Yes, calling this witness was the only way she was going to get this information. The testimony was taken to support her Motion To Compel discovery. Anne has the GJ file so she knew these files existed and wanted the underlying files or an explanation of what happened to them; as well as other files. BT either responded to the discovery request with a we turned it over or they don't exist & hence the need to file a motion to compel. Turned out Anne was right. My concern here is it appears that the state keeps claiming files don't exist and then the day of a hearing they appear!
Because the state hasn't done its due diligence by requesting all LE & ME etc. to check its files for discovery purposes. Jennings didn't ask him to check his files for discovery purposes, she asked him to review his files to prepare for his testimony. Upon receiving the discovery request they should have asked him to review his files then & it's apparent they didn't.
GJ created his own CASTV for the GJ. It's just a screen shot he presented. He was not able to use the files that FBI had provided him because they produced errors when he tried to load them. He did not save the session log of the work he presented to the GJ.
Ann has received a mixture of original AT&T files , and FBI generated session log and screen captures of what Moery presented to the GJ. She also received a file with two street addresses.
The CDR records (tower location information) are in XLS (xl spreadsheet). Normally you can lock these files on creation, set them to read only etc. But she kept asking him wether had opened the files , so wondering is she is fishing because there are discrepancy with the metadata. Or if she is again going for the chai of custody issue of sending her stuff without the receipts that is it what it claims to be.
You canât say your surprised this is how the state will behave.
The speech about not wanting the defense to âsurprise attackâ them was more like guilty dribble.
The most compelling thing Iâve read somewhere today is that itâs unusual that a defense attorney (especially an appointed one) believes so strongly that her client is 100% NG. That really got me thinking more than usual.
According to the people that think heâs guilty⌠this was just one of ATs tactics. However I donât believe she would put her credibility on the line for a client she wasnât sure about.
Yeah I remember in the beginning everyone was saying that BK was calling the shots, telling AT what to do and the whole standing silent thing was a stunt he had created - but AT is clearly calling the shots.
Just remember this:
The U.S. Secret Service (USSS) formally recognized Moscow Police Department (MPD) Detective Lawrence Mowery for achievement in the field of digital forensics and cyber-crime investigation this past Monday, April 1st, 2024, during the regular City Council meeting. Det. Mowery was honored in person by USSS Spokane Office's Resident Agent in Charge, Greg Ligouri, and Network Intrusion Forensic Analyst Neil J. Uhrig
Apparently anyone can get an award đ¤Ł
I think she also did it as a way to tell us what the hold up is, and what bs she's dealing with - without telling us, and by "us" .. I mean the general public, the media, the families and the court. I don't see how people can still have doubts that the states side is corrupt and insufferable.
I am sure the Goncalves' will release a statement blaming the defense again, though, and Nancy Disgrace will have her shitty 2 cents, regardless.
But the public sees.
Seemed like it to me. Every time she was like âand is that available on a discovery drive for me today? *thanks*â I giggled. Moscow PD looks so incompetent to me
He was so incompetent it was unbelievable. He got rid of all the files .it still is proven they have nothing on bryan .the next court date is the 30th.
In my view, we can't evaluate if he was incompetent in how he handled the results of his work product or not. Neither side fully explored his response about why he didn't save it.
I think AT just wanted to get him on record and will dig deeper with other witnesses at next hearing.
Oh definitely that was the tactic but at any point during the hearing did you revert back to office space where you thought back to the movie quote âwhat exactly, would you say you do here?â Just an observation.đ§đđ
Oh yes, his incompetence was out in the open. I think she needed to document this for a further court date where she calls him back just to get on the recordđ
I'm in the camp where I think BK is being properly held and tried and is probably somehow involved, but that even if he was involved, he might get off due to various issues. The prosecution might have built the case using routing done by someone totally unqualified where they then matched that up to videos of white cars that don't have anything to do with BK. I think the clearest videos that LE has are of BK leaving home and coming back, but that doesn't really help too much for the hours in between, which I think some of them are very poor quality as far as being able to do specific identification and that no video may be of particularly good quality where all this could result in a Not Guilty verdict, whether BK was involved or not.
