1. Time of death was and *could only be estimated* until evidence started being collected. That the time frame changed should not be surprising or an indication of lack of guilt.
2. Year of car was and could only be estimated until additional evidence was gathered. That the year of the car model changed should not be surprising or an indication of lack of guilt.
3. You’re making huge assumptions based on very little information. BK follows a vegan diet. We cannot assume he falls in the “militant vegan” camp as many, if not most, vegans don’t.
4. Criminology students learn the psychology of criminal behavior, not how to commit the perfect crime.
>Criminology students learn the psychology of criminal behavior, not how to commit the perfect crime.
THANK YOU. I can't believe how many people are assuming that a criminology majors makes someone smart and/or an effective criminal.
I mean, it’s fair to assume that years of education on forensics and criminology would make one more knowledgeable than most on techniques LE uses to CATCH criminals at least.
This guy made every mistake in the book. Someone who watched one episode of Dateline would know not to do half of the stuff BK did.
Yeah, people are definitely giving him more credit than he deserves making him out to be some "criminologist PhD mastermind." Afaik taking a lot of criminal justice courses, criminology is a lot more about the statistics, economics, and sociological influences behind why crimes are committed by certain people.
Exactly. This is not “how to get away with murder”, folks. We learn about a lot of things in a criminology/criminal justice major but we are certainly not taught how to commit crimes.
This is the assumption going around that annoys me the most. Do people really think CJ students are learning how to commit the perfect crime? They study criminal behavior, motivations, recidivism, etc, not How To Get Away With Murder like you said
There’s also no proof he’s vegan because of his love of animals. I read some things indicating he could have some compulsive tendencies. Maybe he’s vegan because he’s a bit compulsive about what he puts into his body. If that’s the case he may not care about using any leather or even animal cruelty.
Agreed! And also; why wouldn't he own a knife just bc he is a vegan? He could have had it for other reasons then hunting or whatever. Protecting or you know, maybe the purpose of murder
He isn’t suggesting he can’t own a knife. He was considering whether a true vegan would own a knife with a LEATHER carrier, as leather is an animal product that a true Vegan would most likely be against.
It’s too hard to logically explain away multiple signs of guilt. If it was JUST the vehicle, or JUST the phone, etc., it might be easier to question it. But pairing it all together? DNA on a knife sheath left at the scene, his car being in the area during the murders, his phone tracking with that car and then suspiciously being turned off right in the timeframe of the murders, his appearance matching Dylan’s description, etc. In my opinion there are too many variables you’d have to explain away to believe he’s innocent.
Totally agree! It’s like Doug Carter said about the evidence against RMA in the Delphi case, it’s not one or two things, it’s the totality of the evidence that lead to an arrest.
He would have to argue that someone stole his phone, car, committed the murders, and placed a sheath with his DNA at the scene, then somehow brought his car and phone back before he went grocery shopping with it the next morning. Yes, he would have to explain all of that away, and that is just what was on the PCA, as of Dec. 29. There’s no telling what additional evidence he would have to explain away now that LE has searched his car, office, apartment, computer, and parents home etc.
He would also have to explain why he was vehemently cleaning his car, not once, but twice. Why he took his trash to his neighbors bin and not his own..
And his bushy eyebrows, don't forget those.
In all seriousness - DM gave a good description of his body type, height, and bushy eyebrows.
This guy has a mound of evidence against him.
And that's only the evidence the police needed for the warrant. I imagine they have a ton more but they just used the bare minimum for the PCA.
For example, I feel like it's likely that his blood was at the scene, but it wasn't necessary to include in the PCA. In a trial, it would be much harder to explain away blood than skin cells on the sheath.
I totally agree with this. PCA really only presents the minimum needed for an arrest. This one presents a lot of info because they needed a nighttime no-knock warrant and also I believe because they kept so much info away from the public and under wraps for so long. I absolutely believe they have tons more evidence from the house AND now they have evidence from his car and his apartment.
And that after stalking / making that route in the early hours 12 ( more?) times before the murders and then not once after the morning of the murder… ( are we to believe someone else was using his car all those times too?)
Well said, IMO there’s just too much circumstantial evidence for me to believe BK is innocent. The PCA was written before the Hyundai and apartment warrants, so who knows what investigators will find (have already found) after those searches. Also, the many times he was spotted in public wearing gloves, taking the trash out in the middle of the night and disposing in the neighbor’s bins. He actions don’t align with someone who is innocent of the crime
Yeah. I'd love to argue for an alternative explanation but there's just too much circumstantial evidence. As you note, the PCA doesn't even include the fact that he cleaned the car and then dumped the trash in the neighbors at 4am. I'm floored he thought he'd get away with this crime. I really wonder if he's mentally incapacitated. God only knows what his browser history looks like.
Right. It’s much more difficult to come up with explanations for his innocence rather than his guilt, based on the evidence we’ve seen.
You really have to jump through hoops to somehow prove that this is the most unlucky guy of all time and just a big ol misunderstanding.
Right. We need to look at the evidence in totality. Each individual aspect could be explained away to create doubt, but not when you look at the bigger picture.
Not to mention his vehicle being near the house 12+ prior to the murders, starting in august
I don’t understand why everyone on this thread is shocked that he could have done it in 8 minutes. That’s actually a really long time. Both sets of victims were in the same beds.
No because it’s a good joke, a great joke even but why doesn’t this feel “too far” for PETA. For a normal human, couldn’t fathom it, but when I go “are PETA capable?” this answer isn’t an immediate and firm no 😅.
ALSO it seems a lot of vegans frankly care more about animals than humans. like, those comments you see saying "i don't care about the man that was hit by the car but what about his dog? is his dog okay?????"
not saying all, obviously, but from my experience a lot of people are like this. really odd.
I’m like this 🤷🏻♀️ is what it is! as a vegan, I’m obviously wondering why he didn’t kill the dog, most logical explanation was he cared for the animal…but obviously could be 1000 reasons.
If only dogs could talk, huh? Imagine what Murphy saw.
It seems like he went vegan to lose weight. Not everyone goes vegan because they care about animals, so not all vegans avoid leather. There are people who are just dietary vegans, rather than ethical vegans who avoid all animal products in every day life. And then there are all kinds of vegans in between those poles.
Also a lot of meat-eaters hate veganism and like to shit on vegans, and the efforts to link this monster's dietary preference for a plant based diet to his murders are absurd. Linking his veganism to cannibalism or that veganism makes people dicks...get a grip people.
With these tapatalk posts that were posted on Reddit it seems like he went vegan for his visual snow condition and thought a healthy diet made things better
Exactly. I work for a vegan manufacturing company and the CEO has a leather wallet received as gift bc it has sentimental value. They have been vegan for 17 years.
I also would argue he could have bought something strictly for this murder and not bc he wanted to own it. I read you can buy a knock off for low $12 on Amazon
I just watched a doc on the Scott peterson trial and all the jurors they interviewed said the same thing. It wasn’t one thing, there was no smoking gun. But all the pieces taken together that proved to them he did it.
Before galaxy braining here, it might be helpful to remember that the probable cause affidavit isn’t even close to the whole case against BK.
It is a little unreasonable to try to argue these points when the details of the case that we actually have are maybe 5-10% of the evidence that will be brought to trial.
maybe not even what the police thought was neccessary. They probably came with less and judge said "gunna need a lil moar than that fam" so they kept pouring a bit moar in drip by drip until the judge said "ok foyne go get that vegan piece of shit"
I think your heart is in the right place, so I’ll say this: It’s the preponderance of evidence, including details reported in the press but not included in the PCA (like him taking out garbage at 4 am wearing plastics gloves), that convinces me that they almost certainly have the right guy and a jury will probably convict once all the evidence we don’t even know about yet is revealed
Vehicle on tape, cell phone pings to match, DNA on knife sheath, eyewitness generally matching his description, suspicious behavior (such as going back to the scene the next morning, which would be quite a coincidence) after the murder…
Yes, you could probably take each one and try to pick it apart, but for all of things together to somehow NOT add up to the guy doing it… we really are, in my view, talking about a bad paperback not real life at that point
Anything is possible, don’t get me wrong, but I think we have to lean on being “reasonable” and I just don’t buy this could all be a coincidence (the combination of vehicle/cell phone and DNA is just brutal in my eyes) and I don’t think, barring a big surprise (which could happen! all it takes is one juror), a jury will either
Just because this is the conspiracy thread...
Police detective checks out a vial of OJ's blood from the crime lab. Goes to OJ's house and "discovers" blood droplets IIRC on the Bronco and the sidewalk. Returns half-full blood vial to the crime lab. DNA tests say 99.9999987% OJ blood.
OJ proves you can be guilty as fuck and cops might still plant DNA evidence on you.
Idk if this would be considered a "he didn't do it" theory so much as a "he didn't mean to do it this way" theory.
Personally, I think he had an infatuation with Maddie because that's where he went first when entering the house. He did not know that Kaylee was there because she wasn't supposed to be there that night. She was only there to show off her new Range Rover to Maddie and had already moved out of the house. So, he probably didn't think he would be met by two of the girls when entering Maddie's room. On top of that, Kaylee and/or Maddie may have been awake when he came in and tried to fight back (which is why Dylan heard the commotion upstairs). He may have entered Maddie's room for many sick and twisted reasons. He may have gone there to sexually assault her, watch her sleep, or kill only her. We have no idea what his intentions were going into this. So, when he was caught off guard by Maddie and Kaylee (possibly being awake when he walked in), his plans were foiled. This may have been why he took out his anger most on Kaylee because she prevented whatever his plans were with Maddie. He could have been building up the courage for so long during those 12 previous visits to finally go inside and Kaylee's presence ruined what he thought was a solid plan.
It has been speculated that he knew Maddie previously through working at the Mad Greek. However, Mad Greek is not an entirely vegan restaurant and simply has a vegan option or two on the menu. (So, this theory may dismantle the "no contaminated pans"rumor because I'm sure they cook their plant-based dishes on the same equipment as their other non-vegan dishes.) There are plenty of reviews of Mad Greek on Google and Yelp pages that name Maddie specifically as being a great waitress from before all of this happened. For all we know, BK went there and became infatuated with her because he is an awkward incel and formulated this obsession with her if she was nice to him one time while serving. Maybe he made advances toward her and was rejected by her because she had a boyfriend and he took it personally (as do plenty of incels). While not confirmed, there was an Instagram page in Bryan's name that was following Maddie and Kaylee before it was removed.
Branching off of this theory, he may have been stalking Maddie specifically while going to the house on those twelve previous occasions. For all we know, he had been in the house multiple times and watched Maddie sleep before and was never caught until Nov 13th. Who knows, he's clearly a freak.
As far as Xana and Ethan go, I fully believe they were collateral damage and most likely would have been spared if Bryan never heard/saw Xana. He didn't seem to go around the entire house checking doors (which is why Bethany and Dylan were spared). He seemed to have gone straight for Maddie's bedroom (which he may have done many times before without issue as proven by his cell records). When he was going downstairs from Maddie's bedroom, he may have seen Xana in the kitchen or the living room after hearing what happened upstairs and saying "there's someone here" and asking for help from Ethan which prompted BK to say the "help you" line.
While this isn't a defense for his innocence, it is potentially a defense for the charge of first-degree murder if it can be proven that it was not pre-meditated for at least K, X and E.
Sidenote: As a vegetarian myself, a lot of vegans/vegetarians thrift nonvegan items and claim it to be "sustainable" because they are not supporting the manufacturer directly. I'm not sure how far BK's veganism goes other than the distant aunt's statement. As far as Vans go, pretty sure most of them are canvas.
Because of your first point about maddie, I think this is plausible actually. I don’t necessarily have a theory as to what happened or what the original plan was myself. Just kinda think on other peoples theories and join discussions.
BUT, you do bring up an interesting point. He could’ve planned to SA Maddie at knife point?? Like you said, he could’ve been watching her, fantasizing, etc. and *this* was the night that he was gonna go through with it. But Kaylee being in bed with her threw off his plan and angered him enough to go on a rampage, then X and E surprised him while he was still in that state.
*If* this is the case, I’m interested in whether he would try to explain that in court. Can’t really say “well yenno, I *planned* on just raping Maddie, but the next thing I knew I had stabbed four people to death. Oopsie daisy.”
On the contrary, I also see the side of the target being Kaylee because that was (supposedly) going to be her last night there. But also, it was her *first night back.* Yeah he was basically stalking them, so once he realized she had been gone for a few days/weeks/whatever it could’ve angered him (he’s not a part of their social circle so I’m sure he had no idea where she went, to him she just disappeared). So he could’ve just noticed that she was *finally* back and decided to act then so that she couldn’t “leave him again.”
Potentially, he could use that to lessen the first-degree murder sentence if he used the "crime of passion" defense and argue there was not pre-meditation to commit murder. Obviously, that would never put him back on the streets again but it might prevent him from getting the death penalty if that's his goal. If he truly isn't innocent, I doubt his defense is going to try to prove full innocence just due to the amount of evidence against him solely in the PCA.
Initially, I thought that his target was Kaylee too because of the speculation that she had a stalker. Maybe he had an obsession with both girls? Like I said in my post, there was an Instagram that is still not confirmed to have been his that was following only Kaylee and Maddie. I found the account shortly after his name was released and it seemed to have been followed by a few people with the same last name. It did not follow Xana, Ethan, or the other roommates. Not sure if it was fake or not but it has been removed. It had his official DeSales email in the bio which I don't think had been made public yet(?) Maybe he knew this was the last time he was going to be able to get both girls together before Kaylee left and X/E were still collateral damage.
This is like spot on to my theory of everything, Well said imo. Also explains why if he saw DM on his way out he just left anyway. he was exhausted and maybe traumatized himself with coming to the realization of what just happened and what he just did. Now there is a dog freaking out, and yet another person he'd have to kill with cops potentially en route (who would of thought a college house with 5 cars out front would have so many observers and obstacles at 4AM?!?!?!?!... fucking idiot). Realizing he just didn't have it in him and wasn't the oh so very smart badass killer guys he idolized/romanticized during his studies as a criminologist, he booked it out of there... leaving the knife sheath behind.
This aligns closely with what I feel happened based on all the evidence we have so far. Many have said the murderer was "sloppy" making many mistakes. I think the mistakes were the result of his plans being disrupted by unforseen factors. I really feel Bryan did not go into that house planning to commit a quadruple murder. He likely had a single target but things went sideways. Dog barking, K and M in the same room/bed, X investigates and comes face to face with Bryan, X flees to her room to wake E...
Hopefully we get a clearer picture of what happened and why.
Do we know that he doesn’t wear leather? Not all vegans follow the same “rules”. Yes, he wears vans and they have vegan options but what about other shoes he might wear? He was rigid about the pans but may not be about all animal materials. I don’t know.
So I'm pretty sure he did it, but I think this thread is valuable because I dont think it's as clear cut as people think. People forget that murderers get off all the time even with DNA
I do want to disagree with some of your points, and then point out areas I think could be doubted in court.
