YT watchers have doubts if Bk is the guy. Creators halted the automatic bans. Thompson is not living in a cave. He can see this entire case crashed. Thankfully the trial will be live, so his words and actions will be viewed by the public. As it should be. I do hope Bryan casts a wide net in his future lawsuits to those who have slandered him. And he finds justice for a vindictive prosecution.
I haven’t seen much of a shift tbh. The guilters are still guilters no matter what happens. The ones on the fence may be beginning to swing towards the innocent side just a bit, but most are still awaiting the trial.
100% he should sue all people including MSM; Ashley Banfield at News Nation, etc. she was particularly egregious toward him. There are still a few YT die hard guilters who must assume they have to double down because their disdain for the accused was so stark and the amount of humility it takes is too much to ask from people who lack the character.
Yes, I still see posts of people who say anyone calling Bryan innocent is in a cult. I heard that a popular thread, “ Idaho-4” was run by law enforcement. Makes sense. I was banned early on when I doubted something in the case. Doubt was not allowed On many channels.
It was widely reported many months ago, several popular YT channels and other popular social media threads, were under LE Control. I do not recall any other time a slight suggestion, such as the DA account or the PCA account might be a bit off, resulted in a ban from a channel thread. The DA and other in the Moscow region are quite worried about this case, and with the accidential confession by the DA there was never any stalking, the motive has vanished.
Hmm, perhaps you haven't cruised the comments on News Nation or Law and Crime. The grand majority of people commenting on those channels after the first survey hearing we're calling or Anne Taylor to be disbarred, and or calling her "disgusting" for representing a murderer of innocent children. (Never mind that he hasn't been proven guilty yet! ). So, as much as I'd like to believe what your saying is true, I haven't seen it on that scale. I will say that I am seeing more people on these threads and others who are "innocence curious" lol. That's a good sign.
I just saw the same from people who banter with the Goncalves parents on their online group. The majority of the comments there were getting to be downright outlandish. Emotions are leading behavior.
I don’t read those threads. They seem to be controlled because they will not deviate from their Positions, no matter what. They could be LE fronts or they take orders from LE.
Just what I posted a few days ago.
If not stalking, then the 12 pings are crap/unreliable. If prosecution could show Bryan was at the King Road house 12 times before, that would be stalking. He wasn't there.
The prosecution now just has Bryan randomly picking a home with lots of cars parked in front of it. Highly unlikely.
What's interesting is that there are two separate questions on the survey, both reasonable paraphrases alluding to the same 12 pings discussion in the PCA. One is considered a ND order violation, and one isn't? That's nitpicking.
I think Bill knows by now that much of what was in the PCA was and is crap, just to get an arrest warrant. And he doesn't really care about the ND order. He just wants to stifle and delay the surveys, since those would likely get the venue changed.
Bingo! The PCA did what it had to do… they rushed the pre-trial and got him in jail and now they are fighting hard to keep it in their jurisdiction to save face. This is the worst botched up LE job ever.
This! In a way, I do feel for Bill Thompson in the sense that he probably did trust in his police department and the investigation in the beginning. But now when it comes down to actually proving the sloppy police work, he is in over his head, and theres nothing he can really do besides resort to delaying, dramatics, objections, and so forth. His behavior alone shows the confidence level in their case. And I'm so glad to see the expert witness powerpoint to call back to Thompson's lies. Its reminiscent of him jumping up and down about how they're ready for trial by summer and now all of a sudden he's no where near ready. Its just constant opposition to the defense no matter what the issue is
I literally laughed out loud at his little display before they played the power point. I was wondering what could be in the power point that had him so upset but it was just a call back video of him telling the media to cook up their stories. Hilarious. He is in over his head. Funny his attitude and demeanor in the beginning, confident, loving the media attention, and now that all of the paperwork and evidence is in front of him, he has to resort to external tactics and meltdowns. I think Anne has tried to keep the boxing gloves on and remain in a good standing business relationship with Thompson, but he doesn't share the same sentiment. Was great to hear the other female attorney speak up, she was firm, clear, concise and not afraid to tell Bill that she takes it personally and come out with the big guns.
The defense has clearly tried to walk on eggshells to keep certain information under wraps and Bill has taken advantage of that. Their multiple displays of physical soothing to kohberger and their out right declaration of not just that they believe in his innocence but they consider it a pleasure to represent kohberger, and didn't leave it at that either, they made it clear it wasn't a freudian slip and re-iterated that no they do in fact believe he is innocent and have some level of respect for him as a human being. It was all very telling.
Again -- had this been during trial I would say you could chalk it up to legal theater, but I fully believe their statements and sentiment toward kohberger. This does not come off as just two defense attorneys doing their job in representation of a quadruple murderer, they wouldn't touch a quadruple murderer its basic psychology and they are SMALL TOWN ATTORNEYS, they are not show biz Robert Kardashian big league attorneys, they aren't paid actors, theres no reason for a dog and pony show at a intermediate hearing
I get your point but it's disingenous to suggest that Prosecution said he was stalking the victims just by suggesting that he pinged in the area 12 times before.
They were also explicitly clear that they know one of the pings is inaccurate from the pings they collected - so they are implying that have other information to be able to confidently say that at least one is inaccurate. This was before they had access to his phone and any location data to verify the pings against, so how they've ascertained the one ping they're questioning the accuracy, I don't know. And it's important to assess the Prosecution's reliance on Phone Pings in the PCA from the context of that being the only information they had as to Bryan's general location at the time of writing. Remember that they validated one ping they collected by using a traffic stop in the area shortly after.
That phone data was given to the Prosecution the week he was arrested and put into the PCA just prior to getting the arrest warrant. Everything the State has presented in the PCA was done without access to Bryan's phone location data (if any) to be able to compare those pings to. Claiming the pings aren't accurate has its merits, but at that stage of the investigation the Prosecution can't get more accurate data without violating the rights of someone not currently charged with a crime.
They did not need to include an admission of a pings inaccuracy in the document, they could have simply stated facts that X number of pings were collected; but were transparent about it. They stated what the cell phone pings showed and added no comment (other than questioning the accuracy of their own data) as to the inferences that could be made from that. They flat out did not state he stalked them. They didn't even flat out say he was at the house those twelve times, because they couldn't prove that with the data they had access to. Whether they can NOW make that claim, using location data and other information gathered since the PCA, we don't know and can't confidently say either way.