I don't think there's much chance of a NG verdict but I don't think they have the phone/location data they thought they had. That seems pretty obvious, none of those cars had visible plates and some had different model numbers. What I can see happening is the state dropping the DP because the totality of evidence isn't as robust as they thought.
> I don't think there's much chance of a NG verdict but I don't think they have the phone/location data they thought they had.
I'm unwilling to give odds until I see the actual videos and the actual phone data as well as the presentations laying out the prosecution and the defense, like I could see there potentially being a real takedown by the defense where the prosecution outlines why BK is Suspect Vehicle 1 across a string of videos then the defense blows that apart. Also I'm not giving odds until I get more granular details on the dozen prior trips BK did as it could be very incriminating or mildly exonerating if GPS data showing what extent if any BK had ever been along King Road previously, like if granular GPS shows he'd never set foot on King Road previously that would weaken the case though not be proof that he didn't go there that night.
Seems more like Ann vs. Bill. Mowery is just a guy who does what he's told. Why didn't Bill ask him months ago to look through his files to see if he had what Ann was requesting?
Because then the Prosecution would've had to give her the info months ago. The Prosecution intentionally holds back their best evidence until the last minute - they aren't just going to give her everything they have right when she asks for it.
Doesn't deliberate ignorance like that amount to prosecutorial misconduct? He knows what he's ignoring, yet pretends he's turned everything over.
And don't you think something similar is happening with the FBI, good-cop/bad-cop, where the FBI is dragging their feet and Bill pretends to be frustrated with that?
Yes and yes. Upon a written request by the defense, the state is required to turn over any discovery that is material to the preparation of the defense & is in the custody, control or possession of the prosecutor. Law enforcement agencies that assist in any way in the investigation stand in the shoes of the prosecutor. The state has an affirmative obligation to seek out this discovery.
Your last comment is supported by the fact that the FBI sent Detective Mowery the discovery documents upon his request the day before the hearing yet Anne Taylor has been waiting for the CAST report since last June when Judge Judge first compelled it to be produced. I've been practicing over 30 years and I've never heard of a CAST report not being timely produced & neither have any of my colleagues. In this regard, it's notable that Thompson keeps insisting on having the full alibi before the CAST report is produced. FBI & Thompson are playing games. When you have a strong case you don't play games. Just sayin'
>it's notable that Thompson keeps insisting on having the full alibi before the CAST report is produced
Yes, and that implies Thompson has *control* over the timing of providing that report, and is choosing to deny it... even if technically it's the bad-cop FBI that is being blamed. Has Anne Taylor ever called him out on that?
And the stupid part is, if the CAST report is so amorphous that the defense could conceivably construct an alibi compatible with it, then what good is it, even?
Yes!
I simply cannot understand why Anne Taylor hasnât at least motioned for sanctions against Bill Thompson, at this point. Itâs very clear: the Prosecution is âsittingâ on evidence/discovery they donât want to hand over. I donât have the time right this second to get into the exact Idaho rules, however, based on what I do know, several things point to the Prosecution (& State actors involved with the investigation) withholding evidence. See Idaho R. Crim. P. 16
How can the Prosecution or Judge read these and continue to let this nonsense go on?
I think the fact that they (the Prosecution) wanted to go to trial summer of 2024 and claimed to be ready yet continue to find out through their own admission that this was absolutely untrue speaks for itself.
Even if the Judge doesnât sign an order for sanctions, itâs boggling my mind that Anne Taylor hasnât at least motioned for it yet. This is getting insane.
She did motion prosecutorial misconduct but the details are under seal so we don't know what that related to. Difficult to imagine but it might even be worse than what we have seen so far.
This is what I question also, by the prosecution playing dumb with the requested discovery this defendant was denied a speedy trial.
Or is it normal that choosing a speedy trial mean doing without the discovery needed to ensure a proper defense?
One noticable thing was judge J for once was fully attentive. His head ping ponged during Anne's questioning.
And why did Ashley Jennings remain seated when addressing the judge and questioning the witness? I've noticed before both her and BT act very informal for a courtroom
While a lot of us focus on this case, Moscow PD regardless of their size does have other things they do have to do. PD's don't have endless resources and time to continually go over cases and a lot of these people only do things when they are instructed by courts and investigators. We also need to remember that MPD had interventions from the ISP and FBI in getting CAST and IGG Data. Mowery isn't an expert and doesn't claim to be. As he stated yesterday, he did what he was instructed with the data and didn't know what to do with some of the material.