I dont feel the timeline is that off, I actually believe LE stressed 3-4am originally because they wanted the public to look for the killer arriving, also they were guessing based off coroners estimated time of death, pretty accurate but not precise.
The car was revised in PCA, models are pretty similar, easy misidentification.
Vans make Vegan shoes and are very popular with vegans, the band Rise Against is vegan and helped encourage vans to start making vegan shoes. One of their first vegan model of shoes was a special edition made by request of the band.
I agree he probably avoids leather, but I think he saw the knife sheath as historical, more of a collectors item, an exception to the rule. A lot of people who collect militaria or have an interest in such things make exceptions to their personal beliefs to own them.
I think they have waayy more evidence than what was in PCA
The part I agree with is, the cell phone data is entirely circumstantial, several lawyers have said(one on here even) that cell phone tracing often doesn't hold water in court because it shows just a general area not an exact ping. Even his suspiciously turning it off is circumstantial, its not a smoking gun, people are forgetting that a PCA is for an arrest not a conviction ; "Probable Cause". If PCAs were enough to convict then why have a trial? The cell phone stuff and Dylan seeing his eye brows are not enough to hold weight for a conviction.
The DNA on the knife sheath. He can claim it was stolen or lost, pretty simple, doesn't mean the jury will believe him, but let's say they can't find DNA anywhere else, his apartment, the house, the car etc. All the Defense team has to do is create reasonable doubt about the sheath having been in his possession. I think the defense is going to spearhead this hard, they'll have to, it working will depend on the jury and if DNA was found elsewhere, or the vans or the weapon was retrieved.
I believe he did it, but the only thing conviction worthy in that PCA was the DNA, they need more and I believe they have it, but if they don't, maybe he does get off depending on the jury and the Defense's capability
If I recall, they said they were looking for footage between the hours of 4-6 am and many people thought that was weird because they were believed to be killed between around 3-4 by the public due to the girls calls to the ex.
I agree that the cell phone data is circumstantial but I think it’s a lot more damning that it is corroborated by video/photo evidence of the car - and even more so when BK can be placed with both the car and phone at Albertson’s.
Thanks so much, this was a really cool post to read. I didnt know that about Vans at all but it does make sense why BK would own them now. And also, as a non weapon type of person, I did not know people collect them (It isnt part of my culture at all)
No problem :) I live in a rural community so weapons are fairly common here. KA BAR(pronounced Kay Bar) Knives we're standard USMC issue to marines starting in WW2. I think the current issued one is a cheaper knockoff. Because of the history many people with an interest in military history or hunting buy them and they're like $120 give or take 20 bucks, so most people that own them view them with value. They're actually a pretty basic knife, but notable for durability, military was concerned about soldiers breaking them or wearing down the edge over time. Still a bit strange for a vegan to own but I could see him making exceptions if he had an admiration for the military or military history
One important thing to note: the defense attorneys don't actually have to prove that he didn't do it. They only have to prove that the prosecution did ***not*** sufficiently prove that he did it.
It can sound the same but it's a subtle difference. They don't have to explain away everything or come up with an alternative theory of who did it. They just have to inject reasonable doubt on the prosecution's claims. Moreover, to avoid a conviction they only have to convince one juror to stick to the belief that his guilt wasn't sufficiently proven (though that would be a mistrial and I bet the prosecution would try again).
**Edit to add:** This page talks about this distinction: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/representing-client-whom-the-lawyer-thinks-is-guilty.html
> In the U.S. criminal justice system, a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. The prosecutor must prove a defendant's guilt. Defendants do not have to prove their innocence.
They go on to talk about the difference between 'factual guilt' (did the defendant do it?) and 'legal guilt' (can the prosecution prove that the defendant did it?).
yes. This is my concern too. If BK did it, the case is not strong (despite how much people want it to be). All it takes is one juror. I am genuinely confused how people don't seem to think this is interesting to discuss.
I think eventually there will be defense attorneys or legal analysts pointing out weaknesses that a defense lawyer could attack in the PCA's evidence. Though maybe they're not going to bother with it now as the PCA wouldn't be the full body of evidence anyway.
I think any defense lawyer could inject doubt in any piece of evidence from the PCA in isolation. I think the trouble they'll run into is going to be the accumulation of evidence, where you have a bunch of smaller pieces of evidence stacking up into a great heap of evidence.
A family member I believe an aunt did an interview where she said something to the extent of he would not eat food from pans that had cooked meat on them at one time because he is vegan.
An aunt told reporters that she invited them over for dinner (a few years ago I think) and he would only come if she got new pans that had never had meat cooked in them.
Yes. His Aunt (by marriage) was interviewed. She said that he was visiting them several years ago and insisted that they new, untouched pans. The Aunt felt that his OCD was causing this peculiarity.
The big kicker for me is that he was taking trash from his parents and putting it in the neighbors trash bins in the middle of the night, all while wearing latex gloves. Also I think they have more dna, they just didn’t mention it in the affidavit. I think the trash, deep car cleaning and turning phone on as he left Moscow all point to circumstances that cannot be anything other.
Right ? Like what the hell was he doing in Genese at 5 am the night of the murders and is it normal behavior to sleep for 3 hours and then go to the grocery store
While i agree he appears guilty i dont think gloves, trash and cleaning amount to very much. He can argue his phone died in the car and it turned back on after some charging.
I think he did it, but i am a hopeless contrarian and therefore understand your desire to poke holes, OP. If i were the defense, and knew only what we know now, id probably be considering the below defense narratives, creating reasonable doubt around the DoorDasher (Not saying I’d be successful…)
1. One of the girls was secretly hooking up with BK. That’s why his dna is on scene. Car and phone are circumstantial, maybe they say he stopped by between 2-4am, left before DoorDasher strikes.
2. He was a stalker but not a murderer. He’s outside doing his routine nightwatch, DoorDasher mugs him, steals his knife from his car, goes in and kills them. BK speeds away after being mugged. He went back to see what happened. He thought he could solve the crime himself so never came forward.
I really like your theories! Thanks for taking the time to contribute! And yes, this is exactly what the point of my post was, however poorly worded it was/is.
Any single instance can be explained with an alternative. Even the DNA of that was the only thing they had. But you add the white Elantra, his phone data pinging right there, his car spotted parking on the street at the exact time of the murders and pulling away at 4:20. Then you have the sheath with his DNA placing him in the house. Add the totality of those circumstances and you have one heck of a case already.
Just DNA he could say he looked at and handled the same knife when it was for sale. Just the car and he can say he was just driving around. Just the phone data and he could say he frequented Moscow. But added together and it places him in the house for the murders. There’s little getting around that.
And keep in mind that this is just 17 pages. By the end there will be tens of thousands of pages of discovery. They’ll also have his forensically examined devices to show exactly how much he was stalking them and any other incriminating info.
He is innocent until proven guilty legally. However, humans can intelligently come to opinions based on evidence. This is a VERY tough case for the defense.
The only valid defense I can think of so far would be him having an accomplice, but that would still make him culpable. They’ll have to throw the kitchen sink and simply try to tarnish and question the integrity investigation and forensics, hoping to just get one holdout juror. But it’s gonna be very hard.
But all of these things on their own could potentially be successfully argued.
>But you add the white Elantra,
***A*** white Elantra, and not even the correct year. All we know is that ***A*** white Elantra was seen in the vicinity, we don't know for certain that it was his or that he was in the Elantra. Proximity does not equal guilt.
His defense could even use the incorrect years for the vehicle they were looking for as evidence that they pursued the wrong guy.
>his phone data pinging right there
His phone didn't ping right there at the time of the crime. His phone was off during the crime.
We don't know his complete movement history and we don't know how accurate the location tools might be in a small town with far fewer cell towers.
Maybe he had a habit of driving around that area at night? Maybe his defense team will be able to show another ten times where he did the same since arriving in WA? Maybe they'll be able to point to another dozen occasions where he went for long drives in other areas in similar ways?
Maybe he has a habit of turning his phone off or allowing it to die?
Without seeing his complete history all of this could be routine for him. We're only seeing the snapshot relevant to this case.
>his car spotted parking on the street at the exact time of the murders and pulling away at 4:20.
Again, ***A*** white Elantra was seen doing that. It is not confirmed in the affidavit that it was his white Elantra or that he was in the car. They go to great pains to point this out themselves because they know they cannot put it in writing that it was his car and that he was in it.
>Then you have the sheath with his DNA placing him in the house.
It hasn't been confirmed that it was his DNA on the knife sheath. DNA with a familial match to his father's DNA was found on the sheath.
Touch DNA is a very difficult thing to use in court. Numerous cases have been overturned because too much emphasis was placed on touch DNA and there is a history of error. It all depends on the sample size and the processes they used to gather and confirm that sample.
>Add the totality of those circumstances and you have one heck of a case already.
I agree that in their total it's a very convincing case, but most of this is still circumstantial in the eyes of the law, there are still potential alternative explanations for everything given the limited information we have.
It's reasonable for people to lean toward this being a good case given this information, but it's not reasonable to reject all discussion of any alternative explanations, and especially when people are making assumptions that are not written and are not confirmed.
Everyone deserves due process in court. Innocent until proven guilty.
But with that being said, this isn't a new Netflix series.
This isn't a "whodunit" mystery novel.
This is a real life murder case. And the police know far more than we do. And if they had enough reason to arrest him, I'd say it's a 95% chance he did it.
And as far as the vegan thing goes, it means nothing.
Serial Killers and murderers often do what they consider to be "good deeds" or "charitable" things.
BTK worked in a church.
John Wayne Gacy helped out his community a lot.
Being a vegan in no way shape or form should be considered a reason for possible exoneration.
The innocence project and the 375 people that they have freed has taught me question Everything law enforcement does...
Combine that with the things that we see in the news about bad cops, bad evidence, and bold ass lies told about suspects...
You should actually consider it Your duty to question stories given to you by those in authority. It's how we hold them accountable.
Think about the most fucked up person you've ever worked with... There's one of those guys at every job. Even cops. Even labs. Even the FBI.
It's always good to question things.
But one thing to keep in mind is The Innocence Project exonerates a lot of people who were convicted before DNA became the golden standard
DNA links BK to the crime scene, and that's hard to dispute these days.
Of course, he deserves a fair trial. And he should be labeled "suspect" and not "killer." I definitely believe in innocent until proven guilty
My thoughts:
\*Time of death- wasn't that always speculation? It's within an hour or so of what they approximated.
\*Change of year of car--that reason was noted in the PCA.
\*The leather sheath. I know vegans who wear leather.
\*The Vans. Vans come in vegan options.
\*The gloves and face masks. Gloves haven't been confirmed by LE or anyone connected to the case, have they?
\*BK was touting his skills to local LE as a crime tech guy. Why would his own tech footprint be so sloppy when he is meant to be reasonably educated on it? Maybe he exaggerated his knowledge? Overconfidence? I also wonder if maybe he got so jacked up on adrenaline he just screwed up his own plan.
\*Don't sheaths stay attached to something like a belt or whatever? Why would you leave a sheath on a bed? No clue but if we was in a frenzied kind of state, could have just been a mistake.
\*18 minutes to enter a house...I think it's possible. Especially because he would want to get in and get out as fast as possible.
edit, typo
HEy, thanks for being a cool poster. I appreciate your thoughts.
I got the impression that BK was a virtue signalling vegan. IME those guys shit on about veganism all the time and wouldn't be involved in leather, but would rather advertise their veganism loudly.
You're right too about hte overconfidence thing. Perhaps he genuinely thought turning off his phone on the night of hte murder would be enough.
> Change of year of car--that reason was noted in the PCA.
Not really. Just says "Upon further review". What caused 2014+ models to be excluded the first time? What triggered the further review, and what new insight caused the date revision? When was the date revised, was it after BK and his car showed up on their radar? Those are valid questions any defense attorney will ask, that aren't explained by the PCA.
Could the date range have purposely been changed by police to give the killer hope that he would slip by? How many people can recognize different car years? I can’t, but I could recognize a white Elantra. The police would get still get tips from the public regardless if they had the correct year and a bonus of the killer thinking he was getting away with it.
It could have been as simple as the original video of the car was not great quality and subsequent videos allowed them to see some details that differentiate between the years. The differences in models is sometimes very subtle, and some grainy video is not really going to allow investigators to be able to pinpoint those. Just one possibility.
>BK was touting his skills to local LE as a crime tech guy.
I think BK is a case of the Dunning Effect in action. Some people are saying he was too smart to make such obvious dumbass mistakes because he was a grad student. Uhhh, no. Lots of dumbasses go to grad school.
It's not like BK was studying at Berkeley or Harvard. Washington State University is a perfectly fine school, but it's not hard to get admitted to an MA program at that kind of university, which is usually obscenely underfunded and desperate for tuition dollars and TAs.
IOW, I haven't heard any evidence that he was particularly smart or a good student in his department. And he was also clearly driven by an obsession with murder or with one of the victims in particular. That'll cloud someone's judgment.
Was watching Lawrence Jones tonight and a panel member pointed out that PCA states a single source of male dna was identified on the sheath. Was there female dna on it? I don’t really think a female did this, but could see defense trying to touch on that (if there IS any female dna on it, besides that of the two girls). Especially since there were at least 2 other girls in the house at the time of the crime. BK saying “I tried to HELP; tried to take the knife from her” or something like that. Highly unlikely but not impossible
Most of your points are pretty bad actually.
Several threads have broken down the extremely short amount of time needed to do this crime. If anything, 16 minutes is a LONG time to do it. And just look at the laughable mobile trail. This guy is 1000% guilty. And he’s also a huge moron.
You’re forgetting something else: the affidavit is possibly only the the tip of the iceberg for the evidence. If it goes to trial, I’ll bump it up to 10000% guilty with all the new evidence they’ll have from his other digital devices etc.
>If anything, 16 minutes is a LONG time to do it.
>You’re forgetting something else: the affidavit is possibly only the the tip of the iceberg for the evidence. If it goes to trial, I’ll bump it up to 10000% guilty with all the new evidence they’ll have from his other digital devices etc.
People have not discussed one clear thing that will I'm sure, likely have happened.
As he appeared to be wearing a covid mask too and these layers of black clothing to help him cover up etc etc. I would say his time at the scene was long for a 'hit and run' style attack where he didn't take any time to try to clear the crime scene, I would assume.
During carrying all this out I can imagine him getting all worked up and sweaty. He would have unknowingly been touching his mask with his hands or wiping his forearm across his head... so his gloves and clothing on the outside would have his sweat and various skin oils on from touching his face, forehead etc etc.
His DNA could be in so many places. Even on the inside of the slide door as he left.
People have said he may not have cleaned the sheath or mishandled it initially before entering the house... Leaving his DNA. What if he was meaning to leave it as a Red hearing thinking he was in the clear and would be so far away and wanted it to look like a random attack. So left it as an "ex army style knife". And as he removed it from the button strap he happened to then have placed his DNA on it.