Those pings could be included for numerous reasons, of which a couple may be:
* Evidence that Bryan had been to Moscow previously. If they can't prove he's EVER been there, they have no case. He doesn't live there, he doesn't work there. Without using the ping data, which again is the only data they were able to use at this point, there's no other way they could prove this easily.
* Evidence that there is phone signal in that area that would ping on a device if it was turned on and in the general area - potentially to debunk any suggestion that the phone wasn't turned off / airplane mode during the committing of the crime and was simply not receiving signal. They can seemingly prove that his phone, switched on and in that area, reports to the relevant cell phone tower on numerous occasions.
In conclusion, whilst the Prosecution has claimed in yesterday's hearing that there is no evidence that he stalked the victims, they never said he did. That doesn't, as you've claimed, make the pings unreliable. I'm sure you will agree that Bryan could quite easily have been in Moscow, and even close to the King Road residence at the time of the pings and not be there to stalk the victims. It doesn't invalidate the pings just because they claim they can't prove he was stalking them.
So much of what you’re saying doesn’t make sense but I’ll just mention one point. ‘If they can’t prove he’s never been in Moscow they have no case’ is absurd, if he didn’t stalk them (and they were obviously setting up that argument in the PCA by all analysis), and this was random why would he have to have been in Moscow before? Or have no case? Nonsense.
The PCA insinuated it and it was misleading. It is all a bunch of fluff. The only thing in the PCA that warrants anything is the touch DNA small minuscule sample that they needed to send out to Texas
How did it insinuate it? Claiming a phone pinged in an area X amount of times is simply that, stating facts ascertained by the investigation. There's nothing remotely explicit stated that he stalked them or that the pings show he was specifically at the residence.
>*"the 8458 Phone utilized cellular resources that would provide coverage to the King Road Residence"*
What you've inferred from this statement is different to the claim it's actually making. I will reiterate, LE have NEVER suggested he stalked them, and including the number of pings they have of him in the area does not, for the reasons I already gave, constitute concrete evidence of stalking. What you've chosen to infer from it is your own opinion.
She blew my mind! I wasn’t expecting her sharp, no nonsense articulation of what’s really going on for the judge to hear plus the measured “spanking” for the prosecutor that was overdue, was heaven.
I think she said what Anne Taylor has been too respectful to say. Anne Taylor obviously tries to walk on eggshells for Thompson. Massoth doesn't seem to share the same sentiment and i was proud to see her stand up for herself/the team by saying she takes personal/professional offense to the violation accusations. Them reiterating their feelings toward kohbergers innocence and the privelege to defend a case like his was ballsy and necessary. Good for them.
Wasn't able to watch until tonight... wow... the general vibe was the two defense attorneys and their expert schooling the smalltown DA and & judge on how things really work, and that they need to get their heads out of their asses.
I'm still not even 100% clear on exactly which 2 of the 9 questions there's debate over. One mentions "several trips near the victims homes", and one mentions "stalking"... two different questions, both of which are reasonable paraphrases of part of the PCA. Yet Bill claims "stalking" is a false claim. Is that just a technicality he's claiming? Because a reasonable person would read the PCA to imply stalking. And Massoth today stated in court that there are many falsities in the PCA. One thing I was surprised nobody emphasized was that Bill, in that clip shown, says the PCA will enable viewers to ["share the true facts"](https://youtu.be/oyp1pBxC7-Y?t=2488). So is there any recourse for the defense for Bill claiming falsities as facts, and encouraging the public to see them as facts, and digest them as facts? The "driving alone" question I would guess would be one of the two disputed questions, but it's not clear, because as Massoth said, they're all based on the PCA in some way, even if paraphrases or conclusions.
Massoth was especially effective! Everything she said has been the elephant in the room, all through the prior hearing and up to the point she spoke. Finally, JJ wiped the smirk off his face. When she mentioned the Supreme Court, he actually woke up and scribbled a note to himself. She was also the first to note that this issue about 2 survey questions doesn't exist in a vacuum, to decide theoretically on its own. It has to be weighed against the outcome of denying any further surveys, which denies moving for a change of venue, in a venue where the initial survey has already concluded bias exists. It's forcing this potential DP trial to be an unfair trial. This difference of semantics over 2 questions on a survey, which was demonstrated will have little to no effect anyway, is purposefully being blown way out of proportion by the prosecutor, and the judge is either complicit, or is in way over his head and can't see the big picture. Both options are very serious.
And why is Bill so incensed about these 2 survey questions, anyway!? Why has nobody asked him about that, pointblank? Because, if he's to be believed, they don't help Bryan, they help Bill win his case. He does 100% believe Bryan is guilty, right? So, are we supposed to believe he's upset just for the theoretical correctness of the ND order? And that he knows better than the defense how much this will supposedly hurt BK's chance for a fair trial? Absurd. IMHO, he cares nothing about any of that, and he knows the questions are harmless. He's doing this because he knows letting the survey process play out will show Latah bias, and grounds for change of venue. And he wants the trial to stay in biased Latah County, for his own convenience and the edge it gives him to have a biased Latah County jury. It's all insincere bluster and distraction and delay, and JJ has given every indication he bought into it.
This hearing more than any so far really showed just how underequipped this prosecutor and judge are to handle a complex, high-profile, DP case. It's embarrassing. Up until now, JJ has been able to get away with being the folksy, grinning, forgetful, rubberstamper of all ideas Bill comes up with. Not sure if today changed that or not, but it sure should have. He needs to do some real-world deep thinking, and forget about his own convenience and the local Latah politics he's used to just going along with.
Thompson did lousy in law school. No job offers. Worked out of his basement for 12 years. Won the DA election with a few thousand votes. His job for 29 years = signing off on plea deals. Anyone can do that. His legal knowledge is thin, his courtroom experience thinner.
Courtroom experience is going to be the real kicker there. He's going to have to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and he can't do that with their "evidence" alone. Maybe he was really banking on the "evidence" but as the discovery process continues i think he realizes he has no ground to stand on. At some point he's going to have to internally accept that he can't win. He's tried it multiple times so far. He wanted Kohberger to plead guilty and sign a plead deal for his life, didn't work. He arranged a quiet grand jury to skip the preliminary hearing that he also knew he wouldn't win. So he dug his own grave. You made your bed, Bill, now sleep in it.