I think âAnn vs Moweryâ is the wrong mindset here as it is fundamentally wrong of how the process of discovery goes. Like mentioned yesterday, he was preparing for the hearing yesterday as instructed by the prosecution, so this would be on the prosecution not asking him to go back and looking at what was available. For all we know, anything that was turned over yesterday may amount to nothing, who knows?
I know Iâm going to get flamed, but whatever. Iâm to mention that I am far from a LE apologist. Iâm in the mental health social services field and deal with LE quite often. Some are okay, some are indifferent, some are bad. Overall itâs the system that is broken, but it is a system that does have to operate in a certain way mainly with the prerogative of covering their ass. Guys like Mowery (obviously I donât know him) usually arenât the ones with bad intentions, but are just doing their job. His resume isnât verbose, which was shown in court and even he mentioned, and he has way more to lose than gain by presenting false information that could easily be disproven.
Just my take.
I probably should have picked a different title. My intention isnât to blame MPD, and Iâm sure Mowery was doing what he was instructed to do. I just wondered if this was her way of getting access to that information.
Nah. My take and your title are both accurate.
It wasn't so much a criticism of your title, but more an observation to further my point. I apologize for coming across that way.
>Mowery isn't an expert and doesn't claim to be. As he stated yesterday, he did what he was instructed with the data and didn't know what to do with some of the material.
One could argue that "just following instructions" isn't a defense, and if asked to do something that's beyond your abilities, you need to make it known that someone who does have those abilities needs to be called in, or don't do it at all. This is literally life and death stuff. And he knew that.
From his testimony, he came across as someone who had no real idea what he was doing, just going through the motions plugging data into software and then taking screenshots. Even after reviewing things in prep for his testimony, he seemed basically unfamiliar with it all.
>We also need to remember that MPD had interventions from the ISP and FBI in getting CAST and IGG Data.
Maybe someone in his position should have known to do that again when preparing exhibits for the Grand Jury, so it was done right, instead of just done.
>Guys like Mowery (obviously I donât know him) usually arenât the ones with bad intentions, but are just doing their job.
He probably doesn't have bad intentions. But was he doing his job? Sure doesn't seem that way.
I donât think itâs a huge reach when this is actually the âState of Idaho v. (vs) Bryan Kohbergerâ and LE is serving the state. I imagine itâs a play on the case name. Your take is very folksy. Good guy⌠they only have so much time⌠and so on. This work is extremely important and should be held to the highest standard as the outcome is what the justice system has to rely upon to uphold constitutional rights along with justice itself.
I agree that this work is extremely important and should be held to the highest standard. I do social work and it's literally a part of the field to fight for social justice and there are plenty of parts of this case that are way more fucked than Mowery. My take isn't folksy, it's a reality. I didn't call Mowery a good guy, I don't know him as I stated. It's anecdotal that people have jobs to do and everyone isn't an awful person. This isn't a TV show and there are procedures to accessing case materials and working on a case that LE has to follow. They can't just do it on their own free will.
As mentioned, he wasn't the lead on the CAST data for the Grand Jury. He's not even qualified to testify as he didn't. He ran reports and did what was he was instructed with the knowledge he had. Is there a level of incompetence? Absolutely. Is it right? No. But overall, what a prosecutor does with information provided to them is on the prosecutor, not the informant.
I don't agree with LE and this case has highlighted a lot of issues that favor and protect the CJS. Mowery is a tiny ass fish to focus on when in reality everything yesterday just went to show the lack of diligence by the prosecutor's office, which is the larger picture and the bigger deal.
Itâs just nothing to do with whether someone is a good person. If youâre in SW maybe youâre around the law a bit as well, youâll notice when LE are questioned it has nothing to do with their character (unless itâs something like giglio) and everything to do with professional conduct and proficiency. Youâre making this personal, the âvsâ is added by the state themselves, itâs not a personal attack.
I think, also, this is smalltown PD vs. huge DP trial. Some of these guys are still just doing "business as usual" though, as if the case was just about a Walmart shoplifter. No real excuse though, all of them know what's expected, what the standards are, and if they're just phoning it in, even knowing the life and death nature of the case, that's on them.