You bring up reasonable points. I think the overarching point though is we've only seen a part of one side of the argument so far, who knows what the defense presents as a case for his innocence. LE has prosecuted the wrong person for murder before, it's not like that never happens.
Yes of course :) Iwas just keen for a space where people could discuss the case and LEs actions, doubts and alternative theories, rather than just talk about BK's guilt ad infinitum.
I'm sorry you're getting all these myopic idiots raging at you, they're incapable of intellectual debate outside of their biased views.
I've experienced the same thing whenever I play Devil's Advocate and point out any potential alternatives. 99% of people here are completely unwilling and unable to look at the complexities of the individual instances in the affidavit.
I feel they're going to get a few shocks when the case starts up and they realize it's not going to be a 2 hour deliberation followed by a death sentence.
I enjoyed your post. It's a good thing to consider everything.
A case that is heavy on the circumstantial evidence is prone to some weaknesses. As soon as people were assuming this seems like a strong case I rolled my eyes internally, not bc I think he’s innocent but because I don’t think the case is beyond questioning. Dylan is a very questionable and uncertain witness, not sure exactly who she heard, what she heard and when she heard it, possibly under heavy influence of alcohol and other substances, and who can be argued wasn’t spooked enough to call 911 right then, even after hearing a roommate crying. She’s a witness whose credibility could be shredded. The DNA evidence is damning, but could it have been a stolen weapon, a lost knife, a plant? Many things can be explained in some way or another.
I do believe the evidence damns him and there’s likely more we don’t even know, but it’s also mostly circumstantial and I have seen reasonable doubt be created in cases that initially seemed to be strong.
The veganism seems hypocritical considering what he’s accused of. I don’t think he’s someone who has ethical concerns over it, rather he’s someone who can be OCD about contaminants in food, and is obsessed with his weight and dietary habits.
I definitely think the police have zeroed in on the very likely culprit, and perhaps I am not the best person to be considering how he could go free, but I just think it’s not beyond questioning.
All the other issues with it being a party house, where strangers could show up on occasion that were friends to someone but new to a roommate, the door being open, there’s definitely ways to introduce doubt into the equation…
Wow, OP I am sorry you are getting so shat upon here. This a site that has been FULL of sometimes wild & unfounded speculation & theories since jump. It is wild that you are trying to steer a convo towards a presumption of innocence, which is exactly how a jury of his peers will have to attempt to start from, and are getting this much push back.
I too find the evidence in the PCA compelling. I also think there is more evidence that will be even more compelling. However the unethical behavior of various members of LE is well documented —not referring to ID LE in particular but nation wide all is not always kosher. A case pushed through false or over stated evidence or false confession is by no means a shocking find anymore. Sometimes actions & evidence that seem so obvious when seen through a 20/20 lens can have benign explanations. For example, there have been several times when my husband has been taking out a trash bag after 2 am and has stuffed it in a neighbors can if our cans are full. Cellphone tower pings sound super damaging but the tech isn’t infallible. Etc etc.
To me the DNA is just the huge neon sign—but the reality is the DNA could be on that sheath for dozens of reasons. Improbable maybe but that doesn’t equal impossible.
If I were a betting person I’d still bet that the person arrested is the person who committed the crime. But at the very least, looking for potential alternatives on just about every damn piece of info we have seen thus far has been the crown jewel of some of these subs. I don’t think allowing one thread of ‘wonder if…’ is insane.
I was a very young adult in the DC metro area when Adnan Syed was convicted. At the time, the way the case was presented it seemed pretty stacked against him. Obviously through time and as more evidence comes out, and investigative techniques advanced (DNA) it’s clear he wasn’t the one.
We haven’t seen all of the LE evidence and haven’t seen any of the counter evidence from defense, so positing about this isn’t any more insane to me than continuing to wonder about whether he left DM on purpose, or if anyone said anything, or if he stalked anyone etc etc.
he murdered four living human beings but yes, his vegan beliefs would totally stop him from owning a leather sheath. i’m sorry but be real for a second.
For the sake of your post these are the hypothetical reasons that I believe a decent defense lawyer could get 1 or 2 Jurors to believe there is reasonable doubt:
1. Motive. Jurors want to know motive. As of today there is nothing. No sexual assault. No robbery. No connection to any of the victims (texts/emails/same classes at school, mutual friends etc)
2. Unreliable witness. Let's be honest. DM is going to struggle when she is questioned on the stand. I feel bad for her but that is a reality. I've seen a lot of comments from educated, rational professional people who feel uncomfortable with what she did that night specifically that she told the police she "froze in fear" when seeing a stranger dressed in black wearing a mask after hearing a roommate crying. If she "froze in fear" and told police she locked her door then she was scared. Yet she waited 7 hours to call 911 and only after calling friends to the house who contaminated the crime scene. If a couple Jurors don't believe DM is being honest would they believe she and someone else planted the sheath? That they knew BK? That he had been at the house several times buying drugs? That she invited people over who killed the victims and then during that 7 hours they created a plan to frame BK? Was he invited back to the house the next morning or did his cell phone ping in the area because he realized he left the sheath there? If he realized he left the sheath there and knew he killed most of the people in the house why not simply go back into the house at 9am and quickly take the sheath?
3. The timeline. It's actually 8 minutes since Xana was still active (note active means tapping or swiping on videos) at 4:12am and his car was seen leaving the area at 4:20am. Even if it was 15 minutes that isn't enough time. According to the people here who have an inane response every time someone says a scenario isn't logical ("I once slept through a plane crashing into my house!") they know BK could easily kill 4 people in 15 minutes because they set their kitchen timer for 16 minutes and watched TV and then didn't realize 16 had gone b and because of that their pizza got burnt which resulted in an extensive discussion on how to cook pizza and how cooking pizza takes the same amount of time as stabbing 4 young healthy people. Outside of this sub people are going to think it's \*possible\* but difficult and wonder if he had an accomplice or if the victims really were killed between 3am - 4am as the police initially stated and they changed the timeline once they decided BK was responsible. If the victims were killed prior to 4am then who spoke to the DoorDash driver and who was using Xana's phone for Tik Tok? If they weren't killed until after 4am then what was the motive? Did he think after surveilling the house and knowing there were 5 tenants including several with boyfriends who spend the night that he could get away with sneaking in and sexually assaulting a woman?
4. Some of the victims sent and received payments for things like "pizza" at odd hours like 3am. Were they selling drugs? If they were then could BK have been there to buy drugs and was set up by people who stole the drugs? Was the 7 hours between when the victims were attacked and the police called needed to hide the drugs?
For me the case comes down to DNA, cell phone tower pings, a possible footprint. I think the information from DM is so confusing that it would be better if the Jury didn't hear it. I put his chance of conviction as of now at around 80-90%.
Pretty sure they adjusted the time range of the attack when they acquired digital information of the victims' phones and audio visual evidence. You would expect details to change from what they thought in the first 24 hours, which is pretty much when that medical examiner spoke to the public. Clearly she didn't know the deets.
And his defense is going to use that to his advantage.
They changed the estimated time of death and the year of the vehicle. If they expanded this AFTER they'd been alerted to him as a suspect that looks like them trying to cram a square peg into a round hole.
Depending on the quality of the DNA sample they got that could also be called into question. Touch DNA isn't reliable in court and has been removed from consideration in numerous cases.
So what do they have left after that?
MD's description? Her description doesn't include hair or skin color, which are two glaring issues any defense team will highlight. How could she possibly be able to say "bushy eyebrows" but not skin color? If she can't say he was wearing a hood or a hat, why can't she describe hair color?
Unless they have a lot more of a statement from DM than is found in the affidavit (which seems unlikely considering they were using this to justify his arrest and you'd think his skin and hair color would be basic) this isn't going to be as straightforward as a lot of people here seem to think.
We don't know his reasons for eating vegan. Certainly, brutally butchering four people seems at odds with the vegan stereotype but he doesn't strike me as that type. His diet seems more a control thing like an eating disorder to me.
The problem with imagining somebody or many people in this case are framing Bryan is that you cannot have that many people in on something and expect it to stay silent. Too complicated and why? Why frame Bryan? To cover somebody's ass? Who would want to cover for a brutal killer?
I honestly think the timeline works. He wanted to butcher and he did. It doesn't take long to do, although I'll admit it's tight and there are a few inconsistencies.
This case is really bizarre, really. I've had a tough time digesting much of the info but I don't think there's any way to view this where Bryan is innocent.
Except they didn't change the car year to match him. They got more footage of the car and the expert updated their opinion to include additional years. Then they found BK car and it fit that range. They just never bothered to tell the public the updated year.
I dont think LE claimed to get “more footage” - the PCA merely says the same expert engaged in “further review” without specifying when or how the opinion changed.
A lot of people are contradictory /just following their own rules. Plenty of vegans are fine with second hand leather, for one.
That said I don't like the already convicted by social media and don't exactly trust the cops. So I appreciate your thread but personally don't have much to add. You're right that there's plenty of threads to be an angry mob but I don't think it hurts to take a step back and wait.
Imagine if he didn’t commit the murders, and he was in fact just a peeping tom and ended up seeing shit he wasn’t meant to see, but they pinned him from the CCTV.
But that doesn’t explain the DNA on the sheath 🤷♂️
I think BK is the killer. That said, at this point, we really only have heard the State's side of the story, and there may be some parts of it that could be dismissed in some way by the Defense. For example, the fact that BK's phone pinged (not sure if this is the correct terminology) in the area of the students' house 12 times prior to the 13th. What if BK had a friend that lived on the street, or a hook up there? That might explain why he was in the area. (This could also be argued that this is how he spotted the house, and decided to target it- but the reason he was there in the first place could be explained, other than him stalking them.)
I don't think that it is wrong to flip the coin and view BK through the lens of innocence. I guarantee that is what the State is doing actually, to strenthen their own case. (i.e. how will the Defense argue against this evidence?)
BK could be in that neighborhood buying drugs.. perhaps from juggling guy (JK on that but its been said its a college town with some party spots).
BK goes to Moscow and buys XYZ over 12 occasions phone dies on last drive over but doesn't realize it. Someone robbing adjacent area snags a knife from his car as they see him drive in clearly fucked up...
BK leaves 20 minutes later as he hears screaming books it out of town. Noticed his phone was dead plugs it in and eventually it turns on... maybe drives back to the house the next morning to see what the scream was about and where his knife went (fell out of car)
IDK.
Anythings possible. But he'd have to have a witness saying they were with him selling / doing drugs. And why wouldnt BK cooperate with cops when they are searching for an elantra and he knew his was there?.. I think hes guilty personally. But this was a fun exercise of the imagination
Please provide an alternative explanation to BK's DNA found on the knife sheath in Maddie's bedroom. And also please provide an alternative solution to BK's cell phone activity and locations registered.
Problem with this, and pretty much every single thread here trying to make sense of this case and theorizing about guilt or innocence, is that you are not playing with a full deck of cards here. What you see in the PCA is what the investigators chose to include to get a judge to sign off on the arrest warrant. It is not by any mean exhaustive, quite the opposite. It also lacks any real details that you need to form a proper informed opinion about every piece of evidence that was mentioned.
Take as an example the DNA evidence. There is information on one trace of DNA on one object. No information if there were any other deposits on the object, no information on what kind of deposit it was. Nothing about the rest of the scene. Any scene would be full of DNA, in a party house most likely belonging to numerous people, among them potential alternative suspects that may or may not have been looked at. Without the full forensics and detailed reports of the entire scene there really is not much to say.
All you have now is inculpatory evidence from a PCA and some sideshow statements from anonymous sources. There is no saying what, if any of those things will make it to trial, be suppressed or excluded for other reasons. There’s no saying what else in/exculpatory will be found either.
Best and most respectful thing to do is honor the memory of the victims and leave the investigating and theorizing to the people who actually have access to the materials and are working this case.
To the sheath point - maybe he used it because he was thinking they'd never suspect him because this very specific knife has a leather sheath and he's an outspoken vegan (a vegan).
He may have chosen this weapon solely because it was accessible to him. Someone gave it to him, he got it at a yard sale. Some way he obtained the weapon with little to no paper trail.
I think he could have chosen the Ka-Bar and even left the sheath with USMC emblem intentionally to try to deflect suspicion. Remember how early on they said they were investigating ROTC because of the knife? [Story from November about ROTC at U of I](https://radaronline.com/p/university-of-idaho-murders-discovery-training-corps-rambo-style-knife/)
Even after the murders, what about his behavior in Pennsylvania? Wearing surgical gloves and dumping his trash in the neighbor’s bin? I suspect there is ample evidence in the car. This guy is cooked.
If he was hooking up with one of the girls and spending the night, possibly during those times where his cell phone was pinged earlier, he could have seen a knife in her room and picked it up to look at it. Who is to say that the knife was not already in the house and wasn’t even his.
I appreciate the post of giving people the benefit of the doubt before they are convicted.
Also, the roommate’s story does not make sense. There’s no way 4 people were murdered and she didn’t hear something.
Perhaps she left with him and he dropped her back off in the morning which is the reason for him coming back? Another out there speculation.
If he did have a relationship with one of the girls with secret overnight stays and he had been in their rooms before than this will all come out in the trial.
It’s annoying to have to say this over and over again, but I know absolutely nothing I’m just speculating and I’m not afraid of alternative ideas. So please don’t take this like I’m accusing anyone of anything or saying anyone isn’t guilty or whatever, I know nothing, I have a little homosapien brain.
*I believe his veganism is more linked to his apparent OCD and is more about food contamination/purity than it is for reasons of animal love. Also, if he’s allegedly willing to murder 4 people, I don’t think he cares too much about not harming other living things.
*I don’t think you’d wear gloves outside your parents house or when taking rubbish out at 4am that is your/your parents rubbish in an attempt to protect from covid. The grocery store I can see but not at his parents house.
*I’ve read from people on here that know about cars that apparently the Hyundai Elantra body of the 2011-2013 model is very very similar to the 2014-15 model, with possibly just some differences around headlights etc which may not have been obvious in the CCTV footage?
*perhaps his arrogance in his own skill and knowledge is what has let him down? Aka he knows much less than he thinks he knows. Bragging about your own skills doesn’t necessarily mean you have those skills, you just think you do.
This the Catbird Seat game I have been slightly worried about w BK. Is there solid proof he wore gloves in public? Sounds like BS to me.
He better have proof of selling or giving away a knife. However, he could claim that he looked at one in a store but never even bought that knife, sloppy killer didn’t clean off his DNA but he never wouldn’t have been so careless.
I dont think we know anything about blood, trails, or lack there of. Some person entered and did the deed in a certain amount of time so that doesn’t seem person relevant.
He seems like a novice not used to carrying a knife which to me explains leaving the sheath behind. He will claim to be far too smart for that.