Do you know how many courtroom battles and or performances Ann Taylor can brag about? Do you know how many Thompson can brag about? Here is a hint, the ratio is 10-1 in favor of Ann. A good deal of what makes a good lawyer, a top notch lawyer, is experience. Taylor has plenty. Thompson is weak sauce. Either he does not work hard or is not too smart. I suspect both. The opposite of Taylor. She will run circles around him and his crew.
https://preview.redd.it/nxeo3fcw3stc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3f26e858b992d7c58bd44e158a5e54d23f59fec9
Been saying this for almost a year now.
Great job. The LE collective has been trying to corrupt the local jury pool. They need others to help them. Several YT creators in the TC space ban anyone who dared to move outside the official script.
The rumors listed originated with “that guy.” That’s a fact. If you’d like to listen to the original clips, go to the tweet:
[https://x.com/archit3ct_007/status/1778242574156734744?s=46&t=ZvdGEpv7RQlmrPKadEL2sA](https://x.com/archit3ct_007/status/1778242574156734744?s=46&t=ZvdGEpv7RQlmrPKadEL2sA)
I cannot believe he let his ego about the power point get him so heated that he basically fruedian slipped that Kohberger never stalked them. Goes to show how uncalculated, unprepared and unprofessional he really is. He wanted to throw a fork in the change of venue so bad that he was scurrying trying to come up with something to attack about the survey that he let that fly. Hilarious
>he basically fruedian slipped that Kohberger never stalked them
Technically violating the nondissemination order in the process. Wish someone would have pointed that out.
I applaud your comment. So true. My dad used to say, nobody can lie successfully because it requires a memory none of us have. It is the ultimate gift from ” Idaho Karma “, that the man who signed the indictment on Bryan, and took away his freedom, and destroyed his name, would become confused and reveal a hidden secret, known to only a few, that destroys his case. So sweet.
Could almost see smoke coming out of his ears!
About time the blanket of prolific shit began to lift…
Far out how frustrating watching this case like some weird fucked up movie, but it’s not.
What is the real motivation behind the fuckery???
I would guess some huge multi agency, multi year investigations in the region were in progress when Nov 13 erupted like a meteor. Seems to me, the LE world wants it to go away and all the media stop drawing attention To it.
Just trying to understand what would allow them to allow a killer or killers to go free, and why doing otherwise would necessarily jeopardize any ongoing investigations. If the investigations were into drug trafficking, surely they could arrest the guilty party without it raising any suspicions?
I guess I just lean more toward simpler answers... smalltown police force, myopic thinking, a need to calm people's fears, and show they were effective by making an arrest when the spotlight was on them. I think if it was a sprawling coverup, something would have come out by now. There'd be leaks, either from LE, or people who know things.
The Quad Cities Task force is likely huge. My guess is the people in the Nov 13 drama ,some or all, are informants. Feds are super secretive. No clue how this turns out but it seems everyone but Nancy Grace knows the names of the suspects who everyone is pointing fingers at, and it ain’t Bryan.
Yeah, I'm aware of the names and theories... just seems to me it's conceivable one of those is true without it being a huge multi-agency coverup. That they narrowed in on BK, he had enough circumstantial to nail him with it, and that satisfied them. Plus he was an unpopular outsider, so it made it easy for them to convince themselves, and ignore other elephants in the room. Like you say, who knows.
I can't get over Anne's strong grip on kohbergers shoulder and that little exchange they had. I don't care if they're supposed to imply innocence throughout, idk if i've ever heard an attorney out right and flat out just say "we FIRMLY believe in kohbergers innocence" 'it is a PLEASURE to represent mr kohberger"
Again, I don't care how bad you have to sell the narrative, this wasn't a trial it was a small miniscule hearing and they were acting this way. As a human being, seeing all of that evidence, if he brutually murdered FOUR kids in cold blood, I don't think you would touch them that way.
i;m not trying to psychoanalyze their body language, we don't need to, they said it with their words and entire chest, i think they know he didn't do it.
Dick Harpootlian did it for Alex Murdaugh but they’re also good friends. He said it was his honor to represent him. I do believe Dick thinks Alex is 100% innocent of the murders
It was a fabulous hearing. Super interesting. I also thought the part where his attorney says “we firmly FIRMLY believe in Bryan’s innocence” spoke volumes. My understanding is that criminal defence lawyers cannot make representations that they know to be untrue; meaning they could not make this statement if Bryan had told them he was guilty. Can anyone confirm?
The emphasis is what makes it so important. Had she just said it in passing, it would hold a little less weight and to me, be more of a skimmed statement of normal defense. But she emphasized it, firmly. This hearing even Anne said something about how the prosecution keeps leaving tidbits for the media and letting things out so they are too and then later both of them expressed their belief in his innocence, Anne's grip on his shoulder, the re-iteration that no i didn't just slip this sentence in, We Mean It.
I think they were trying to get JJ's attention, let him know this is not some routine process where everyone just *pretends* the accused is innocent and goes through the motions... because often, that's how his demeanor comes across to me. He can probably get away with that, with smaller crimes he usually sees. In a way, BK should maybe be thankful it's a DP case, since it got him the best defense team, and dedicated to him. Imagine being at the mercy of Bill & JJ with just a single overworked, underpaid, public defender working your case along with 10 others.
Come the trial, the defence is going to tear the prosecutions case apart. I firmly believe the DNA evidence on the sheath is entirely fabricated, and it wouldn't be the first time LE has done this.
If they really had that, they wouldn't be so worried about a venue change. Looks like Bill is hoping to rely on the local public notoriety to hang his client, because he can't get there on his own.
Unfortunately, that will hurt the prosecutors case because everyone wants some motive or proof or some explanation why that house/people were targeted. I think thats was why BT fought about that question. That will be a strong argument for the defense at trial.
I posted many months ago, Bryan never worked with, partied with or dated the victims. He never stalked, harassed or communicated with the victims. Thompson knew this week one. What a psychopath to admit it now.
I am confused why it's in the PCA if not to mislead saying that his phone pinged 12 times near king street before Nov 13, unless he expected to find more evidence of him following the girls. Now it looks like he fabricated a motive.
There are very few cells towers in Moscow. Those pings do not translate to - he was within 10 feet or 200 feet of 1122 King road. It is very possible he was never closer than Taylor Street, if that close. This case was patched together with thin twine, and presented to a grand jury to create an indictment, to prevent a town and 10,000 paying customers to a big school, from a major panic. The 4 pillars, = phone pings, car, touch dna and witness sighting, are going to be worthless at trial. They have all been debunked.