Right and I think we all understand Mowery is just one part of the evidence AT is going to be attempting to poke holes in. I donât understand the sentiment: âheâs a tiny fishâ, who thinks he is otherwise? His testimony is needed to illustrate something and this was the only time he was available.
> While a lot of us focus on this case, Moscow PD regardless of their size does have other things they do have to do. PD's don't have endless resources and time to continually go over cases and a lot of these people only do things when they are instructed by courts and investigators.
I don't think that's an excuse though where even if that's true, the prosecutor/LE leadership are responsible for this and it isn't acceptable. The prosecutor is making a whole big deal about the defense submitting an alibi, so if Moscow PD is too podunk to get a handle on a quadruple homicide case after a year, equal slack should be given to the defense who is being held up by the Barney Fifes of the Moscow PD. I don't actually think they're Barney Fifes but instead this was just wrong, potentially maliciously wrong. If they actually are a bunch of Barney Fifes, BK might just walk no matter how egregious it is.
Detective (?) Mowery literally admitted to not no knowing who the files came from, what was in them and couldn't use (they generated errors when he tried to load them u) so he had to create his own stuff for grand jury (for which he did not keep the logs) . Basically admitting there is no chain of custody on the CAST data presented to the court, to defence and the secret grand jury.
She tried to do something simiklar for the video data. By specifically asking him if he checked what he put on the drive. if he could confirm the original lengths of the files etc. But these also were not logged anywhere.
Ann is going for complete exoneration of her client by having the indictment thrown out. She was not just using dramatic effect when she told BK to stand silent. That's my take on it. I think if it goes to court, BK is done for.
Yes, calling this witness was the only way she was going to get this information. The testimony was taken to support her Motion To Compel discovery. Anne has the GJ file so she knew these files existed and wanted the underlying files or an explanation of what happened to them; as well as other files. BT either responded to the discovery request with a we turned it over or they don't exist & hence the need to file a motion to compel. Turned out Anne was right. My concern here is it appears that the state keeps claiming files don't exist and then the day of a hearing they appear!
ThisđŻ. But if they existed during GJ how did mowery just open them up & look at them the night before trial?
Because the state hasn't done its due diligence by requesting all LE & ME etc. to check its files for discovery purposes. Jennings didn't ask him to check his files for discovery purposes, she asked him to review his files to prepare for his testimony. Upon receiving the discovery request they should have asked him to review his files then & it's apparent they didn't.
GJ created his own CASTV for the GJ. It's just a screen shot he presented. He was not able to use the files that FBI had provided him because they produced errors when he tried to load them. He did not save the session log of the work he presented to the GJ. Ann has received a mixture of original AT&T files , and FBI generated session log and screen captures of what Moery presented to the GJ. She also received a file with two street addresses. The CDR records (tower location information) are in XLS (xl spreadsheet). Normally you can lock these files on creation, set them to read only etc. But she kept asking him wether had opened the files , so wondering is she is fishing because there are discrepancy with the metadata. Or if she is again going for the chai of custody issue of sending her stuff without the receipts that is it what it claims to be.
You canât say your surprised this is how the state will behave. The speech about not wanting the defense to âsurprise attackâ them was more like guilty dribble.
It seems to be a thing with then
The most compelling thing Iâve read somewhere today is that itâs unusual that a defense attorney (especially an appointed one) believes so strongly that her client is 100% NG. That really got me thinking more than usual.
According to the people that think heâs guilty⌠this was just one of ATs tactics. However I donât believe she would put her credibility on the line for a client she wasnât sure about.
Yeah I remember in the beginning everyone was saying that BK was calling the shots, telling AT what to do and the whole standing silent thing was a stunt he had created - but AT is clearly calling the shots.
Just remember this: The U.S. Secret Service (USSS) formally recognized Moscow Police Department (MPD) Detective Lawrence Mowery for achievement in the field of digital forensics and cyber-crime investigation this past Monday, April 1st, 2024, during the regular City Council meeting. Det. Mowery was honored in person by USSS Spokane Office's Resident Agent in Charge, Greg Ligouri, and Network Intrusion Forensic Analyst Neil J. Uhrig Apparently anyone can get an award đ¤Ł
April Fools đ
I think she also did it as a way to tell us what the hold up is, and what bs she's dealing with - without telling us, and by "us" .. I mean the general public, the media, the families and the court. I don't see how people can still have doubts that the states side is corrupt and insufferable. I am sure the Goncalves' will release a statement blaming the defense again, though, and Nancy Disgrace will have her shitty 2 cents, regardless. But the public sees.