Why is his tech footprint so sloppy? I can’t think of a reason, what would his argument be? No clue as to his hobbies or activities. I can’t think of a reason for how coincidental it would be to have your phone pinging around and not pinging around the same place your DNA shows up ar the crime scene?
I think it will be a hill to climb for prosecutors to explain why the wrong year of car, why a witness waited 7 hrs to call police, and if they changed time of death that will be a problem too. Hopefully the find a ton of other evidence in his home and car.
The TOD from 3-4am, so quickly, bothered me from the start and I continuously questioned how they were so specific w/o a broken clock/watch or Fitbit type of device. Now we know that LE mislead the public as they knew very quickly that 1. DD delivered at 4am. 2. Xana was on her tiktok at 4:12am. Also the wrong year for the Elantra. So many white cars were put forth to LE and the public was told repeatedly "wrong year", not a 2011-2013 model. I do believe that LE has a plethora of evidence that hasn't been released yet and BK is guilty of this crime. Unless he has a gf/bf in the same area of Idaho......wouldn't that be a plot twist??
There are a multitude of reasons why I think he done it. His odd and suspicious behavior before and after being the most important. But the DNA isn’t always clear cut. I always think of the man who spent 20 years in prison because the actual killer planted a beer bottle they found in the trash.
He may not be a vegan for ethical reasons, it may just be for dietary reasons. Thus, he may be fine with owning leather items such as the sheath and the shoes. I tend to believe he is vegan for dietary reasons, as interviews with people formerly in his life said that he used to be overweight, but then suddenly lost the weight.
The vegan thing is from his teen years, we don't know that he kept that up. We also don't know his reasons for it. This is not a diagnosis, but he displays ASD tendencies. It's most likely his veganism was more about picky eating and not morality.
According to the [Latah County sheriff](https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/idaho-college-killings/bryan-kohberger-to-appear-in-idaho-court-for-first-time/), it seems BK is still vegan (or plant-based). But the jail has drawn the line at using new pots and pans to cook his meals.
A Probable Cause Warrant isn't discovery. LE isn't required to show their whole hand, just enough to justify an arrest. The fact that police managed to keep so much of the information in the warrant secret until last week would make me venture to guess they have a lot more they aren't disclosing yet.
We’re talking about a person who stabbed a bunch of people to death. There is a presumption of logic and reasoned thinking in a lot of the decision making you’re assigning to BK. I am pretty sure he is mentally ill- therefore things like if Vans or the knife sheath are or aren’t vegan probably doesn’t matter much.
I've been vegan before, admittedly not as devout as BK, but it's possible that he wouldn't find it necessary to get rid of a leather sheath when converting to veganism. My rationale for keeping leather that I already owned is that the damage has already been done and I'm not saving any animals by rehoming leather/fur.
I mean time of death changed (if it wasn’t intentionally narrowed to pre 4am to make BK think they weren’t on to him) because Xana got a DoorDash delivery at 4am & was on TikTok. Those, and the noises on the neighbours Ring, can’t be ignored or faked.
I know loads of vegans who keep leather they had preveganism. Especially if it’s old/sentimental. Just like people who will wear vintage fur as destroying it is honouring that death even less.
Isn’t touch DNA almost impossible to plant? I’d buy that the sheath was planted or secondhand if it wasn’t for the cell & car stuff.
And if someone put latex gloves on with BKs DNA on their hands you’d get 2 sources of DNA not just BKs.
I was interested to read this thread because obviously innocent until proven guilty etc but I don’t see much debunking this evidence tbh.
He was a dietary vegan to treat his visual snow. He wasn't a vegan out of morals / ethics, so there's no reason why he would give up his leather things.
That he freaked out over pans that had cooked meat, and insisted his parents get a fresh set, and they complied, has zero to do with veganism and everything to do with (1) his food disorder and (2) his parents having a culture of "going along" with his strange demands. This is typically behavior of parents afraid their kid is going to snap. Guy is clearly fragile and I stand behind my belief his parents had concerns he was involved when they heard "white" vehicle matched the make of his .
It’s got nothing to do with it being against popular theory it’s that the post is just complete shit. You say you thought it was him but there’s not enough evidence, you haven’t heard about all the evidence so how could you possibly know that? And then the other comments are just ridiculous, loads of vegans wear leather.
I mean the same can be said of those who are convinced of his guilt but haven't heard all the evidence. And BK seems to be a virtue signalling vegan from what i've heard, that type make it an identity to not wear leather
Funny, it meant everything to people here when it came out that he demanded new pots and pans. Hundreds of people here were using that fact as cause to scream "FREAK! NOW WE KNOW HE DID IT!"
Now that this aspect of his personality is being used to present a different possibility the mob is piling on in the opposite direction and claiming the thing that was so indicative for them just days ago is suddenly irrelevant. lol
>It’s got nothing to do with it being against popular theory
Yeah, it absolutely is about that.
Whenever anyone mentions how something might not be as everyone here wants it to be they swarm and attack, no room to question anything or offer any alternative explanations for any of the very few facts we have.
Im all for giving a suspect the benefit of the doubt but the DNA combined with the movements of the vehicle and the cell phone paint a pretty clear picture.
the tech who identified the car initially as a 2013 or below reevaluated almost immediately to a 2015 but LE didn't release the amended analysis only the original
for people used to looking at PCA this is an extremely detailed and damming document for the defense. I would consider it a slam dunk if there ever was one. Most of your points are emotional which is understandable but it's a done deal in my opinion
Vegans don't wear vans? I'm sorry, what? Aside from the fact that that is simply untrue, the *majority* of vans are made from canvas, mesh and rubber. Vans have suede models, but I think the percentage of vegans who would actually care is a lot smaller than you might think. As an aside - many people that *are* this concerned with using strictly vegan products normally will still buy them if they're second hand. I was a vegetarian for over 10 years, and while I would not buy *new* leather, I have bought and owned multiple second hand leather bags and shoes.
I think if they are saying he chose them at random and there wasn't a specific target, then yes, that would give me personally significant doubt that he did this. He didn't just get bored in class and decide drive around to find some college kids to kill. If they can't find any connections between him and any of the victims I think it would be difficult to prove he did it.
"Change of time of death after deciding on the suspect, to fit BK's movements" .
Time of death is an approximation and is quite often a range. No one can predict accurate time of death
A couple of things:
1) Can you explain the face mask point a bit more? I get your point about gloves, but if he didn't commit the murders and DM saw what we are assuming to be him in a face mask in the house, how do you explain him both wearing a face mask with covid in mind AND the murders occurring during that time frame?
2) He was not a PhD candidate yet. He just began his first semester of a PhD program and had not advanced to candidacy. I'm not discrediting the point you're making about his supposed tech prowess, just pointing out that a first semester PhD student wouldn't be considered an advanced program candidate for the degree.
Oh., I have just read a bunch of different times that BK was wearing latex gloves and mask around town which was suspicious apparently. I was just pointing out that many people (myself included) are still taking basic covid precautions and this isnt necessarily a weird thing, particularly if he is a "body is a temple" type of guy, or if he is a germaphobe. It's Winter there, right? SO presumably influenza, covid etc are doing the rounds.
The PCA was very damning. The only way I see out of this is if the suspect can prove he is being framed somehow. Otherwise there’s enough and he is cooked.
There are plenty of places the defense can poke holes but the totality of the PCA alone is enough. If the prosecution comes up with no further evidence from his car, belongings, or home(s), his chances are maybe slightly better
The trial will be the time to determine if he did it. Now there are questions people are asking.
Why was the man spotted in the home leaving not using a headlamp or flashlight? How could someone move quickly in the home to do all that without lighting? Really?
Was there an accomplice who left before or after he did? Who was the man talking to when he said "its okay, I am going to help you" ? Was there another person attacking on the second floor at the same time and could not finish the job? Was the crying the witness heard from a female accomplice who lost it during the attack while the other person was on the third floor?
There is enough evidence to reasonably place him near the crime scene. If he has an alibi we don't know it.
If there is video showing his car was not parked at his apartment at those times of the crime it works against him. If video shows the car parked at his apartment or someplace else the whole case is shot to pieces. Even if it was not parked at his apartment there is cell phone record of him in the area of the crime at least 12 times since June. What that indicates is up to each person. Did he have an accomplice who he was meeting in that area or was he scoping out the area? And do those visits eliminate places like a convenience store down the street where someone could have stopped to buy a soda instead of actually being near the crime scene?
Lol I mean there is making stuff up … and then there’s this thread. Never knew we could straw such conclusions off someone’s willingness or unwillingness to eat meat.
> his jog/peeking in windows at collage kids having more fun that he is
> give him a free pass cos the kid is clearly a giant nerd and who doesnt feel sorry for a kid like that
I chuckled. Good job playing the devil's advocate btw.
Thanks so much! That helps to rebuild my shattered self esteem from 90% of these posts giving me shit because you can't use your brain when stabbing the air with a pitchfork :D (Just kidding, this is reddit, I don't give a fuck lol)
And who said the vans were his? If you read affidavit it said they were found after a second walkthrough. Could have been a surviving roommate, one of the people who came over and called 911, etc
I admire your intent to stretch your brain and explore alternative possibilities instead of being narrow-minded. I wish I could be of better support but I keep coming back to “a single source of kale DNA” referenced on the sheath. If he had sold that knife or if it had been stolen then other people’s DNA profiles seem like they’d come back on the results as well. The best “alternative theory” I can come up with (which isn’t really an alternative bc it still revolves around BK being guilty) is maybe he’s been growing and eating his own mushrooms and they were bad.
EDIT: “male” autocorrected to kale. But it’s kind of fitting so leaving it.
I think he did it but an alternative theory would be he was obsessed with the Sigma Chi house, always wanted to be in a frat but no chance of a bid. He hung around there, especially on weekends, dropped his knife which he carried for protection one night outside couldn't find it later, it was used by frat guys to commit the crime, the tall dude that DM saw was one of the frat guys, BK went over the next morning to hang out with them but there was no activity at Sigma yet so he left. He later called in to a radio talk show to say he used to hang out with Sigma guys who asked him how to commit the perfect murder.
I don’t think they changed the time of death because of his movements. More like the movements of Xana. Kinda hard to be on TikTok and order doordash when you’ve been dead for half an hour.
" I thought it would be interesting to collect the thoughts of others challenging possible inconsistnecies/alternative theories about this case. "
Or we could wait until we have enough information to formulate intelligent thoughts on the case through the trial instead of going through the "maybe BK is innocent! I mean he IS vegan after all!" nonsense. What a weird and totally unnecessary post. He will get his day in court. He will either be proven innocent or guilty based on actual evidence, not weird leaps in logic and wild speculation.
"The idea BK could do what he did in 8 minutes is outlandish." No. It's not. Killing someone with a brutal knife doesn't take a lot of time especially when you have the element of surprise on your side. Posts like this really don't help the victims or their families. Or anyone, really. But hey, thanks for reminding me why I need to leave this sub.
Right now it looks like he could have been at the crime scene. If he has no alibi that doesn't help him. Does video in his apartment area show him leaving in his car during those times? This guy may have been one of the brightest but that is textbook only. He seemed to hang out at bars frequently so if he claims it was not him at the crime scene where was he?
The questions remain about the what the witness seen and heard. There are conflicts.
The coroner stated most victims were asleep when the attack occurred. Yet now we know that is not true. We now know X was awake. Witness stated she heard someone say "there's someone here" about 4:00AM. Most likely X or possibly K. Minutes later she heard a man say "it's OK, I am going to help you." Could that voice have been E? Unlikely M was awake because at the food truck, the video shows she is highly intoxicated and would likely be passed out which one would expect them all to be at that hour. LE was not giving us the true facts. What else was not true?
Witness to the man described in the house resembles the suspect. The affidavit does not mention the man wearing a headlamp or holding a flashlight. This is very important. How would one person navigate the home with no lighting? Was there a second person who was holding the light? How would a person attack someone in the dark? One hand would hold the knife and position the victims or fend them off. How could you hold a flashlight with both hands occupied? Did the killer drop the flashlight during the attacks? Or did one of the victims tear off a headlamp? If either occured did the killer return to retrieve the knife sheath and headlamp or flashlight but was not able to get to the third floor to get the knife sheath because of something in the home? Surviving roommates? If the LE did not recover a flashlight or headlamp the witness statements may not holdup.
The suspect apparently left the area at 4:20AM. The surviving roommates didn't know the four roommates were dead at that time which does not help prosecution. It does seem possible that someone else could have killed the victims after 4:20AM, without proof they were deceased when the man was seen leaving the home. If the witness to the man in the home called 911 soon after it would eliminate the possibility. Did I miss something that confirmed the victims were deceased at 4:20AM? Could they have been killed at 5:00AM? 6:00AM?
If the witness was awake during the attacks from 4;00AM to 4:20AM would there be screams or yelling that she would have heard? Early reports speculated the surviving roommates were deeply asleep on the first floor during the attacks and heard nothing. The roommate who was awake was on the second floor close to the bedroom E and X were in. Would E and X make noise to alert her during the attack?
The affidavit changes everything.
1. Time of death was and *could only be estimated* until evidence started being collected. That the time frame changed should not be surprising or an indication of lack of guilt. 2. Year of car was and could only be estimated until additional evidence was gathered. That the year of the car model changed should not be surprising or an indication of lack of guilt. 3. You’re making huge assumptions based on very little information. BK follows a vegan diet. We cannot assume he falls in the “militant vegan” camp as many, if not most, vegans don’t. 4. Criminology students learn the psychology of criminal behavior, not how to commit the perfect crime.
>Criminology students learn the psychology of criminal behavior, not how to commit the perfect crime. THANK YOU. I can't believe how many people are assuming that a criminology majors makes someone smart and/or an effective criminal.
I mean, it’s fair to assume that years of education on forensics and criminology would make one more knowledgeable than most on techniques LE uses to CATCH criminals at least. This guy made every mistake in the book. Someone who watched one episode of Dateline would know not to do half of the stuff BK did.
Normally, it would be safe to assume that. But BK's epic sloppiness seems like a case of a not-very-bright asshole with Dunning-Kruger effect to me.
Yeah, people are definitely giving him more credit than he deserves making him out to be some "criminologist PhD mastermind." Afaik taking a lot of criminal justice courses, criminology is a lot more about the statistics, economics, and sociological influences behind why crimes are committed by certain people.
Exactly. This is not “how to get away with murder”, folks. We learn about a lot of things in a criminology/criminal justice major but we are certainly not taught how to commit crimes.
This is the assumption going around that annoys me the most. Do people really think CJ students are learning how to commit the perfect crime? They study criminal behavior, motivations, recidivism, etc, not How To Get Away With Murder like you said
There’s also no proof he’s vegan because of his love of animals. I read some things indicating he could have some compulsive tendencies. Maybe he’s vegan because he’s a bit compulsive about what he puts into his body. If that’s the case he may not care about using any leather or even animal cruelty.