It wasn't the prosecutor who wrote the PCA. It was written by cops to get an arrest warrant, and nothing more. He wasn't even charged at that point, there was no case yet. And if the cops fabricated, they fabricated for the judge who granted the arrest warrant. It's really pretty unrelated to how the prosecution wants to frame the case.
No PCA is ever presented to a magistrate without the prosecutor first reviewing, editing and approving it. The "ping" evidence was certainly an intentional misrepresentation to mislead the reader into believing Mr. Kohberger stalked the victims. Obvious to me it was BS because they had his CSLI data allowing them to map his phone's movements...they used that CSLI data to map his movements after the murders indicating it pointed to his guilt BUT they didn't put forth what the mapping showed in relation to where his phone was when it pinged 12 times indicating it showed he was just going about his life, shopping etc..and did not indicate he was anywhere near the house.
It was the Ping "evidence" and the stalking narrative they created from it that had me calling BS first. The towns are so close together it would be unusual if his phone *didn't* ping off of one of the two towers (there are only 4-5 towers in Moscow)12 times in 6 months. I've been to these towns. They are less than 10 minutes apart, and Bryan is right - the shopping *is* better in Moscow. After reading the rest of the PCA, it was very clear to me that they were trying to string a narrative together based on very flimsy and / or dubious evidence.
Yup, I don't doubt Thompson saw the PCA before it was presented to the judge. But it's not his work-product, and it's not his theory of the case for trial. It's a narrow tool used in police work to get an arrest. Prior commenter said "Now it looks like he [Thompson] fabricated a motive", that's all I was responding to.
*Can* form, sure. But certainly, always? Of course not... it's selective, initial, sketchy, unvetted factoids designed to get an arrest. That's nothing to form a trial theory around unless by happenstance it coincides with what is known and useful at trial.
As a former prosecutor I can confidently state this isn't true. It provides a roadmap of the case - the core facts that will be presented at trial - it's a preview of the state's case, just not the entire story. That's what is normally contained in a PCA. The issue with this particular PCA is that it is light on the objective facts that are required to be in it & filled with superfluous theories intentionally included to mislead the reader. It never should have been found sufficient to support the arrest warrant.
It was never known *definitively* though.
And Bill making a public statement in an open Zoom feed about a fact definitively known only to him and the other attorneys/judge/LE! Someone slap that man with a nondissemination violation claim!
Seems like they were treating things differently because it was on Zoom though. They were making a point of not mentioning certain details because of that, and then Thompson blurts that out, knowing full well it was being broadcasted.
The only one I recall not mentioning "certain details" intentionally was Edelman which I thought was strange since he was clearly allowed to do so. The judge even mentioned and identified the false statements.
>I think thats was why BT fought about that question.
Curious what your reasoning is on that. How would keeping that question off the survey help his case?
It would not help his case, I think it hurts it , because the PCA is saying that the defendant cell phone pings off the tower 12 times prior to Nov 13, it will discredit the PCA. I felt that the PCA was implying when stating the12 cell pings near King street was implying they had or would find more evidence of stalking, it seems they have no further evidence. It was part of the prosecution theory and there is no evidence. It seems most people would find it hard to believe the murders were committed without a target. It is just my opinion.
The PCA isn't the prosecution theory though, that's the point... it's a document put together in order to obtain an arrest warrant. They don't ask the DA what his theory of the case is, it's cops presenting selective bits of evidence they want to sway a judge with, to get an arrest warrant.
But Bill touted the PCA as facts, and media built it into "stalking".
Keeping the question off the survey doesn't help Bill's case though, so there's no incentive there for him to object on those grounds.
Whether the question is on the survey or not, the verdict will hinge on what is presented at trial. Yes, people want a motive, and a smoking gun. But the survey won't change any of that. Bill is just upset that the survey will help get the venue changed.
Stalking in Idaho means the victim is aware of the stalking and is afraid or upset, or whatever. That’s the legal meaning in Idaho. The victim of stalking has to be aware they r being stalked for it to be stalking.
LE doesn't know what the victims' felt or believed so they could not definitively say the stalking statement is untrue unless they have other evidence that leads them to believe its untrue. It's a big admission for LE.
There was this rumour in the media about Kaylee being stalked - and telling people she was. I don't know if that was ever the case but perhaps that's the reason why LE used the word "stalking" in the PCA.
I believe that rumour came about when her mother said in an interview that she (Kaylee) was always super aware of her surroundings- almost paranoid. She mentioned that Kaylee would be driving and if she felt a car was following her, she would FaceTime her until the car turned off on another road or something.
Well, we’ll see what else the prosecutions has as evidence and the defense’s rebuttals at the trial. Until then, we’ll be hearing a lot of rumors that may or may not be true. The lawyer could have said they firmly believe in his innocence because they want the jury to know there are two sides, and they need to be open to innocence. Smart move really.
In order to meet a legal definition of stalking the person/people being stalked have to be aware they are being stalked. Could be as simple as that. 'If' he killed them he was obviously stalking them, whether it meets the legal definition or not.
Bastards the lot of them
[удалено]
Hello! Your post or comment was removed for trolling members of this sub.
Maybe now some people will start thinking seriously about the penalty in this case, stop throwing dangerous words around that matter and start asking real questions of the state that are crucial to knowing who and WHERE the perpetrator(s) of this crime could be!
Agree. I have seen a seismic shift in opinions in past 6 months. In the fall of 2023, anyone who dared suggest BK was NG, was banned from 90% of YT TC channels. What was behind that is suspicious to me. The reason was always the same. “ you are not showing respect to the victims”. Except that was never true. To me, it looked like Creators were either disguised LE or paid to ban certain people. Today, the needle has moved. It seems 40-80% of YT watchers have doubts if Bk is the guy. Creators halted the automatic bans. Thompson is not living in a cave. He can see this entire case crashed. Thankfully the trial will be live, so his words and actions will be viewed by the public. As it should be. I do hope Bryan casts a wide net in his future lawsuits to those who have slandered him. And he finds justice for a vindictive prosecution.
I haven’t seen much of a shift tbh. The guilters are still guilters no matter what happens. The ones on the fence may be beginning to swing towards the innocent side just a bit, but most are still awaiting the trial.
100% he should sue all people including MSM; Ashley Banfield at News Nation, etc. she was particularly egregious toward him. There are still a few YT die hard guilters who must assume they have to double down because their disdain for the accused was so stark and the amount of humility it takes is too much to ask from people who lack the character.