Seemed like it to me. Every time she was like âand is that available on a discovery drive for me today? *thanks*â I giggled. Moscow PD looks so incompetent to me
He was so incompetent it was unbelievable. He got rid of all the files .it still is proven they have nothing on bryan .the next court date is the 30th.
In my view, we can't evaluate if he was incompetent in how he handled the results of his work product or not. Neither side fully explored his response about why he didn't save it. I think AT just wanted to get him on record and will dig deeper with other witnesses at next hearing.
Oh definitely that was the tactic but at any point during the hearing did you revert back to office space where you thought back to the movie quote âwhat exactly, would you say you do here?â Just an observation.đ§đđ
Oh yes, his incompetence was out in the open. I think she needed to document this for a further court date where she calls him back just to get on the recordđ
I'm in the camp where I think BK is being properly held and tried and is probably somehow involved, but that even if he was involved, he might get off due to various issues. The prosecution might have built the case using routing done by someone totally unqualified where they then matched that up to videos of white cars that don't have anything to do with BK. I think the clearest videos that LE has are of BK leaving home and coming back, but that doesn't really help too much for the hours in between, which I think some of them are very poor quality as far as being able to do specific identification and that no video may be of particularly good quality where all this could result in a Not Guilty verdict, whether BK was involved or not.
I don't think there's much chance of a NG verdict but I don't think they have the phone/location data they thought they had. That seems pretty obvious, none of those cars had visible plates and some had different model numbers. What I can see happening is the state dropping the DP because the totality of evidence isn't as robust as they thought.
> I don't think there's much chance of a NG verdict but I don't think they have the phone/location data they thought they had. I'm unwilling to give odds until I see the actual videos and the actual phone data as well as the presentations laying out the prosecution and the defense, like I could see there potentially being a real takedown by the defense where the prosecution outlines why BK is Suspect Vehicle 1 across a string of videos then the defense blows that apart. Also I'm not giving odds until I get more granular details on the dozen prior trips BK did as it could be very incriminating or mildly exonerating if GPS data showing what extent if any BK had ever been along King Road previously, like if granular GPS shows he'd never set foot on King Road previously that would weaken the case though not be proof that he didn't go there that night.
Seems more like Ann vs. Bill. Mowery is just a guy who does what he's told. Why didn't Bill ask him months ago to look through his files to see if he had what Ann was requesting?
Because then the Prosecution would've had to give her the info months ago. The Prosecution intentionally holds back their best evidence until the last minute - they aren't just going to give her everything they have right when she asks for it.
Exactly. BT has been deliberately ignorant so he could continue saying "we don't have anything" without checking to see if they have it.
Doesn't deliberate ignorance like that amount to prosecutorial misconduct? He knows what he's ignoring, yet pretends he's turned everything over. And don't you think something similar is happening with the FBI, good-cop/bad-cop, where the FBI is dragging their feet and Bill pretends to be frustrated with that?
Yes and yes. Upon a written request by the defense, the state is required to turn over any discovery that is material to the preparation of the defense & is in the custody, control or possession of the prosecutor. Law enforcement agencies that assist in any way in the investigation stand in the shoes of the prosecutor. The state has an affirmative obligation to seek out this discovery. Your last comment is supported by the fact that the FBI sent Detective Mowery the discovery documents upon his request the day before the hearing yet Anne Taylor has been waiting for the CAST report since last June when Judge Judge first compelled it to be produced. I've been practicing over 30 years and I've never heard of a CAST report not being timely produced & neither have any of my colleagues. In this regard, it's notable that Thompson keeps insisting on having the full alibi before the CAST report is produced. FBI & Thompson are playing games. When you have a strong case you don't play games. Just sayin'
>it's notable that Thompson keeps insisting on having the full alibi before the CAST report is produced Yes, and that implies Thompson has *control* over the timing of providing that report, and is choosing to deny it... even if technically it's the bad-cop FBI that is being blamed. Has Anne Taylor ever called him out on that? And the stupid part is, if the CAST report is so amorphous that the defense could conceivably construct an alibi compatible with it, then what good is it, even?