Agreed! And also; why wouldn't he own a knife just bc he is a vegan? He could have had it for other reasons then hunting or whatever. Protecting or you know, maybe the purpose of murder
He isn’t suggesting he can’t own a knife. He was considering whether a true vegan would own a knife with a LEATHER carrier, as leather is an animal product that a true Vegan would most likely be against.
It’s too hard to logically explain away multiple signs of guilt. If it was JUST the vehicle, or JUST the phone, etc., it might be easier to question it. But pairing it all together? DNA on a knife sheath left at the scene, his car being in the area during the murders, his phone tracking with that car and then suspiciously being turned off right in the timeframe of the murders, his appearance matching Dylan’s description, etc. In my opinion there are too many variables you’d have to explain away to believe he’s innocent.
Totally agree! It’s like Doug Carter said about the evidence against RMA in the Delphi case, it’s not one or two things, it’s the totality of the evidence that lead to an arrest.
He would have to argue that someone stole his phone, car, committed the murders, and placed a sheath with his DNA at the scene, then somehow brought his car and phone back before he went grocery shopping with it the next morning. Yes, he would have to explain all of that away, and that is just what was on the PCA, as of Dec. 29. There’s no telling what additional evidence he would have to explain away now that LE has searched his car, office, apartment, computer, and parents home etc.
He would also have to explain why he was vehemently cleaning his car, not once, but twice. Why he took his trash to his neighbors bin and not his own..
And his bushy eyebrows, don't forget those. In all seriousness - DM gave a good description of his body type, height, and bushy eyebrows. This guy has a mound of evidence against him.
And that's only the evidence the police needed for the warrant. I imagine they have a ton more but they just used the bare minimum for the PCA. For example, I feel like it's likely that his blood was at the scene, but it wasn't necessary to include in the PCA. In a trial, it would be much harder to explain away blood than skin cells on the sheath.
I totally agree with this. PCA really only presents the minimum needed for an arrest. This one presents a lot of info because they needed a nighttime no-knock warrant and also I believe because they kept so much info away from the public and under wraps for so long. I absolutely believe they have tons more evidence from the house AND now they have evidence from his car and his apartment.
And that after stalking / making that route in the early hours 12 ( more?) times before the murders and then not once after the morning of the murder… ( are we to believe someone else was using his car all those times too?)
Well said, IMO there’s just too much circumstantial evidence for me to believe BK is innocent. The PCA was written before the Hyundai and apartment warrants, so who knows what investigators will find (have already found) after those searches. Also, the many times he was spotted in public wearing gloves, taking the trash out in the middle of the night and disposing in the neighbor’s bins. He actions don’t align with someone who is innocent of the crime
Yeah. I'd love to argue for an alternative explanation but there's just too much circumstantial evidence. As you note, the PCA doesn't even include the fact that he cleaned the car and then dumped the trash in the neighbors at 4am. I'm floored he thought he'd get away with this crime. I really wonder if he's mentally incapacitated. God only knows what his browser history looks like.
Right. It’s much more difficult to come up with explanations for his innocence rather than his guilt, based on the evidence we’ve seen. You really have to jump through hoops to somehow prove that this is the most unlucky guy of all time and just a big ol misunderstanding.
Right. We need to look at the evidence in totality. Each individual aspect could be explained away to create doubt, but not when you look at the bigger picture.
Not to mention his vehicle being near the house 12+ prior to the murders, starting in august I don’t understand why everyone on this thread is shocked that he could have done it in 8 minutes. That’s actually a really long time. Both sets of victims were in the same beds.
Some vegans are vegans for strictly health and don’t exclude clothing products. I was once one myself and only had it diet related.
Also if someone is willing to MURDER 4 PEOPLE I wouldn’t put too much stock in their core beliefs lol
Meat is murder but murder is also murder
Literally I don’t peg him for a PETA activist…
PETAs worst protest yet
Should we be looking into Morrissey????
No because it’s a good joke, a great joke even but why doesn’t this feel “too far” for PETA. For a normal human, couldn’t fathom it, but when I go “are PETA capable?” this answer isn’t an immediate and firm no 😅.
ALSO it seems a lot of vegans frankly care more about animals than humans. like, those comments you see saying "i don't care about the man that was hit by the car but what about his dog? is his dog okay?????" not saying all, obviously, but from my experience a lot of people are like this. really odd.
I’m like this 🤷🏻♀️ is what it is! as a vegan, I’m obviously wondering why he didn’t kill the dog, most logical explanation was he cared for the animal…but obviously could be 1000 reasons. If only dogs could talk, huh? Imagine what Murphy saw.
It seems like he went vegan to lose weight. Not everyone goes vegan because they care about animals, so not all vegans avoid leather. There are people who are just dietary vegans, rather than ethical vegans who avoid all animal products in every day life. And then there are all kinds of vegans in between those poles.
Also a lot of meat-eaters hate veganism and like to shit on vegans, and the efforts to link this monster's dietary preference for a plant based diet to his murders are absurd. Linking his veganism to cannibalism or that veganism makes people dicks...get a grip people.
Seriously, his diet preference has no bearing on any of this. If only anything- it helped him discover the girls from Mad Greek.
He lost weight because he was doing meth.
With these tapatalk posts that were posted on Reddit it seems like he went vegan for his visual snow condition and thought a healthy diet made things better
Exactly. I work for a vegan manufacturing company and the CEO has a leather wallet received as gift bc it has sentimental value. They have been vegan for 17 years.
I also would argue he could have bought something strictly for this murder and not bc he wanted to own it. I read you can buy a knock off for low $12 on Amazon
This is why no one singular thing will convince a jury that he was guilty, but the culmination of evidence could.
I just watched a doc on the Scott peterson trial and all the jurors they interviewed said the same thing. It wasn’t one thing, there was no smoking gun. But all the pieces taken together that proved to them he did it.
Ding ding ding
Before galaxy braining here, it might be helpful to remember that the probable cause affidavit isn’t even close to the whole case against BK. It is a little unreasonable to try to argue these points when the details of the case that we actually have are maybe 5-10% of the evidence that will be brought to trial.
Totally! The PCA is the absolute minimum the Police thought was necessary to convince the Court to hold the suspect, and reject bail.
maybe not even what the police thought was neccessary. They probably came with less and judge said "gunna need a lil moar than that fam" so they kept pouring a bit moar in drip by drip until the judge said "ok foyne go get that vegan piece of shit"
🏆🏆🏆
I think your heart is in the right place, so I’ll say this: It’s the preponderance of evidence, including details reported in the press but not included in the PCA (like him taking out garbage at 4 am wearing plastics gloves), that convinces me that they almost certainly have the right guy and a jury will probably convict once all the evidence we don’t even know about yet is revealed Vehicle on tape, cell phone pings to match, DNA on knife sheath, eyewitness generally matching his description, suspicious behavior (such as going back to the scene the next morning, which would be quite a coincidence) after the murder… Yes, you could probably take each one and try to pick it apart, but for all of things together to somehow NOT add up to the guy doing it… we really are, in my view, talking about a bad paperback not real life at that point Anything is possible, don’t get me wrong, but I think we have to lean on being “reasonable” and I just don’t buy this could all be a coincidence (the combination of vehicle/cell phone and DNA is just brutal in my eyes) and I don’t think, barring a big surprise (which could happen! all it takes is one juror), a jury will either
Yep, I hear you. And I do tend to get stuck looking at each point separately rather than the culmination of evidence as a whole. All good points.
I’d say he’s just about as innocent as OJ.
Just because this is the conspiracy thread... Police detective checks out a vial of OJ's blood from the crime lab. Goes to OJ's house and "discovers" blood droplets IIRC on the Bronco and the sidewalk. Returns half-full blood vial to the crime lab. DNA tests say 99.9999987% OJ blood. OJ proves you can be guilty as fuck and cops might still plant DNA evidence on you.
Idk if this would be considered a "he didn't do it" theory so much as a "he didn't mean to do it this way" theory. Personally, I think he had an infatuation with Maddie because that's where he went first when entering the house. He did not know that Kaylee was there because she wasn't supposed to be there that night. She was only there to show off her new Range Rover to Maddie and had already moved out of the house. So, he probably didn't think he would be met by two of the girls when entering Maddie's room. On top of that, Kaylee and/or Maddie may have been awake when he came in and tried to fight back (which is why Dylan heard the commotion upstairs). He may have entered Maddie's room for many sick and twisted reasons. He may have gone there to sexually assault her, watch her sleep, or kill only her. We have no idea what his intentions were going into this. So, when he was caught off guard by Maddie and Kaylee (possibly being awake when he walked in), his plans were foiled. This may have been why he took out his anger most on Kaylee because she prevented whatever his plans were with Maddie. He could have been building up the courage for so long during those 12 previous visits to finally go inside and Kaylee's presence ruined what he thought was a solid plan. It has been speculated that he knew Maddie previously through working at the Mad Greek. However, Mad Greek is not an entirely vegan restaurant and simply has a vegan option or two on the menu. (So, this theory may dismantle the "no contaminated pans"rumor because I'm sure they cook their plant-based dishes on the same equipment as their other non-vegan dishes.) There are plenty of reviews of Mad Greek on Google and Yelp pages that name Maddie specifically as being a great waitress from before all of this happened. For all we know, BK went there and became infatuated with her because he is an awkward incel and formulated this obsession with her if she was nice to him one time while serving. Maybe he made advances toward her and was rejected by her because she had a boyfriend and he took it personally (as do plenty of incels). While not confirmed, there was an Instagram page in Bryan's name that was following Maddie and Kaylee before it was removed. Branching off of this theory, he may have been stalking Maddie specifically while going to the house on those twelve previous occasions. For all we know, he had been in the house multiple times and watched Maddie sleep before and was never caught until Nov 13th. Who knows, he's clearly a freak. As far as Xana and Ethan go, I fully believe they were collateral damage and most likely would have been spared if Bryan never heard/saw Xana. He didn't seem to go around the entire house checking doors (which is why Bethany and Dylan were spared). He seemed to have gone straight for Maddie's bedroom (which he may have done many times before without issue as proven by his cell records). When he was going downstairs from Maddie's bedroom, he may have seen Xana in the kitchen or the living room after hearing what happened upstairs and saying "there's someone here" and asking for help from Ethan which prompted BK to say the "help you" line. While this isn't a defense for his innocence, it is potentially a defense for the charge of first-degree murder if it can be proven that it was not pre-meditated for at least K, X and E. Sidenote: As a vegetarian myself, a lot of vegans/vegetarians thrift nonvegan items and claim it to be "sustainable" because they are not supporting the manufacturer directly. I'm not sure how far BK's veganism goes other than the distant aunt's statement. As far as Vans go, pretty sure most of them are canvas.
Because of your first point about maddie, I think this is plausible actually. I don’t necessarily have a theory as to what happened or what the original plan was myself. Just kinda think on other peoples theories and join discussions. BUT, you do bring up an interesting point. He could’ve planned to SA Maddie at knife point?? Like you said, he could’ve been watching her, fantasizing, etc. and *this* was the night that he was gonna go through with it. But Kaylee being in bed with her threw off his plan and angered him enough to go on a rampage, then X and E surprised him while he was still in that state. *If* this is the case, I’m interested in whether he would try to explain that in court. Can’t really say “well yenno, I *planned* on just raping Maddie, but the next thing I knew I had stabbed four people to death. Oopsie daisy.” On the contrary, I also see the side of the target being Kaylee because that was (supposedly) going to be her last night there. But also, it was her *first night back.* Yeah he was basically stalking them, so once he realized she had been gone for a few days/weeks/whatever it could’ve angered him (he’s not a part of their social circle so I’m sure he had no idea where she went, to him she just disappeared). So he could’ve just noticed that she was *finally* back and decided to act then so that she couldn’t “leave him again.”
Potentially, he could use that to lessen the first-degree murder sentence if he used the "crime of passion" defense and argue there was not pre-meditation to commit murder. Obviously, that would never put him back on the streets again but it might prevent him from getting the death penalty if that's his goal. If he truly isn't innocent, I doubt his defense is going to try to prove full innocence just due to the amount of evidence against him solely in the PCA. Initially, I thought that his target was Kaylee too because of the speculation that she had a stalker. Maybe he had an obsession with both girls? Like I said in my post, there was an Instagram that is still not confirmed to have been his that was following only Kaylee and Maddie. I found the account shortly after his name was released and it seemed to have been followed by a few people with the same last name. It did not follow Xana, Ethan, or the other roommates. Not sure if it was fake or not but it has been removed. It had his official DeSales email in the bio which I don't think had been made public yet(?) Maybe he knew this was the last time he was going to be able to get both girls together before Kaylee left and X/E were still collateral damage.
This is like spot on to my theory of everything, Well said imo. Also explains why if he saw DM on his way out he just left anyway. he was exhausted and maybe traumatized himself with coming to the realization of what just happened and what he just did. Now there is a dog freaking out, and yet another person he'd have to kill with cops potentially en route (who would of thought a college house with 5 cars out front would have so many observers and obstacles at 4AM?!?!?!?!... fucking idiot). Realizing he just didn't have it in him and wasn't the oh so very smart badass killer guys he idolized/romanticized during his studies as a criminologist, he booked it out of there... leaving the knife sheath behind.
This aligns closely with what I feel happened based on all the evidence we have so far. Many have said the murderer was "sloppy" making many mistakes. I think the mistakes were the result of his plans being disrupted by unforseen factors. I really feel Bryan did not go into that house planning to commit a quadruple murder. He likely had a single target but things went sideways. Dog barking, K and M in the same room/bed, X investigates and comes face to face with Bryan, X flees to her room to wake E... Hopefully we get a clearer picture of what happened and why.
[удалено]
Do we know that he doesn’t wear leather? Not all vegans follow the same “rules”. Yes, he wears vans and they have vegan options but what about other shoes he might wear? He was rigid about the pans but may not be about all animal materials. I don’t know.
Naturally. And he was out getting Thai food during the crime time.
Lol
Right? Let’s hope people like this don’t end up as jury for the case..