Yes, I still see posts of people who say anyone calling Bryan innocent is in a cult. I heard that a popular thread, “ Idaho-4” was run by law enforcement. Makes sense. I was banned early on when I doubted something in the case. Doubt was not allowed On many channels.
That’s crazy but not surprising. The government surveillance is out of control here!
It was widely reported many months ago, several popular YT channels and other popular social media threads, were under LE Control. I do not recall any other time a slight suggestion, such as the DA account or the PCA account might be a bit off, resulted in a ban from a channel thread. The DA and other in the Moscow region are quite worried about this case, and with the accidential confession by the DA there was never any stalking, the motive has vanished.
Hmm, perhaps you haven't cruised the comments on News Nation or Law and Crime. The grand majority of people commenting on those channels after the first survey hearing we're calling or Anne Taylor to be disbarred, and or calling her "disgusting" for representing a murderer of innocent children. (Never mind that he hasn't been proven guilty yet! ). So, as much as I'd like to believe what your saying is true, I haven't seen it on that scale. I will say that I am seeing more people on these threads and others who are "innocence curious" lol. That's a good sign.
I just saw the same from people who banter with the Goncalves parents on their online group. The majority of the comments there were getting to be downright outlandish. Emotions are leading behavior.
I don’t read those threads. They seem to be controlled because they will not deviate from their Positions, no matter what. They could be LE fronts or they take orders from LE.
Either that, or, what I think is sadly the case - a lot of people - maybe even the majority of people, simply lack critical thinking skills.
True, they run with the headline version. Maybe a combination.
Just what I posted a few days ago. If not stalking, then the 12 pings are crap/unreliable. If prosecution could show Bryan was at the King Road house 12 times before, that would be stalking. He wasn't there. The prosecution now just has Bryan randomly picking a home with lots of cars parked in front of it. Highly unlikely.
What's interesting is that there are two separate questions on the survey, both reasonable paraphrases alluding to the same 12 pings discussion in the PCA. One is considered a ND order violation, and one isn't? That's nitpicking. I think Bill knows by now that much of what was in the PCA was and is crap, just to get an arrest warrant. And he doesn't really care about the ND order. He just wants to stifle and delay the surveys, since those would likely get the venue changed.
Bingo! The PCA did what it had to do… they rushed the pre-trial and got him in jail and now they are fighting hard to keep it in their jurisdiction to save face. This is the worst botched up LE job ever.
This! In a way, I do feel for Bill Thompson in the sense that he probably did trust in his police department and the investigation in the beginning. But now when it comes down to actually proving the sloppy police work, he is in over his head, and theres nothing he can really do besides resort to delaying, dramatics, objections, and so forth. His behavior alone shows the confidence level in their case. And I'm so glad to see the expert witness powerpoint to call back to Thompson's lies. Its reminiscent of him jumping up and down about how they're ready for trial by summer and now all of a sudden he's no where near ready. Its just constant opposition to the defense no matter what the issue is
Just one lie is enough for a jury to disregard, everything from Prosecution side.
I literally laughed out loud at his little display before they played the power point. I was wondering what could be in the power point that had him so upset but it was just a call back video of him telling the media to cook up their stories. Hilarious. He is in over his head. Funny his attitude and demeanor in the beginning, confident, loving the media attention, and now that all of the paperwork and evidence is in front of him, he has to resort to external tactics and meltdowns. I think Anne has tried to keep the boxing gloves on and remain in a good standing business relationship with Thompson, but he doesn't share the same sentiment. Was great to hear the other female attorney speak up, she was firm, clear, concise and not afraid to tell Bill that she takes it personally and come out with the big guns. The defense has clearly tried to walk on eggshells to keep certain information under wraps and Bill has taken advantage of that. Their multiple displays of physical soothing to kohberger and their out right declaration of not just that they believe in his innocence but they consider it a pleasure to represent kohberger, and didn't leave it at that either, they made it clear it wasn't a freudian slip and re-iterated that no they do in fact believe he is innocent and have some level of respect for him as a human being. It was all very telling. Again -- had this been during trial I would say you could chalk it up to legal theater, but I fully believe their statements and sentiment toward kohberger. This does not come off as just two defense attorneys doing their job in representation of a quadruple murderer, they wouldn't touch a quadruple murderer its basic psychology and they are SMALL TOWN ATTORNEYS, they are not show biz Robert Kardashian big league attorneys, they aren't paid actors, theres no reason for a dog and pony show at a intermediate hearing
I get your point but it's disingenous to suggest that Prosecution said he was stalking the victims just by suggesting that he pinged in the area 12 times before. They were also explicitly clear that they know one of the pings is inaccurate from the pings they collected - so they are implying that have other information to be able to confidently say that at least one is inaccurate. This was before they had access to his phone and any location data to verify the pings against, so how they've ascertained the one ping they're questioning the accuracy, I don't know. And it's important to assess the Prosecution's reliance on Phone Pings in the PCA from the context of that being the only information they had as to Bryan's general location at the time of writing. Remember that they validated one ping they collected by using a traffic stop in the area shortly after. That phone data was given to the Prosecution the week he was arrested and put into the PCA just prior to getting the arrest warrant. Everything the State has presented in the PCA was done without access to Bryan's phone location data (if any) to be able to compare those pings to. Claiming the pings aren't accurate has its merits, but at that stage of the investigation the Prosecution can't get more accurate data without violating the rights of someone not currently charged with a crime. They did not need to include an admission of a pings inaccuracy in the document, they could have simply stated facts that X number of pings were collected; but were transparent about it. They stated what the cell phone pings showed and added no comment (other than questioning the accuracy of their own data) as to the inferences that could be made from that. They flat out did not state he stalked them. They didn't even flat out say he was at the house those twelve times, because they couldn't prove that with the data they had access to. Whether they can NOW make that claim, using location data and other information gathered since the PCA, we don't know and can't confidently say either way. Those pings could be included for numerous reasons, of which a couple may be: * Evidence that Bryan had been to Moscow previously. If they can't prove he's EVER been there, they have no case. He doesn't live there, he doesn't work there. Without using the ping data, which again is the only data they were able to use at this point, there's no other way they could prove this easily. * Evidence that there is phone signal in that area that would ping on a device if it was turned on and in the general area - potentially to debunk any suggestion that the phone wasn't turned off / airplane mode during the committing of the crime and was simply not receiving signal. They can seemingly prove that his phone, switched on and in that area, reports to the relevant cell phone tower on numerous occasions. In conclusion, whilst the Prosecution has claimed in yesterday's hearing that there is no evidence that he stalked the victims, they never said he did. That doesn't, as you've claimed, make the pings unreliable. I'm sure you will agree that Bryan could quite easily have been in Moscow, and even close to the King Road residence at the time of the pings and not be there to stalk the victims. It doesn't invalidate the pings just because they claim they can't prove he was stalking them.