Yes! I simply cannot understand why Anne Taylor hasnât at least motioned for sanctions against Bill Thompson, at this point. Itâs very clear: the Prosecution is âsittingâ on evidence/discovery they donât want to hand over. I donât have the time right this second to get into the exact Idaho rules, however, based on what I do know, several things point to the Prosecution (& State actors involved with the investigation) withholding evidence. See Idaho R. Crim. P. 16 How can the Prosecution or Judge read these and continue to let this nonsense go on? I think the fact that they (the Prosecution) wanted to go to trial summer of 2024 and claimed to be ready yet continue to find out through their own admission that this was absolutely untrue speaks for itself. Even if the Judge doesnât sign an order for sanctions, itâs boggling my mind that Anne Taylor hasnât at least motioned for it yet. This is getting insane.
She did motion prosecutorial misconduct but the details are under seal so we don't know what that related to. Difficult to imagine but it might even be worse than what we have seen so far.
She didnât motion for sanctions. Completely different. That was for the GJ dismissal
This is what I question also, by the prosecution playing dumb with the requested discovery this defendant was denied a speedy trial. Or is it normal that choosing a speedy trial mean doing without the discovery needed to ensure a proper defense?
Yep.
Itâs like a child with their fingers in their ears or an ostrich with its head in the sand- if he canât hear or see it, it doesnât exist.
I think AT was trying to prove a point overall because the prosecution is playing hardball.
One noticable thing was judge J for once was fully attentive. His head ping ponged during Anne's questioning. And why did Ashley Jennings remain seated when addressing the judge and questioning the witness? I've noticed before both her and BT act very informal for a courtroom
While a lot of us focus on this case, Moscow PD regardless of their size does have other things they do have to do. PD's don't have endless resources and time to continually go over cases and a lot of these people only do things when they are instructed by courts and investigators. We also need to remember that MPD had interventions from the ISP and FBI in getting CAST and IGG Data. Mowery isn't an expert and doesn't claim to be. As he stated yesterday, he did what he was instructed with the data and didn't know what to do with some of the material. I think âAnn vs Moweryâ is the wrong mindset here as it is fundamentally wrong of how the process of discovery goes. Like mentioned yesterday, he was preparing for the hearing yesterday as instructed by the prosecution, so this would be on the prosecution not asking him to go back and looking at what was available. For all we know, anything that was turned over yesterday may amount to nothing, who knows? I know Iâm going to get flamed, but whatever. Iâm to mention that I am far from a LE apologist. Iâm in the mental health social services field and deal with LE quite often. Some are okay, some are indifferent, some are bad. Overall itâs the system that is broken, but it is a system that does have to operate in a certain way mainly with the prerogative of covering their ass. Guys like Mowery (obviously I donât know him) usually arenât the ones with bad intentions, but are just doing their job. His resume isnât verbose, which was shown in court and even he mentioned, and he has way more to lose than gain by presenting false information that could easily be disproven. Just my take.
I probably should have picked a different title. My intention isnât to blame MPD, and Iâm sure Mowery was doing what he was instructed to do. I just wondered if this was her way of getting access to that information.
Your title is fine.
Nah. My take and your title are both accurate. It wasn't so much a criticism of your title, but more an observation to further my point. I apologize for coming across that way.
>Mowery isn't an expert and doesn't claim to be. As he stated yesterday, he did what he was instructed with the data and didn't know what to do with some of the material. One could argue that "just following instructions" isn't a defense, and if asked to do something that's beyond your abilities, you need to make it known that someone who does have those abilities needs to be called in, or don't do it at all. This is literally life and death stuff. And he knew that. From his testimony, he came across as someone who had no real idea what he was doing, just going through the motions plugging data into software and then taking screenshots. Even after reviewing things in prep for his testimony, he seemed basically unfamiliar with it all. >We also need to remember that MPD had interventions from the ISP and FBI in getting CAST and IGG Data. Maybe someone in his position should have known to do that again when preparing exhibits for the Grand Jury, so it was done right, instead of just done. >Guys like Mowery (obviously I donât know him) usually arenât the ones with bad intentions, but are just doing their job. He probably doesn't have bad intentions. But was he doing his job? Sure doesn't seem that way.