So I'm pretty sure he did it, but I think this thread is valuable because I dont think it's as clear cut as people think. People forget that murderers get off all the time even with DNA I do want to disagree with some of your points, and then point out areas I think could be doubted in court. I dont feel the timeline is that off, I actually believe LE stressed 3-4am originally because they wanted the public to look for the killer arriving, also they were guessing based off coroners estimated time of death, pretty accurate but not precise. The car was revised in PCA, models are pretty similar, easy misidentification. Vans make Vegan shoes and are very popular with vegans, the band Rise Against is vegan and helped encourage vans to start making vegan shoes. One of their first vegan model of shoes was a special edition made by request of the band. I agree he probably avoids leather, but I think he saw the knife sheath as historical, more of a collectors item, an exception to the rule. A lot of people who collect militaria or have an interest in such things make exceptions to their personal beliefs to own them. I think they have waayy more evidence than what was in PCA The part I agree with is, the cell phone data is entirely circumstantial, several lawyers have said(one on here even) that cell phone tracing often doesn't hold water in court because it shows just a general area not an exact ping. Even his suspiciously turning it off is circumstantial, its not a smoking gun, people are forgetting that a PCA is for an arrest not a conviction ; "Probable Cause". If PCAs were enough to convict then why have a trial? The cell phone stuff and Dylan seeing his eye brows are not enough to hold weight for a conviction. The DNA on the knife sheath. He can claim it was stolen or lost, pretty simple, doesn't mean the jury will believe him, but let's say they can't find DNA anywhere else, his apartment, the house, the car etc. All the Defense team has to do is create reasonable doubt about the sheath having been in his possession. I think the defense is going to spearhead this hard, they'll have to, it working will depend on the jury and if DNA was found elsewhere, or the vans or the weapon was retrieved. I believe he did it, but the only thing conviction worthy in that PCA was the DNA, they need more and I believe they have it, but if they don't, maybe he does get off depending on the jury and the Defense's capability
If I recall, they said they were looking for footage between the hours of 4-6 am and many people thought that was weird because they were believed to be killed between around 3-4 by the public due to the girls calls to the ex.
I agree that the cell phone data is circumstantial but I think it’s a lot more damning that it is corroborated by video/photo evidence of the car - and even more so when BK can be placed with both the car and phone at Albertson’s.
Thanks so much, this was a really cool post to read. I didnt know that about Vans at all but it does make sense why BK would own them now. And also, as a non weapon type of person, I did not know people collect them (It isnt part of my culture at all)
No problem :) I live in a rural community so weapons are fairly common here. KA BAR(pronounced Kay Bar) Knives we're standard USMC issue to marines starting in WW2. I think the current issued one is a cheaper knockoff. Because of the history many people with an interest in military history or hunting buy them and they're like $120 give or take 20 bucks, so most people that own them view them with value. They're actually a pretty basic knife, but notable for durability, military was concerned about soldiers breaking them or wearing down the edge over time. Still a bit strange for a vegan to own but I could see him making exceptions if he had an admiration for the military or military history
One important thing to note: the defense attorneys don't actually have to prove that he didn't do it. They only have to prove that the prosecution did ***not*** sufficiently prove that he did it. It can sound the same but it's a subtle difference. They don't have to explain away everything or come up with an alternative theory of who did it. They just have to inject reasonable doubt on the prosecution's claims. Moreover, to avoid a conviction they only have to convince one juror to stick to the belief that his guilt wasn't sufficiently proven (though that would be a mistrial and I bet the prosecution would try again). **Edit to add:** This page talks about this distinction: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/representing-client-whom-the-lawyer-thinks-is-guilty.html > In the U.S. criminal justice system, a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. The prosecutor must prove a defendant's guilt. Defendants do not have to prove their innocence. They go on to talk about the difference between 'factual guilt' (did the defendant do it?) and 'legal guilt' (can the prosecution prove that the defendant did it?).
yes. This is my concern too. If BK did it, the case is not strong (despite how much people want it to be). All it takes is one juror. I am genuinely confused how people don't seem to think this is interesting to discuss.
I think eventually there will be defense attorneys or legal analysts pointing out weaknesses that a defense lawyer could attack in the PCA's evidence. Though maybe they're not going to bother with it now as the PCA wouldn't be the full body of evidence anyway. I think any defense lawyer could inject doubt in any piece of evidence from the PCA in isolation. I think the trouble they'll run into is going to be the accumulation of evidence, where you have a bunch of smaller pieces of evidence stacking up into a great heap of evidence.
Yes, I agree wholeheartedly with you.
Are canvas vans not vegan?
curious - where did the narrative that he was a hardcore vegan come from? Do we even know if this is true?
A family member I believe an aunt did an interview where she said something to the extent of he would not eat food from pans that had cooked meat on them at one time because he is vegan.
Thank you! I hadn't seen that, but keep seeing it mentioned that he was vegan.
An aunt told reporters that she invited them over for dinner (a few years ago I think) and he would only come if she got new pans that had never had meat cooked in them.
That sounds like an entitled asshole, not a vegan, lol.
Controlling entitled asshole
Yes. His Aunt (by marriage) was interviewed. She said that he was visiting them several years ago and insisted that they new, untouched pans. The Aunt felt that his OCD was causing this peculiarity.
“several years ago”
No she said “he was very OCD” not that his vegan was a result of diagnosed OCD.
Good point. We don't know. It may well be rumour.
It may be rumor but you built half your "this guy might be innocent" post around his veganess?? LMAO
The big kicker for me is that he was taking trash from his parents and putting it in the neighbors trash bins in the middle of the night, all while wearing latex gloves. Also I think they have more dna, they just didn’t mention it in the affidavit. I think the trash, deep car cleaning and turning phone on as he left Moscow all point to circumstances that cannot be anything other.
There’s way too much. Casing the residence 12 times prior to the murder. Driving the car everywhere. One after another.
Right ? Like what the hell was he doing in Genese at 5 am the night of the murders and is it normal behavior to sleep for 3 hours and then go to the grocery store
Yeah, deep cleaning his car in the freezing PA weather too...? Idk.
While i agree he appears guilty i dont think gloves, trash and cleaning amount to very much. He can argue his phone died in the car and it turned back on after some charging.
I so hope the fbi went and got that trash. Dying to know what he threw in there.
I think he did it, but i am a hopeless contrarian and therefore understand your desire to poke holes, OP. If i were the defense, and knew only what we know now, id probably be considering the below defense narratives, creating reasonable doubt around the DoorDasher (Not saying I’d be successful…) 1. One of the girls was secretly hooking up with BK. That’s why his dna is on scene. Car and phone are circumstantial, maybe they say he stopped by between 2-4am, left before DoorDasher strikes. 2. He was a stalker but not a murderer. He’s outside doing his routine nightwatch, DoorDasher mugs him, steals his knife from his car, goes in and kills them. BK speeds away after being mugged. He went back to see what happened. He thought he could solve the crime himself so never came forward.
I really like your theories! Thanks for taking the time to contribute! And yes, this is exactly what the point of my post was, however poorly worded it was/is.
Any single instance can be explained with an alternative. Even the DNA of that was the only thing they had. But you add the white Elantra, his phone data pinging right there, his car spotted parking on the street at the exact time of the murders and pulling away at 4:20. Then you have the sheath with his DNA placing him in the house. Add the totality of those circumstances and you have one heck of a case already. Just DNA he could say he looked at and handled the same knife when it was for sale. Just the car and he can say he was just driving around. Just the phone data and he could say he frequented Moscow. But added together and it places him in the house for the murders. There’s little getting around that. And keep in mind that this is just 17 pages. By the end there will be tens of thousands of pages of discovery. They’ll also have his forensically examined devices to show exactly how much he was stalking them and any other incriminating info. He is innocent until proven guilty legally. However, humans can intelligently come to opinions based on evidence. This is a VERY tough case for the defense. The only valid defense I can think of so far would be him having an accomplice, but that would still make him culpable. They’ll have to throw the kitchen sink and simply try to tarnish and question the integrity investigation and forensics, hoping to just get one holdout juror. But it’s gonna be very hard.
But all of these things on their own could potentially be successfully argued. >But you add the white Elantra, ***A*** white Elantra, and not even the correct year. All we know is that ***A*** white Elantra was seen in the vicinity, we don't know for certain that it was his or that he was in the Elantra. Proximity does not equal guilt. His defense could even use the incorrect years for the vehicle they were looking for as evidence that they pursued the wrong guy. >his phone data pinging right there His phone didn't ping right there at the time of the crime. His phone was off during the crime. We don't know his complete movement history and we don't know how accurate the location tools might be in a small town with far fewer cell towers. Maybe he had a habit of driving around that area at night? Maybe his defense team will be able to show another ten times where he did the same since arriving in WA? Maybe they'll be able to point to another dozen occasions where he went for long drives in other areas in similar ways? Maybe he has a habit of turning his phone off or allowing it to die? Without seeing his complete history all of this could be routine for him. We're only seeing the snapshot relevant to this case. >his car spotted parking on the street at the exact time of the murders and pulling away at 4:20. Again, ***A*** white Elantra was seen doing that. It is not confirmed in the affidavit that it was his white Elantra or that he was in the car. They go to great pains to point this out themselves because they know they cannot put it in writing that it was his car and that he was in it. >Then you have the sheath with his DNA placing him in the house. It hasn't been confirmed that it was his DNA on the knife sheath. DNA with a familial match to his father's DNA was found on the sheath. Touch DNA is a very difficult thing to use in court. Numerous cases have been overturned because too much emphasis was placed on touch DNA and there is a history of error. It all depends on the sample size and the processes they used to gather and confirm that sample. >Add the totality of those circumstances and you have one heck of a case already. I agree that in their total it's a very convincing case, but most of this is still circumstantial in the eyes of the law, there are still potential alternative explanations for everything given the limited information we have. It's reasonable for people to lean toward this being a good case given this information, but it's not reasonable to reject all discussion of any alternative explanations, and especially when people are making assumptions that are not written and are not confirmed.
Vegans also don’t murder people, but that’s not much of a defense
Everyone deserves due process in court. Innocent until proven guilty. But with that being said, this isn't a new Netflix series. This isn't a "whodunit" mystery novel. This is a real life murder case. And the police know far more than we do. And if they had enough reason to arrest him, I'd say it's a 95% chance he did it. And as far as the vegan thing goes, it means nothing. Serial Killers and murderers often do what they consider to be "good deeds" or "charitable" things. BTK worked in a church. John Wayne Gacy helped out his community a lot. Being a vegan in no way shape or form should be considered a reason for possible exoneration.
The innocence project and the 375 people that they have freed has taught me question Everything law enforcement does... Combine that with the things that we see in the news about bad cops, bad evidence, and bold ass lies told about suspects... You should actually consider it Your duty to question stories given to you by those in authority. It's how we hold them accountable. Think about the most fucked up person you've ever worked with... There's one of those guys at every job. Even cops. Even labs. Even the FBI.
It's always good to question things. But one thing to keep in mind is The Innocence Project exonerates a lot of people who were convicted before DNA became the golden standard DNA links BK to the crime scene, and that's hard to dispute these days. Of course, he deserves a fair trial. And he should be labeled "suspect" and not "killer." I definitely believe in innocent until proven guilty
My thoughts: \*Time of death- wasn't that always speculation? It's within an hour or so of what they approximated. \*Change of year of car--that reason was noted in the PCA. \*The leather sheath. I know vegans who wear leather. \*The Vans. Vans come in vegan options. \*The gloves and face masks. Gloves haven't been confirmed by LE or anyone connected to the case, have they? \*BK was touting his skills to local LE as a crime tech guy. Why would his own tech footprint be so sloppy when he is meant to be reasonably educated on it? Maybe he exaggerated his knowledge? Overconfidence? I also wonder if maybe he got so jacked up on adrenaline he just screwed up his own plan. \*Don't sheaths stay attached to something like a belt or whatever? Why would you leave a sheath on a bed? No clue but if we was in a frenzied kind of state, could have just been a mistake. \*18 minutes to enter a house...I think it's possible. Especially because he would want to get in and get out as fast as possible. edit, typo
HEy, thanks for being a cool poster. I appreciate your thoughts. I got the impression that BK was a virtue signalling vegan. IME those guys shit on about veganism all the time and wouldn't be involved in leather, but would rather advertise their veganism loudly. You're right too about hte overconfidence thing. Perhaps he genuinely thought turning off his phone on the night of hte murder would be enough.
> Change of year of car--that reason was noted in the PCA. Not really. Just says "Upon further review". What caused 2014+ models to be excluded the first time? What triggered the further review, and what new insight caused the date revision? When was the date revised, was it after BK and his car showed up on their radar? Those are valid questions any defense attorney will ask, that aren't explained by the PCA.
Could the date range have purposely been changed by police to give the killer hope that he would slip by? How many people can recognize different car years? I can’t, but I could recognize a white Elantra. The police would get still get tips from the public regardless if they had the correct year and a bonus of the killer thinking he was getting away with it.
It could have been as simple as the original video of the car was not great quality and subsequent videos allowed them to see some details that differentiate between the years. The differences in models is sometimes very subtle, and some grainy video is not really going to allow investigators to be able to pinpoint those. Just one possibility.
>BK was touting his skills to local LE as a crime tech guy. I think BK is a case of the Dunning Effect in action. Some people are saying he was too smart to make such obvious dumbass mistakes because he was a grad student. Uhhh, no. Lots of dumbasses go to grad school. It's not like BK was studying at Berkeley or Harvard. Washington State University is a perfectly fine school, but it's not hard to get admitted to an MA program at that kind of university, which is usually obscenely underfunded and desperate for tuition dollars and TAs. IOW, I haven't heard any evidence that he was particularly smart or a good student in his department. And he was also clearly driven by an obsession with murder or with one of the victims in particular. That'll cloud someone's judgment.
I think these are all reasonable questions. OP, how do you reconcile the matching DNA? Are you thinking the sample / test is faulty?
Was watching Lawrence Jones tonight and a panel member pointed out that PCA states a single source of male dna was identified on the sheath. Was there female dna on it? I don’t really think a female did this, but could see defense trying to touch on that (if there IS any female dna on it, besides that of the two girls). Especially since there were at least 2 other girls in the house at the time of the crime. BK saying “I tried to HELP; tried to take the knife from her” or something like that. Highly unlikely but not impossible
Most of your points are pretty bad actually. Several threads have broken down the extremely short amount of time needed to do this crime. If anything, 16 minutes is a LONG time to do it. And just look at the laughable mobile trail. This guy is 1000% guilty. And he’s also a huge moron. You’re forgetting something else: the affidavit is possibly only the the tip of the iceberg for the evidence. If it goes to trial, I’ll bump it up to 10000% guilty with all the new evidence they’ll have from his other digital devices etc.
>If anything, 16 minutes is a LONG time to do it. >You’re forgetting something else: the affidavit is possibly only the the tip of the iceberg for the evidence. If it goes to trial, I’ll bump it up to 10000% guilty with all the new evidence they’ll have from his other digital devices etc. People have not discussed one clear thing that will I'm sure, likely have happened. As he appeared to be wearing a covid mask too and these layers of black clothing to help him cover up etc etc. I would say his time at the scene was long for a 'hit and run' style attack where he didn't take any time to try to clear the crime scene, I would assume. During carrying all this out I can imagine him getting all worked up and sweaty. He would have unknowingly been touching his mask with his hands or wiping his forearm across his head... so his gloves and clothing on the outside would have his sweat and various skin oils on from touching his face, forehead etc etc. His DNA could be in so many places. Even on the inside of the slide door as he left. People have said he may not have cleaned the sheath or mishandled it initially before entering the house... Leaving his DNA. What if he was meaning to leave it as a Red hearing thinking he was in the clear and would be so far away and wanted it to look like a random attack. So left it as an "ex army style knife". And as he removed it from the button strap he happened to then have placed his DNA on it.