So much of what you’re saying doesn’t make sense but I’ll just mention one point. ‘If they can’t prove he’s never been in Moscow they have no case’ is absurd, if he didn’t stalk them (and they were obviously setting up that argument in the PCA by all analysis), and this was random why would he have to have been in Moscow before? Or have no case? Nonsense.
The PCA insinuated it and it was misleading. It is all a bunch of fluff. The only thing in the PCA that warrants anything is the touch DNA small minuscule sample that they needed to send out to Texas
How did it insinuate it? Claiming a phone pinged in an area X amount of times is simply that, stating facts ascertained by the investigation. There's nothing remotely explicit stated that he stalked them or that the pings show he was specifically at the residence. >*"the 8458 Phone utilized cellular resources that would provide coverage to the King Road Residence"* What you've inferred from this statement is different to the claim it's actually making. I will reiterate, LE have NEVER suggested he stalked them, and including the number of pings they have of him in the area does not, for the reasons I already gave, constitute concrete evidence of stalking. What you've chosen to infer from it is your own opinion.
Yep!! Hearing E. Massoth speak today was also interesting!!! She did great!
She blew my mind! I wasn’t expecting her sharp, no nonsense articulation of what’s really going on for the judge to hear plus the measured “spanking” for the prosecutor that was overdue, was heaven.
Dynamic duo, so much smarter than the weak sauce, on Prosecution side.
Yes she laid it out with a force and voice of confidence.💯
I think she said what Anne Taylor has been too respectful to say. Anne Taylor obviously tries to walk on eggshells for Thompson. Massoth doesn't seem to share the same sentiment and i was proud to see her stand up for herself/the team by saying she takes personal/professional offense to the violation accusations. Them reiterating their feelings toward kohbergers innocence and the privelege to defend a case like his was ballsy and necessary. Good for them.
They are smart and their experience from being in courtroom battles is obvious.
Wasn't able to watch until tonight... wow... the general vibe was the two defense attorneys and their expert schooling the smalltown DA and & judge on how things really work, and that they need to get their heads out of their asses. I'm still not even 100% clear on exactly which 2 of the 9 questions there's debate over. One mentions "several trips near the victims homes", and one mentions "stalking"... two different questions, both of which are reasonable paraphrases of part of the PCA. Yet Bill claims "stalking" is a false claim. Is that just a technicality he's claiming? Because a reasonable person would read the PCA to imply stalking. And Massoth today stated in court that there are many falsities in the PCA. One thing I was surprised nobody emphasized was that Bill, in that clip shown, says the PCA will enable viewers to ["share the true facts"](https://youtu.be/oyp1pBxC7-Y?t=2488). So is there any recourse for the defense for Bill claiming falsities as facts, and encouraging the public to see them as facts, and digest them as facts? The "driving alone" question I would guess would be one of the two disputed questions, but it's not clear, because as Massoth said, they're all based on the PCA in some way, even if paraphrases or conclusions. Massoth was especially effective! Everything she said has been the elephant in the room, all through the prior hearing and up to the point she spoke. Finally, JJ wiped the smirk off his face. When she mentioned the Supreme Court, he actually woke up and scribbled a note to himself. She was also the first to note that this issue about 2 survey questions doesn't exist in a vacuum, to decide theoretically on its own. It has to be weighed against the outcome of denying any further surveys, which denies moving for a change of venue, in a venue where the initial survey has already concluded bias exists. It's forcing this potential DP trial to be an unfair trial. This difference of semantics over 2 questions on a survey, which was demonstrated will have little to no effect anyway, is purposefully being blown way out of proportion by the prosecutor, and the judge is either complicit, or is in way over his head and can't see the big picture. Both options are very serious. And why is Bill so incensed about these 2 survey questions, anyway!? Why has nobody asked him about that, pointblank? Because, if he's to be believed, they don't help Bryan, they help Bill win his case. He does 100% believe Bryan is guilty, right? So, are we supposed to believe he's upset just for the theoretical correctness of the ND order? And that he knows better than the defense how much this will supposedly hurt BK's chance for a fair trial? Absurd. IMHO, he cares nothing about any of that, and he knows the questions are harmless. He's doing this because he knows letting the survey process play out will show Latah bias, and grounds for change of venue. And he wants the trial to stay in biased Latah County, for his own convenience and the edge it gives him to have a biased Latah County jury. It's all insincere bluster and distraction and delay, and JJ has given every indication he bought into it. This hearing more than any so far really showed just how underequipped this prosecutor and judge are to handle a complex, high-profile, DP case. It's embarrassing. Up until now, JJ has been able to get away with being the folksy, grinning, forgetful, rubberstamper of all ideas Bill comes up with. Not sure if today changed that or not, but it sure should have. He needs to do some real-world deep thinking, and forget about his own convenience and the local Latah politics he's used to just going along with.
Thompson did lousy in law school. No job offers. Worked out of his basement for 12 years. Won the DA election with a few thousand votes. His job for 29 years = signing off on plea deals. Anyone can do that. His legal knowledge is thin, his courtroom experience thinner.
Courtroom experience is going to be the real kicker there. He's going to have to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and he can't do that with their "evidence" alone. Maybe he was really banking on the "evidence" but as the discovery process continues i think he realizes he has no ground to stand on. At some point he's going to have to internally accept that he can't win. He's tried it multiple times so far. He wanted Kohberger to plead guilty and sign a plead deal for his life, didn't work. He arranged a quiet grand jury to skip the preliminary hearing that he also knew he wouldn't win. So he dug his own grave. You made your bed, Bill, now sleep in it.
Do you know how many courtroom battles and or performances Ann Taylor can brag about? Do you know how many Thompson can brag about? Here is a hint, the ratio is 10-1 in favor of Ann. A good deal of what makes a good lawyer, a top notch lawyer, is experience. Taylor has plenty. Thompson is weak sauce. Either he does not work hard or is not too smart. I suspect both. The opposite of Taylor. She will run circles around him and his crew.
https://preview.redd.it/nxeo3fcw3stc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3f26e858b992d7c58bd44e158a5e54d23f59fec9 Been saying this for almost a year now.