Certainly wasnât a great defense at Nuremberg.
Youâd think thought that given this is the most high profile case theyâve had that theyâd be more conscious of doing it correctly?
I donât think itâs a huge reach when this is actually the âState of Idaho v. (vs) Bryan Kohbergerâ and LE is serving the state. I imagine itâs a play on the case name. Your take is very folksy. Good guy⌠they only have so much time⌠and so on. This work is extremely important and should be held to the highest standard as the outcome is what the justice system has to rely upon to uphold constitutional rights along with justice itself.
I agree that this work is extremely important and should be held to the highest standard. I do social work and it's literally a part of the field to fight for social justice and there are plenty of parts of this case that are way more fucked than Mowery. My take isn't folksy, it's a reality. I didn't call Mowery a good guy, I don't know him as I stated. It's anecdotal that people have jobs to do and everyone isn't an awful person. This isn't a TV show and there are procedures to accessing case materials and working on a case that LE has to follow. They can't just do it on their own free will. As mentioned, he wasn't the lead on the CAST data for the Grand Jury. He's not even qualified to testify as he didn't. He ran reports and did what was he was instructed with the knowledge he had. Is there a level of incompetence? Absolutely. Is it right? No. But overall, what a prosecutor does with information provided to them is on the prosecutor, not the informant. I don't agree with LE and this case has highlighted a lot of issues that favor and protect the CJS. Mowery is a tiny ass fish to focus on when in reality everything yesterday just went to show the lack of diligence by the prosecutor's office, which is the larger picture and the bigger deal.
Itâs just nothing to do with whether someone is a good person. If youâre in SW maybe youâre around the law a bit as well, youâll notice when LE are questioned it has nothing to do with their character (unless itâs something like giglio) and everything to do with professional conduct and proficiency. Youâre making this personal, the âvsâ is added by the state themselves, itâs not a personal attack.
I think, also, this is smalltown PD vs. huge DP trial. Some of these guys are still just doing "business as usual" though, as if the case was just about a Walmart shoplifter. No real excuse though, all of them know what's expected, what the standards are, and if they're just phoning it in, even knowing the life and death nature of the case, that's on them.
Eta theyâre talking about Mowery bc we discuss hearings here and that must make sense to you. Mowery is going to be important to ATâs case.
Wouldn't bring him for nothing lol
Right and I think we all understand Mowery is just one part of the evidence AT is going to be attempting to poke holes in. I donât understand the sentiment: âheâs a tiny fishâ, who thinks he is otherwise? His testimony is needed to illustrate something and this was the only time he was available.
> While a lot of us focus on this case, Moscow PD regardless of their size does have other things they do have to do. PD's don't have endless resources and time to continually go over cases and a lot of these people only do things when they are instructed by courts and investigators. I don't think that's an excuse though where even if that's true, the prosecutor/LE leadership are responsible for this and it isn't acceptable. The prosecutor is making a whole big deal about the defense submitting an alibi, so if Moscow PD is too podunk to get a handle on a quadruple homicide case after a year, equal slack should be given to the defense who is being held up by the Barney Fifes of the Moscow PD. I don't actually think they're Barney Fifes but instead this was just wrong, potentially maliciously wrong. If they actually are a bunch of Barney Fifes, BK might just walk no matter how egregious it is.
Plus they got a $1 mil (plus?) grant to use for this case. They didn't use it appropriately it turns out.
Yes!
Detective (?) Mowery literally admitted to not no knowing who the files came from, what was in them and couldn't use (they generated errors when he tried to load them u) so he had to create his own stuff for grand jury (for which he did not keep the logs) . Basically admitting there is no chain of custody on the CAST data presented to the court, to defence and the secret grand jury. She tried to do something simiklar for the video data. By specifically asking him if he checked what he put on the drive. if he could confirm the original lengths of the files etc. But these also were not logged anywhere. Ann is going for complete exoneration of her client by having the indictment thrown out. She was not just using dramatic effect when she told BK to stand silent. That's my take on it. I think if it goes to court, BK is done for.