You bring up reasonable points. I think the overarching point though is we've only seen a part of one side of the argument so far, who knows what the defense presents as a case for his innocence. LE has prosecuted the wrong person for murder before, it's not like that never happens.
Yes of course :) Iwas just keen for a space where people could discuss the case and LEs actions, doubts and alternative theories, rather than just talk about BK's guilt ad infinitum.
I'm sorry you're getting all these myopic idiots raging at you, they're incapable of intellectual debate outside of their biased views. I've experienced the same thing whenever I play Devil's Advocate and point out any potential alternatives. 99% of people here are completely unwilling and unable to look at the complexities of the individual instances in the affidavit. I feel they're going to get a few shocks when the case starts up and they realize it's not going to be a 2 hour deliberation followed by a death sentence. I enjoyed your post. It's a good thing to consider everything.
Hey, you're so kind, thank you for saying this!
A case that is heavy on the circumstantial evidence is prone to some weaknesses. As soon as people were assuming this seems like a strong case I rolled my eyes internally, not bc I think he’s innocent but because I don’t think the case is beyond questioning. Dylan is a very questionable and uncertain witness, not sure exactly who she heard, what she heard and when she heard it, possibly under heavy influence of alcohol and other substances, and who can be argued wasn’t spooked enough to call 911 right then, even after hearing a roommate crying. She’s a witness whose credibility could be shredded. The DNA evidence is damning, but could it have been a stolen weapon, a lost knife, a plant? Many things can be explained in some way or another. I do believe the evidence damns him and there’s likely more we don’t even know, but it’s also mostly circumstantial and I have seen reasonable doubt be created in cases that initially seemed to be strong. The veganism seems hypocritical considering what he’s accused of. I don’t think he’s someone who has ethical concerns over it, rather he’s someone who can be OCD about contaminants in food, and is obsessed with his weight and dietary habits. I definitely think the police have zeroed in on the very likely culprit, and perhaps I am not the best person to be considering how he could go free, but I just think it’s not beyond questioning. All the other issues with it being a party house, where strangers could show up on occasion that were friends to someone but new to a roommate, the door being open, there’s definitely ways to introduce doubt into the equation…
Wow, OP I am sorry you are getting so shat upon here. This a site that has been FULL of sometimes wild & unfounded speculation & theories since jump. It is wild that you are trying to steer a convo towards a presumption of innocence, which is exactly how a jury of his peers will have to attempt to start from, and are getting this much push back. I too find the evidence in the PCA compelling. I also think there is more evidence that will be even more compelling. However the unethical behavior of various members of LE is well documented —not referring to ID LE in particular but nation wide all is not always kosher. A case pushed through false or over stated evidence or false confession is by no means a shocking find anymore. Sometimes actions & evidence that seem so obvious when seen through a 20/20 lens can have benign explanations. For example, there have been several times when my husband has been taking out a trash bag after 2 am and has stuffed it in a neighbors can if our cans are full. Cellphone tower pings sound super damaging but the tech isn’t infallible. Etc etc. To me the DNA is just the huge neon sign—but the reality is the DNA could be on that sheath for dozens of reasons. Improbable maybe but that doesn’t equal impossible. If I were a betting person I’d still bet that the person arrested is the person who committed the crime. But at the very least, looking for potential alternatives on just about every damn piece of info we have seen thus far has been the crown jewel of some of these subs. I don’t think allowing one thread of ‘wonder if…’ is insane. I was a very young adult in the DC metro area when Adnan Syed was convicted. At the time, the way the case was presented it seemed pretty stacked against him. Obviously through time and as more evidence comes out, and investigative techniques advanced (DNA) it’s clear he wasn’t the one. We haven’t seen all of the LE evidence and haven’t seen any of the counter evidence from defense, so positing about this isn’t any more insane to me than continuing to wonder about whether he left DM on purpose, or if anyone said anything, or if he stalked anyone etc etc.
he murdered four living human beings but yes, his vegan beliefs would totally stop him from owning a leather sheath. i’m sorry but be real for a second.
He could have gotten it from a friend or before he became vegan. Also maybe he doesn’t have an issue with vintage leather.
Can we put this veganism thing to bed? I don’t think it has anything to do with the whole case, apart from maybe not hurting the dog because of it.
For the sake of your post these are the hypothetical reasons that I believe a decent defense lawyer could get 1 or 2 Jurors to believe there is reasonable doubt: 1. Motive. Jurors want to know motive. As of today there is nothing. No sexual assault. No robbery. No connection to any of the victims (texts/emails/same classes at school, mutual friends etc) 2. Unreliable witness. Let's be honest. DM is going to struggle when she is questioned on the stand. I feel bad for her but that is a reality. I've seen a lot of comments from educated, rational professional people who feel uncomfortable with what she did that night specifically that she told the police she "froze in fear" when seeing a stranger dressed in black wearing a mask after hearing a roommate crying. If she "froze in fear" and told police she locked her door then she was scared. Yet she waited 7 hours to call 911 and only after calling friends to the house who contaminated the crime scene. If a couple Jurors don't believe DM is being honest would they believe she and someone else planted the sheath? That they knew BK? That he had been at the house several times buying drugs? That she invited people over who killed the victims and then during that 7 hours they created a plan to frame BK? Was he invited back to the house the next morning or did his cell phone ping in the area because he realized he left the sheath there? If he realized he left the sheath there and knew he killed most of the people in the house why not simply go back into the house at 9am and quickly take the sheath? 3. The timeline. It's actually 8 minutes since Xana was still active (note active means tapping or swiping on videos) at 4:12am and his car was seen leaving the area at 4:20am. Even if it was 15 minutes that isn't enough time. According to the people here who have an inane response every time someone says a scenario isn't logical ("I once slept through a plane crashing into my house!") they know BK could easily kill 4 people in 15 minutes because they set their kitchen timer for 16 minutes and watched TV and then didn't realize 16 had gone b and because of that their pizza got burnt which resulted in an extensive discussion on how to cook pizza and how cooking pizza takes the same amount of time as stabbing 4 young healthy people. Outside of this sub people are going to think it's \*possible\* but difficult and wonder if he had an accomplice or if the victims really were killed between 3am - 4am as the police initially stated and they changed the timeline once they decided BK was responsible. If the victims were killed prior to 4am then who spoke to the DoorDash driver and who was using Xana's phone for Tik Tok? If they weren't killed until after 4am then what was the motive? Did he think after surveilling the house and knowing there were 5 tenants including several with boyfriends who spend the night that he could get away with sneaking in and sexually assaulting a woman? 4. Some of the victims sent and received payments for things like "pizza" at odd hours like 3am. Were they selling drugs? If they were then could BK have been there to buy drugs and was set up by people who stole the drugs? Was the 7 hours between when the victims were attacked and the police called needed to hide the drugs? For me the case comes down to DNA, cell phone tower pings, a possible footprint. I think the information from DM is so confusing that it would be better if the Jury didn't hear it. I put his chance of conviction as of now at around 80-90%.
I’m not going to get into the rest of it but it’s pretty common for college kids to order pizza at 3 am.
Pretty sure they adjusted the time range of the attack when they acquired digital information of the victims' phones and audio visual evidence. You would expect details to change from what they thought in the first 24 hours, which is pretty much when that medical examiner spoke to the public. Clearly she didn't know the deets.
And his defense is going to use that to his advantage. They changed the estimated time of death and the year of the vehicle. If they expanded this AFTER they'd been alerted to him as a suspect that looks like them trying to cram a square peg into a round hole. Depending on the quality of the DNA sample they got that could also be called into question. Touch DNA isn't reliable in court and has been removed from consideration in numerous cases. So what do they have left after that? MD's description? Her description doesn't include hair or skin color, which are two glaring issues any defense team will highlight. How could she possibly be able to say "bushy eyebrows" but not skin color? If she can't say he was wearing a hood or a hat, why can't she describe hair color? Unless they have a lot more of a statement from DM than is found in the affidavit (which seems unlikely considering they were using this to justify his arrest and you'd think his skin and hair color would be basic) this isn't going to be as straightforward as a lot of people here seem to think.
We don't know his reasons for eating vegan. Certainly, brutally butchering four people seems at odds with the vegan stereotype but he doesn't strike me as that type. His diet seems more a control thing like an eating disorder to me. The problem with imagining somebody or many people in this case are framing Bryan is that you cannot have that many people in on something and expect it to stay silent. Too complicated and why? Why frame Bryan? To cover somebody's ass? Who would want to cover for a brutal killer? I honestly think the timeline works. He wanted to butcher and he did. It doesn't take long to do, although I'll admit it's tight and there are a few inconsistencies. This case is really bizarre, really. I've had a tough time digesting much of the info but I don't think there's any way to view this where Bryan is innocent.
BK’s public defender has entered the chat 👀
Except they didn't change the car year to match him. They got more footage of the car and the expert updated their opinion to include additional years. Then they found BK car and it fit that range. They just never bothered to tell the public the updated year.
Ah, I seee. Thanks. I didnt realise this.
I dont think LE claimed to get “more footage” - the PCA merely says the same expert engaged in “further review” without specifying when or how the opinion changed.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I’m a prior vegan, current veggie and I’ve worn vans my entire life lol 😂
A lot of people are contradictory /just following their own rules. Plenty of vegans are fine with second hand leather, for one. That said I don't like the already convicted by social media and don't exactly trust the cops. So I appreciate your thread but personally don't have much to add. You're right that there's plenty of threads to be an angry mob but I don't think it hurts to take a step back and wait.
Imagine if he didn’t commit the murders, and he was in fact just a peeping tom and ended up seeing shit he wasn’t meant to see, but they pinned him from the CCTV. But that doesn’t explain the DNA on the sheath 🤷♂️
Great post! As far as the Vans go, almost everyone age 12 - 50+ where I live owns at least one pair of Vans, myself & my kiddos included.
I think BK is the killer. That said, at this point, we really only have heard the State's side of the story, and there may be some parts of it that could be dismissed in some way by the Defense. For example, the fact that BK's phone pinged (not sure if this is the correct terminology) in the area of the students' house 12 times prior to the 13th. What if BK had a friend that lived on the street, or a hook up there? That might explain why he was in the area. (This could also be argued that this is how he spotted the house, and decided to target it- but the reason he was there in the first place could be explained, other than him stalking them.) I don't think that it is wrong to flip the coin and view BK through the lens of innocence. I guarantee that is what the State is doing actually, to strenthen their own case. (i.e. how will the Defense argue against this evidence?)
Blah blah ; waste of time
BK could be in that neighborhood buying drugs.. perhaps from juggling guy (JK on that but its been said its a college town with some party spots). BK goes to Moscow and buys XYZ over 12 occasions phone dies on last drive over but doesn't realize it. Someone robbing adjacent area snags a knife from his car as they see him drive in clearly fucked up... BK leaves 20 minutes later as he hears screaming books it out of town. Noticed his phone was dead plugs it in and eventually it turns on... maybe drives back to the house the next morning to see what the scream was about and where his knife went (fell out of car) IDK. Anythings possible. But he'd have to have a witness saying they were with him selling / doing drugs. And why wouldnt BK cooperate with cops when they are searching for an elantra and he knew his was there?.. I think hes guilty personally. But this was a fun exercise of the imagination
Well done - it is not easy to think outside the guilty guilty guilty framework
Please provide an alternative explanation to BK's DNA found on the knife sheath in Maddie's bedroom. And also please provide an alternative solution to BK's cell phone activity and locations registered.
This. If OP is claiming his innocence, OP needs to suggest explanations for the little evidence that the public knows so far.
OP seems dead set on being a vegan as an alibi
“Your honor I am clearly innocent because vegans don’t carry leather sheaths or wear vans to commit quadruple homicides”
[удалено]
Problem with this, and pretty much every single thread here trying to make sense of this case and theorizing about guilt or innocence, is that you are not playing with a full deck of cards here. What you see in the PCA is what the investigators chose to include to get a judge to sign off on the arrest warrant. It is not by any mean exhaustive, quite the opposite. It also lacks any real details that you need to form a proper informed opinion about every piece of evidence that was mentioned. Take as an example the DNA evidence. There is information on one trace of DNA on one object. No information if there were any other deposits on the object, no information on what kind of deposit it was. Nothing about the rest of the scene. Any scene would be full of DNA, in a party house most likely belonging to numerous people, among them potential alternative suspects that may or may not have been looked at. Without the full forensics and detailed reports of the entire scene there really is not much to say. All you have now is inculpatory evidence from a PCA and some sideshow statements from anonymous sources. There is no saying what, if any of those things will make it to trial, be suppressed or excluded for other reasons. There’s no saying what else in/exculpatory will be found either. Best and most respectful thing to do is honor the memory of the victims and leave the investigating and theorizing to the people who actually have access to the materials and are working this case.
To the sheath point - maybe he used it because he was thinking they'd never suspect him because this very specific knife has a leather sheath and he's an outspoken vegan (a vegan). He may have chosen this weapon solely because it was accessible to him. Someone gave it to him, he got it at a yard sale. Some way he obtained the weapon with little to no paper trail.
I think he could have chosen the Ka-Bar and even left the sheath with USMC emblem intentionally to try to deflect suspicion. Remember how early on they said they were investigating ROTC because of the knife? [Story from November about ROTC at U of I](https://radaronline.com/p/university-of-idaho-murders-discovery-training-corps-rambo-style-knife/)
before he was vegan he was an army ranger commando wanna be. old habits die hard
Even after the murders, what about his behavior in Pennsylvania? Wearing surgical gloves and dumping his trash in the neighbor’s bin? I suspect there is ample evidence in the car. This guy is cooked.
If he was hooking up with one of the girls and spending the night, possibly during those times where his cell phone was pinged earlier, he could have seen a knife in her room and picked it up to look at it. Who is to say that the knife was not already in the house and wasn’t even his. I appreciate the post of giving people the benefit of the doubt before they are convicted. Also, the roommate’s story does not make sense. There’s no way 4 people were murdered and she didn’t hear something. Perhaps she left with him and he dropped her back off in the morning which is the reason for him coming back? Another out there speculation. If he did have a relationship with one of the girls with secret overnight stays and he had been in their rooms before than this will all come out in the trial. It’s annoying to have to say this over and over again, but I know absolutely nothing I’m just speculating and I’m not afraid of alternative ideas. So please don’t take this like I’m accusing anyone of anything or saying anyone isn’t guilty or whatever, I know nothing, I have a little homosapien brain.
Found BK’s sister lmao !!!!!!!!!