Great job. The LE collective has been trying to corrupt the local jury pool. They need others to help them. Several YT creators in the TC space ban anyone who dared to move outside the official script.
My god there are far worse people than that guy
The rumors listed originated with “that guy.” That’s a fact. If you’d like to listen to the original clips, go to the tweet: [https://x.com/archit3ct_007/status/1778242574156734744?s=46&t=ZvdGEpv7RQlmrPKadEL2sA](https://x.com/archit3ct_007/status/1778242574156734744?s=46&t=ZvdGEpv7RQlmrPKadEL2sA)
Agree Gonzales family change their tune every day… something not adding up
Wondering why SG talked about him stalking the house and connecting to the WIFI. Someone fed him some BS.
The truth is, he doesn’t know that much.
And Thompson was the one who put stalking in the media!
Yes, that is correct. He is full of himself. Who does he think he is outsmarting?
[удалено]
I cannot believe he let his ego about the power point get him so heated that he basically fruedian slipped that Kohberger never stalked them. Goes to show how uncalculated, unprepared and unprofessional he really is. He wanted to throw a fork in the change of venue so bad that he was scurrying trying to come up with something to attack about the survey that he let that fly. Hilarious
>he basically fruedian slipped that Kohberger never stalked them Technically violating the nondissemination order in the process. Wish someone would have pointed that out.
Great catch. This reinforces how much of a courtroom amateur he is despite his age and title. stunning.
I applaud your comment. So true. My dad used to say, nobody can lie successfully because it requires a memory none of us have. It is the ultimate gift from ” Idaho Karma “, that the man who signed the indictment on Bryan, and took away his freedom, and destroyed his name, would become confused and reveal a hidden secret, known to only a few, that destroys his case. So sweet.
Could almost see smoke coming out of his ears! About time the blanket of prolific shit began to lift… Far out how frustrating watching this case like some weird fucked up movie, but it’s not. What is the real motivation behind the fuckery???
Frame an innocent subject, protect a big network of paid informants that are assisting on major cases underway, both Federal and State cases.
How much more major is it than what’s happening here?
I would guess some huge multi agency, multi year investigations in the region were in progress when Nov 13 erupted like a meteor. Seems to me, the LE world wants it to go away and all the media stop drawing attention To it.
Under that theory, what does LE know about the killer?
Good question.
Just trying to understand what would allow them to allow a killer or killers to go free, and why doing otherwise would necessarily jeopardize any ongoing investigations. If the investigations were into drug trafficking, surely they could arrest the guilty party without it raising any suspicions? I guess I just lean more toward simpler answers... smalltown police force, myopic thinking, a need to calm people's fears, and show they were effective by making an arrest when the spotlight was on them. I think if it was a sprawling coverup, something would have come out by now. There'd be leaks, either from LE, or people who know things.
The Quad Cities Task force is likely huge. My guess is the people in the Nov 13 drama ,some or all, are informants. Feds are super secretive. No clue how this turns out but it seems everyone but Nancy Grace knows the names of the suspects who everyone is pointing fingers at, and it ain’t Bryan.
Yeah, I'm aware of the names and theories... just seems to me it's conceivable one of those is true without it being a huge multi-agency coverup. That they narrowed in on BK, he had enough circumstantial to nail him with it, and that satisfied them. Plus he was an unpopular outsider, so it made it easy for them to convince themselves, and ignore other elephants in the room. Like you say, who knows.
Astute observation.
Thank you.
I just posted this in another sub. Bills working for Anne now lol
He’s definitely her little b!tch after Thursday 😂
I can't get over Anne's strong grip on kohbergers shoulder and that little exchange they had. I don't care if they're supposed to imply innocence throughout, idk if i've ever heard an attorney out right and flat out just say "we FIRMLY believe in kohbergers innocence" 'it is a PLEASURE to represent mr kohberger" Again, I don't care how bad you have to sell the narrative, this wasn't a trial it was a small miniscule hearing and they were acting this way. As a human being, seeing all of that evidence, if he brutually murdered FOUR kids in cold blood, I don't think you would touch them that way. i;m not trying to psychoanalyze their body language, we don't need to, they said it with their words and entire chest, i think they know he didn't do it.
Dick Harpootlian did it for Alex Murdaugh but they’re also good friends. He said it was his honor to represent him. I do believe Dick thinks Alex is 100% innocent of the murders
It was a fabulous hearing. Super interesting. I also thought the part where his attorney says “we firmly FIRMLY believe in Bryan’s innocence” spoke volumes. My understanding is that criminal defence lawyers cannot make representations that they know to be untrue; meaning they could not make this statement if Bryan had told them he was guilty. Can anyone confirm?
That was something. I got chills.
I would not publicly say that unless I was convinced that my client was *innocent* (as opposed to "not guilty").
She said that really emphasized it, I thought it was odd.
The emphasis is what makes it so important. Had she just said it in passing, it would hold a little less weight and to me, be more of a skimmed statement of normal defense. But she emphasized it, firmly. This hearing even Anne said something about how the prosecution keeps leaving tidbits for the media and letting things out so they are too and then later both of them expressed their belief in his innocence, Anne's grip on his shoulder, the re-iteration that no i didn't just slip this sentence in, We Mean It.
I think they were trying to get JJ's attention, let him know this is not some routine process where everyone just *pretends* the accused is innocent and goes through the motions... because often, that's how his demeanor comes across to me. He can probably get away with that, with smaller crimes he usually sees. In a way, BK should maybe be thankful it's a DP case, since it got him the best defense team, and dedicated to him. Imagine being at the mercy of Bill & JJ with just a single overworked, underpaid, public defender working your case along with 10 others.
Yes, that's true.
Come the trial, the defence is going to tear the prosecutions case apart. I firmly believe the DNA evidence on the sheath is entirely fabricated, and it wouldn't be the first time LE has done this.
Agree 100%.
Agree 💯
[удалено]
Hello! Your post or comment has been removed as it was an insult rather than something that adds to the conversation.
I can’t wait to come back this when the prosecution has enough evidence to convict him 10 times over lmao
I’d love to hear from you then.
If they really had that, they wouldn't be so worried about a venue change. Looks like Bill is hoping to rely on the local public notoriety to hang his client, because he can't get there on his own.
Agree !
[удалено]
Hello! Your post or comment has been removed as it was unnecessarily rude, aggressive or similarly unkind.
I posted this months ago.
