THE BRYAN KOHBERGER - IDAHO FOUR TRIAL IS SET TO BE
ABOUT EVERYTHING NOW
by Christine Trzyna
If the Idaho Four murders had happened not so long ago - let's say two decades ago - Bryan Kohberger would probably not have been arrested as an "innocent until proven guilty" suspect. As there has been no confession, no knife found, but a whole lot of this and that, the murder of four innocent college students living off campus at the University of Idaho is still a crime of circumstantial evidence. There are many who believe the man is innocent, including, she says, his attorney and his defense team. And thousands of news articles and other media, including many True Crime YouTube stations with authoritative guests, speak of him as the killer. Of late is the exploration of how he might be executed by firing squad.
Though not much of a true crime aficionado - compared to the very many who follow outstanding crimes and criminal justice case by case - I love a good mystery and have occasionally participated in the sleuth game over the years. After all, as a ten year old, Nancy Drew books were far more interesting to me than books I was forced to read, such as the English classics. With so many crime and forensics television series giving viewers lessons of discovery, there's a temptation to be just like Nancy, the heroine whose investigative ways lead her to follow the clues and solve the mystery.
The upcoming trial will have everything now. DNA evidence, video evidence, door camera and sound, cell phone pinging, social media and networking, texting, and Internet purchasing... That's why the Bryan Kohberger - Idaho Four Trial may just be the Trial of the Century. Frankly many people I've talked to about it mention how different the O.J. Simpson trial would have been if this technology had been available.
One thing for sure: If Bryan Kohberger is not the killer, then someone who has or may go on to kill again is out there.
As mentioned in a previous post, I find that the constant use of Internet social media as a display of good times, good looks, and in some cases teasing sexiness, by the students, particularly, the two girls who, as childhood friends, slept and died in the same bed together, not worthy of being murdered, but stupidity. (It could be argued that it was also show-offy and competitive.)
As well there is reason to think some of these students were alcoholic and we all know that drunk people loose their inhibitions and under the influence do all sorts of things they may regret later. I associate membership in Frats and Sororities to be indicative of alcoholism as well. Allowing their rental house to be a party house so notorious that some students partied there when not one renter was home, was also just plain stupid. I do not think all college students party as a way of life so excusing the way these activities opened these students up to privacy invasion and being targeted as just what college students do is in error.
I marvel at how a student could work, ace classes with a full time class load, and party too. Maybe I don't personally have that level of genius or guts.
I'm not excusing murder of course, just encountering facts.
I also still find it irksome when I hear true crime authority figures not understand what being a grad student and a TA means or even what a Criminal Justice candidate studies. Finally someone spoke up and said that thousands of people who major in Criminal Justice - bachelor, masters, or PhD's, do not go on to commit murders. The analysis is interesting to be sure, but has not lead to more than speculations.
These last few days more information, such as the redacted texting between surviving housemates, which aids the time-line, has been released. ... As if tantalizing advertising for the upcoming trial.
Of all the "evidence" it is the cell phone pings that I find to be ridiculous. This is because of my own experience with cell phones.
My first cell phone was a gift, along with what proved to be very limited service. (I appreciated it, at a time when I could not afford to buy one myself.) However, while living on a block full of apartment buildings, I had to go outside and walk up the street to make and take calls and there were significant delays when it came to receiving text messages.
In recent years I had a cell phone in a residential area where calls and texts seem to go through with more ease. However, I was amazed to see the information on the phone that "locates" a person and their phone, for it identified me as pinging in Las Vegas, especially in the middle of the night, and Vegas is about 270 miles away! (I also had not ever called anyone or any place in Vegas.) Up the road from my place was a quarter mile stretch in which the locals warned me that even ATT had no service. Was it the ocean? The hill?
Currently, I'm sometimes startled to see that my phone knows exactly were I am, as it switches one town- one block - to the next. Other times my location is all over the place.
Of all the "evidence" I find to be most controversial (and frightening) is the DNA - touch DNA - evidence. This DNA on the metal button of a leather knife sheaf is not even a fingerprint.
In fact, I haven't heard anything about fingerprinting at the crime scene.
Is the information that has made the rounds of YouTube and other True Crime podcasts even true? Such as that despite inspections of Bryan Kohberger's apartment on campus, office on campus, and car, which was taken away by the FBI, there is NO blood from any of the students? I ask, "How can a murder scene so bloody that some may have seeped out of the house foundation" NOT result in student blood - DNA being found?
Friends say that likely the murderer suited up for murder and quickly got rid of the clothing. How masterful that might have been, even if wearing overhauls or the like. No time for a shower, in this case....
Most worrisome is that thousands of people who entered their DNA results into genealogy databases, who DID NOT GIVE PERMISSION FOR THESE TO BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE SUCH AS BY PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS, POLICE, FBI, learned - what the hell - they did so. This did not just violate Bryan Kohberger's privacy but also ALL THOSE PEOPLE'S privacy.
I learned that your garbage is no longer yours or private once you throw it out. Something I have done - put my garbage is someone else's garbage bin - is suspicious behavior. So is wearing gloves to deal with garbage...
I, like very many, are eager to get the blow by blow of the trial. I believe Kohberger's defense attorneys will try everything to reduce his sentence or get him off. We will learn much.
Do I think Bryan Kohberger is innocent?
I am open to that idea.
C2025 Christine Trzyna
My favorite True Crime podcast, and I listen only to the Bryan Kohberger coverage, is Surviving the Survivor.