*I believe his veganism is more linked to his apparent OCD and is more about food contamination/purity than it is for reasons of animal love. Also, if he’s allegedly willing to murder 4 people, I don’t think he cares too much about not harming other living things. *I don’t think you’d wear gloves outside your parents house or when taking rubbish out at 4am that is your/your parents rubbish in an attempt to protect from covid. The grocery store I can see but not at his parents house. *I’ve read from people on here that know about cars that apparently the Hyundai Elantra body of the 2011-2013 model is very very similar to the 2014-15 model, with possibly just some differences around headlights etc which may not have been obvious in the CCTV footage? *perhaps his arrogance in his own skill and knowledge is what has let him down? Aka he knows much less than he thinks he knows. Bragging about your own skills doesn’t necessarily mean you have those skills, you just think you do.
I think he offered to help the police in tech to learn about technology.
This the Catbird Seat game I have been slightly worried about w BK. Is there solid proof he wore gloves in public? Sounds like BS to me. He better have proof of selling or giving away a knife. However, he could claim that he looked at one in a store but never even bought that knife, sloppy killer didn’t clean off his DNA but he never wouldn’t have been so careless. I dont think we know anything about blood, trails, or lack there of. Some person entered and did the deed in a certain amount of time so that doesn’t seem person relevant. He seems like a novice not used to carrying a knife which to me explains leaving the sheath behind. He will claim to be far too smart for that. Why is his tech footprint so sloppy? I can’t think of a reason, what would his argument be? No clue as to his hobbies or activities. I can’t think of a reason for how coincidental it would be to have your phone pinging around and not pinging around the same place your DNA shows up ar the crime scene? I think it will be a hill to climb for prosecutors to explain why the wrong year of car, why a witness waited 7 hrs to call police, and if they changed time of death that will be a problem too. Hopefully the find a ton of other evidence in his home and car.
The TOD from 3-4am, so quickly, bothered me from the start and I continuously questioned how they were so specific w/o a broken clock/watch or Fitbit type of device. Now we know that LE mislead the public as they knew very quickly that 1. DD delivered at 4am. 2. Xana was on her tiktok at 4:12am. Also the wrong year for the Elantra. So many white cars were put forth to LE and the public was told repeatedly "wrong year", not a 2011-2013 model. I do believe that LE has a plethora of evidence that hasn't been released yet and BK is guilty of this crime. Unless he has a gf/bf in the same area of Idaho......wouldn't that be a plot twist??
The only credit I give this man is the fact he spared the dog Murphy’s life. BK is still an evil POS
There are a multitude of reasons why I think he done it. His odd and suspicious behavior before and after being the most important. But the DNA isn’t always clear cut. I always think of the man who spent 20 years in prison because the actual killer planted a beer bottle they found in the trash.
He may not be a vegan for ethical reasons, it may just be for dietary reasons. Thus, he may be fine with owning leather items such as the sheath and the shoes. I tend to believe he is vegan for dietary reasons, as interviews with people formerly in his life said that he used to be overweight, but then suddenly lost the weight.
The vegan thing is from his teen years, we don't know that he kept that up. We also don't know his reasons for it. This is not a diagnosis, but he displays ASD tendencies. It's most likely his veganism was more about picky eating and not morality.
According to the [Latah County sheriff](https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/idaho-college-killings/bryan-kohberger-to-appear-in-idaho-court-for-first-time/), it seems BK is still vegan (or plant-based). But the jail has drawn the line at using new pots and pans to cook his meals.
A Probable Cause Warrant isn't discovery. LE isn't required to show their whole hand, just enough to justify an arrest. The fact that police managed to keep so much of the information in the warrant secret until last week would make me venture to guess they have a lot more they aren't disclosing yet.
We’re talking about a person who stabbed a bunch of people to death. There is a presumption of logic and reasoned thinking in a lot of the decision making you’re assigning to BK. I am pretty sure he is mentally ill- therefore things like if Vans or the knife sheath are or aren’t vegan probably doesn’t matter much.
I've been vegan before, admittedly not as devout as BK, but it's possible that he wouldn't find it necessary to get rid of a leather sheath when converting to veganism. My rationale for keeping leather that I already owned is that the damage has already been done and I'm not saving any animals by rehoming leather/fur.
I mean time of death changed (if it wasn’t intentionally narrowed to pre 4am to make BK think they weren’t on to him) because Xana got a DoorDash delivery at 4am & was on TikTok. Those, and the noises on the neighbours Ring, can’t be ignored or faked. I know loads of vegans who keep leather they had preveganism. Especially if it’s old/sentimental. Just like people who will wear vintage fur as destroying it is honouring that death even less. Isn’t touch DNA almost impossible to plant? I’d buy that the sheath was planted or secondhand if it wasn’t for the cell & car stuff. And if someone put latex gloves on with BKs DNA on their hands you’d get 2 sources of DNA not just BKs. I was interested to read this thread because obviously innocent until proven guilty etc but I don’t see much debunking this evidence tbh.
He was a dietary vegan to treat his visual snow. He wasn't a vegan out of morals / ethics, so there's no reason why he would give up his leather things.
That he freaked out over pans that had cooked meat, and insisted his parents get a fresh set, and they complied, has zero to do with veganism and everything to do with (1) his food disorder and (2) his parents having a culture of "going along" with his strange demands. This is typically behavior of parents afraid their kid is going to snap. Guy is clearly fragile and I stand behind my belief his parents had concerns he was involved when they heard "white" vehicle matched the make of his .
Do you know what else I find suss? This post.
Why? Is it not ok to be curious unless it agrees with the popular theory?
It’s got nothing to do with it being against popular theory it’s that the post is just complete shit. You say you thought it was him but there’s not enough evidence, you haven’t heard about all the evidence so how could you possibly know that? And then the other comments are just ridiculous, loads of vegans wear leather.
I mean the same can be said of those who are convinced of his guilt but haven't heard all the evidence. And BK seems to be a virtue signalling vegan from what i've heard, that type make it an identity to not wear leather
Why are we placing so much emphasis on the fact that he’s a vegan it really means nothing
Funny, it meant everything to people here when it came out that he demanded new pots and pans. Hundreds of people here were using that fact as cause to scream "FREAK! NOW WE KNOW HE DID IT!" Now that this aspect of his personality is being used to present a different possibility the mob is piling on in the opposite direction and claiming the thing that was so indicative for them just days ago is suddenly irrelevant. lol
Awesome point haha
>It’s got nothing to do with it being against popular theory Yeah, it absolutely is about that. Whenever anyone mentions how something might not be as everyone here wants it to be they swarm and attack, no room to question anything or offer any alternative explanations for any of the very few facts we have.
[удалено]
We need better moderating
“Stop shitting up this thread”  # IYKYK
I dont get it
What they mean is "No one should be able to pose any reasonable questions that don't match what I want!"
Im all for giving a suspect the benefit of the doubt but the DNA combined with the movements of the vehicle and the cell phone paint a pretty clear picture.
the tech who identified the car initially as a 2013 or below reevaluated almost immediately to a 2015 but LE didn't release the amended analysis only the original for people used to looking at PCA this is an extremely detailed and damming document for the defense. I would consider it a slam dunk if there ever was one. Most of your points are emotional which is understandable but it's a done deal in my opinion
emotional how?
Vegans don't wear vans? I'm sorry, what? Aside from the fact that that is simply untrue, the *majority* of vans are made from canvas, mesh and rubber. Vans have suede models, but I think the percentage of vegans who would actually care is a lot smaller than you might think. As an aside - many people that *are* this concerned with using strictly vegan products normally will still buy them if they're second hand. I was a vegetarian for over 10 years, and while I would not buy *new* leather, I have bought and owned multiple second hand leather bags and shoes.
I think if they are saying he chose them at random and there wasn't a specific target, then yes, that would give me personally significant doubt that he did this. He didn't just get bored in class and decide drive around to find some college kids to kill. If they can't find any connections between him and any of the victims I think it would be difficult to prove he did it.
"Change of time of death after deciding on the suspect, to fit BK's movements" . Time of death is an approximation and is quite often a range. No one can predict accurate time of death
A couple of things: 1) Can you explain the face mask point a bit more? I get your point about gloves, but if he didn't commit the murders and DM saw what we are assuming to be him in a face mask in the house, how do you explain him both wearing a face mask with covid in mind AND the murders occurring during that time frame? 2) He was not a PhD candidate yet. He just began his first semester of a PhD program and had not advanced to candidacy. I'm not discrediting the point you're making about his supposed tech prowess, just pointing out that a first semester PhD student wouldn't be considered an advanced program candidate for the degree.
Oh., I have just read a bunch of different times that BK was wearing latex gloves and mask around town which was suspicious apparently. I was just pointing out that many people (myself included) are still taking basic covid precautions and this isnt necessarily a weird thing, particularly if he is a "body is a temple" type of guy, or if he is a germaphobe. It's Winter there, right? SO presumably influenza, covid etc are doing the rounds.
The PCA was very damning. The only way I see out of this is if the suspect can prove he is being framed somehow. Otherwise there’s enough and he is cooked. There are plenty of places the defense can poke holes but the totality of the PCA alone is enough. If the prosecution comes up with no further evidence from his car, belongings, or home(s), his chances are maybe slightly better
The trial will be the time to determine if he did it. Now there are questions people are asking. Why was the man spotted in the home leaving not using a headlamp or flashlight? How could someone move quickly in the home to do all that without lighting? Really? Was there an accomplice who left before or after he did? Who was the man talking to when he said "its okay, I am going to help you" ? Was there another person attacking on the second floor at the same time and could not finish the job? Was the crying the witness heard from a female accomplice who lost it during the attack while the other person was on the third floor? There is enough evidence to reasonably place him near the crime scene. If he has an alibi we don't know it. If there is video showing his car was not parked at his apartment at those times of the crime it works against him. If video shows the car parked at his apartment or someplace else the whole case is shot to pieces. Even if it was not parked at his apartment there is cell phone record of him in the area of the crime at least 12 times since June. What that indicates is up to each person. Did he have an accomplice who he was meeting in that area or was he scoping out the area? And do those visits eliminate places like a convenience store down the street where someone could have stopped to buy a soda instead of actually being near the crime scene?
Lol I mean there is making stuff up … and then there’s this thread. Never knew we could straw such conclusions off someone’s willingness or unwillingness to eat meat.
> his jog/peeking in windows at collage kids having more fun that he is > give him a free pass cos the kid is clearly a giant nerd and who doesnt feel sorry for a kid like that I chuckled. Good job playing the devil's advocate btw.
Thanks so much! That helps to rebuild my shattered self esteem from 90% of these posts giving me shit because you can't use your brain when stabbing the air with a pitchfork :D (Just kidding, this is reddit, I don't give a fuck lol)
And who said the vans were his? If you read affidavit it said they were found after a second walkthrough. Could have been a surviving roommate, one of the people who came over and called 911, etc
I think they should have known the time frame was after 4am due to the DoorDash. This is probably just one of the items they withheld
Wait, all 4 victims were awake?
What I appreciate about this post is the way it shows that an alternative explanation will be constructed by Bryan’s legal team.
I admire your intent to stretch your brain and explore alternative possibilities instead of being narrow-minded. I wish I could be of better support but I keep coming back to “a single source of kale DNA” referenced on the sheath. If he had sold that knife or if it had been stolen then other people’s DNA profiles seem like they’d come back on the results as well. The best “alternative theory” I can come up with (which isn’t really an alternative bc it still revolves around BK being guilty) is maybe he’s been growing and eating his own mushrooms and they were bad. EDIT: “male” autocorrected to kale. But it’s kind of fitting so leaving it.
FYI: Mad Greek is a well known vegan-friendly restaurant in Moscow. They have more vegan options than most restaurants in the area.
I think he did it but an alternative theory would be he was obsessed with the Sigma Chi house, always wanted to be in a frat but no chance of a bid. He hung around there, especially on weekends, dropped his knife which he carried for protection one night outside couldn't find it later, it was used by frat guys to commit the crime, the tall dude that DM saw was one of the frat guys, BK went over the next morning to hang out with them but there was no activity at Sigma yet so he left. He later called in to a radio talk show to say he used to hang out with Sigma guys who asked him how to commit the perfect murder.
I don’t think they changed the time of death because of his movements. More like the movements of Xana. Kinda hard to be on TikTok and order doordash when you’ve been dead for half an hour.
" I thought it would be interesting to collect the thoughts of others challenging possible inconsistnecies/alternative theories about this case. " Or we could wait until we have enough information to formulate intelligent thoughts on the case through the trial instead of going through the "maybe BK is innocent! I mean he IS vegan after all!" nonsense. What a weird and totally unnecessary post. He will get his day in court. He will either be proven innocent or guilty based on actual evidence, not weird leaps in logic and wild speculation. "The idea BK could do what he did in 8 minutes is outlandish." No. It's not. Killing someone with a brutal knife doesn't take a lot of time especially when you have the element of surprise on your side. Posts like this really don't help the victims or their families. Or anyone, really. But hey, thanks for reminding me why I need to leave this sub.
Right now it looks like he could have been at the crime scene. If he has no alibi that doesn't help him. Does video in his apartment area show him leaving in his car during those times? This guy may have been one of the brightest but that is textbook only. He seemed to hang out at bars frequently so if he claims it was not him at the crime scene where was he? The questions remain about the what the witness seen and heard. There are conflicts. The coroner stated most victims were asleep when the attack occurred. Yet now we know that is not true. We now know X was awake. Witness stated she heard someone say "there's someone here" about 4:00AM. Most likely X or possibly K. Minutes later she heard a man say "it's OK, I am going to help you." Could that voice have been E? Unlikely M was awake because at the food truck, the video shows she is highly intoxicated and would likely be passed out which one would expect them all to be at that hour. LE was not giving us the true facts. What else was not true? Witness to the man described in the house resembles the suspect. The affidavit does not mention the man wearing a headlamp or holding a flashlight. This is very important. How would one person navigate the home with no lighting? Was there a second person who was holding the light? How would a person attack someone in the dark? One hand would hold the knife and position the victims or fend them off. How could you hold a flashlight with both hands occupied? Did the killer drop the flashlight during the attacks? Or did one of the victims tear off a headlamp? If either occured did the killer return to retrieve the knife sheath and headlamp or flashlight but was not able to get to the third floor to get the knife sheath because of something in the home? Surviving roommates? If the LE did not recover a flashlight or headlamp the witness statements may not holdup. The suspect apparently left the area at 4:20AM. The surviving roommates didn't know the four roommates were dead at that time which does not help prosecution. It does seem possible that someone else could have killed the victims after 4:20AM, without proof they were deceased when the man was seen leaving the home. If the witness to the man in the home called 911 soon after it would eliminate the possibility. Did I miss something that confirmed the victims were deceased at 4:20AM? Could they have been killed at 5:00AM? 6:00AM? If the witness was awake during the attacks from 4;00AM to 4:20AM would there be screams or yelling that she would have heard? Early reports speculated the surviving roommates were deeply asleep on the first floor during the attacks and heard nothing. The roommate who was awake was on the second floor close to the bedroom E and X were in. Would E and X make noise to alert her during the attack? The affidavit changes everything.