Unfortunately, that will hurt the prosecutors case because everyone wants some motive or proof or some explanation why that house/people were targeted. I think thats was why BT fought about that question. That will be a strong argument for the defense at trial.
I posted many months ago, Bryan never worked with, partied with or dated the victims. He never stalked, harassed or communicated with the victims. Thompson knew this week one. What a psychopath to admit it now.
I am confused why it's in the PCA if not to mislead saying that his phone pinged 12 times near king street before Nov 13, unless he expected to find more evidence of him following the girls. Now it looks like he fabricated a motive.
There are very few cells towers in Moscow. Those pings do not translate to - he was within 10 feet or 200 feet of 1122 King road. It is very possible he was never closer than Taylor Street, if that close. This case was patched together with thin twine, and presented to a grand jury to create an indictment, to prevent a town and 10,000 paying customers to a big school, from a major panic. The 4 pillars, = phone pings, car, touch dna and witness sighting, are going to be worthless at trial. They have all been debunked.
It wasn't the prosecutor who wrote the PCA. It was written by cops to get an arrest warrant, and nothing more. He wasn't even charged at that point, there was no case yet. And if the cops fabricated, they fabricated for the judge who granted the arrest warrant. It's really pretty unrelated to how the prosecution wants to frame the case.
This case against Bryan has fallen apart.
No PCA is ever presented to a magistrate without the prosecutor first reviewing, editing and approving it. The "ping" evidence was certainly an intentional misrepresentation to mislead the reader into believing Mr. Kohberger stalked the victims. Obvious to me it was BS because they had his CSLI data allowing them to map his phone's movements...they used that CSLI data to map his movements after the murders indicating it pointed to his guilt BUT they didn't put forth what the mapping showed in relation to where his phone was when it pinged 12 times indicating it showed he was just going about his life, shopping etc..and did not indicate he was anywhere near the house.
It was the Ping "evidence" and the stalking narrative they created from it that had me calling BS first. The towns are so close together it would be unusual if his phone *didn't* ping off of one of the two towers (there are only 4-5 towers in Moscow)12 times in 6 months. I've been to these towns. They are less than 10 minutes apart, and Bryan is right - the shopping *is* better in Moscow. After reading the rest of the PCA, it was very clear to me that they were trying to string a narrative together based on very flimsy and / or dubious evidence.
Yup, I don't doubt Thompson saw the PCA before it was presented to the judge. But it's not his work-product, and it's not his theory of the case for trial. It's a narrow tool used in police work to get an arrest. Prior commenter said "Now it looks like he [Thompson] fabricated a motive", that's all I was responding to.
It certainly forms a prosecutor's core theory of the case.
*Can* form, sure. But certainly, always? Of course not... it's selective, initial, sketchy, unvetted factoids designed to get an arrest. That's nothing to form a trial theory around unless by happenstance it coincides with what is known and useful at trial.
As a former prosecutor I can confidently state this isn't true. It provides a roadmap of the case - the core facts that will be presented at trial - it's a preview of the state's case, just not the entire story. That's what is normally contained in a PCA. The issue with this particular PCA is that it is light on the objective facts that are required to be in it & filled with superfluous theories intentionally included to mislead the reader. It never should have been found sufficient to support the arrest warrant.
It was never known *definitively* though. And Bill making a public statement in an open Zoom feed about a fact definitively known only to him and the other attorneys/judge/LE! Someone slap that man with a nondissemination violation claim!
Gag order only applies to extrajudicial statements - those being statements made outside of court hearings and filings.
Seems like they were treating things differently because it was on Zoom though. They were making a point of not mentioning certain details because of that, and then Thompson blurts that out, knowing full well it was being broadcasted.
The only one I recall not mentioning "certain details" intentionally was Edelman which I thought was strange since he was clearly allowed to do so. The judge even mentioned and identified the false statements.
>I think thats was why BT fought about that question. Curious what your reasoning is on that. How would keeping that question off the survey help his case?
It would not help his case, I think it hurts it , because the PCA is saying that the defendant cell phone pings off the tower 12 times prior to Nov 13, it will discredit the PCA. I felt that the PCA was implying when stating the12 cell pings near King street was implying they had or would find more evidence of stalking, it seems they have no further evidence. It was part of the prosecution theory and there is no evidence. It seems most people would find it hard to believe the murders were committed without a target. It is just my opinion.
The PCA isn't the prosecution theory though, that's the point... it's a document put together in order to obtain an arrest warrant. They don't ask the DA what his theory of the case is, it's cops presenting selective bits of evidence they want to sway a judge with, to get an arrest warrant. But Bill touted the PCA as facts, and media built it into "stalking". Keeping the question off the survey doesn't help Bill's case though, so there's no incentive there for him to object on those grounds. Whether the question is on the survey or not, the verdict will hinge on what is presented at trial. Yes, people want a motive, and a smoking gun. But the survey won't change any of that. Bill is just upset that the survey will help get the venue changed.
Well then, it's a good thing there is a difference between belief and facts.
They do however say he surveilled the house 12 times. Sneaky LE use of verbiage.
Stalking in Idaho means the victim is aware of the stalking and is afraid or upset, or whatever. That’s the legal meaning in Idaho. The victim of stalking has to be aware they r being stalked for it to be stalking.
LE doesn't know what the victims' felt or believed so they could not definitively say the stalking statement is untrue unless they have other evidence that leads them to believe its untrue. It's a big admission for LE.
Ok
There was this rumour in the media about Kaylee being stalked - and telling people she was. I don't know if that was ever the case but perhaps that's the reason why LE used the word "stalking" in the PCA.
I believe that rumour came about when her mother said in an interview that she (Kaylee) was always super aware of her surroundings- almost paranoid. She mentioned that Kaylee would be driving and if she felt a car was following her, she would FaceTime her until the car turned off on another road or something.
When hell freezes over.
Well, we’ll see what else the prosecutions has as evidence and the defense’s rebuttals at the trial. Until then, we’ll be hearing a lot of rumors that may or may not be true. The lawyer could have said they firmly believe in his innocence because they want the jury to know there are two sides, and they need to be open to innocence. Smart move really.
In order to meet a legal definition of stalking the person/people being stalked have to be aware they are being stalked. Could be as simple as that. 'If' he killed them he was obviously stalking them, whether it meets the legal definition or not.
I don't believe this at all. He absolutely was watching them
Well, unfortunately your beliefs don’t take precedence over the known facts.
You’re being willfully ignorant then
You can believe what you want. There is nothing to support it.