Latest / Beyond The Horizon / Murder In Moscow: Five Key Pieces Of Evidence Against Kohberger

Transcript

Murder In Moscow: Five Key Pieces Of Evidence Against Kohberger · Beyond The Horizon

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Everyone and welcome back to the program. Today we have
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: an article that's discussing the five key pieces of evidence
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: against Brian Koberger. Now, ever since he's been arrested, we
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: have been getting a little bit here, a little bit
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: there about who he was, who his friends were, what
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: he was up to, and some of his behavior in
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: the aftermath of these murders. Well, what is the evidence
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: that has led the investigators to believe that Brian Koberger
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: is the man responsible for these murders? Well, let's get
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: to this episode from Fox News and let's see what
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: Paul Morrow has for us. Headline, Idaho Murders. Five key
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: pieces of evidence against Brian Koberger. This article was authored
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: by Paul Morrow. He is still only the accused and
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: must be considered innocent until proven guilty. But the case
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: against Brian Koberger for the Idaho homicides appears strong. There
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: remains much we don't know, and there is much more
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: investigation and evidence to come. But with the recent release
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: of the arrest warrant affidavit, here's how the prosecution's evidence
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: is stacking up. The knife sheath DNA. Currently, this is
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: the only evidence that is direct, not circumstantial and that
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: is true everything we have seen so far is circumstantial
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: and if we didn't have all of the evidence the
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: circumstantial evidence that we do have i would be less
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: inclined to believe that coberger might be the guy here
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: but everything that we have the the circumstantial evidence that
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: all leads to something bigger and all of that circumstantial
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: evidence That is all built upon, and before you know it,
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: you have an ironclad case. At least that's the hope
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: of the prosecution. In the absence of the knife itself,
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: having a sheath that matches to the same knife that
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: caused the wounds, a fact which will need to be demonstrated,
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: found literally besides the body of one of the victims,
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: is going to be tough to refute. And I am
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: 100% on board with that. How are you going to
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: explain this knife sheath in the bed with Kaylee and
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: Madison and with your DNA on it? That's going to
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: be a tough sell in the best of times. That
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: would be a tough sell if you had OJ Simpson's
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: dream team defending you. So I don't know how he's
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: going to get around that one or how his defense
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: team plans on challenging the veracity of that evidence. Yes,
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: as some have proposed, Koberger could contend that someone stole
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: or found his knife. Aside from being far-fetched, this is
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: unlikely to persuade because this hypothetical person's handling of the
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: K-Bar through gripping, sweating, and perhaps even shedding his own
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: blood before and during the attacks would have likely have
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: obfuscated any DNA of Koberger's. It is significant that the
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: affidavit pointedly states that only a single source of male
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: DNA suspect profile was found, on the sheath. So they
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: have their work cut out for them, meaning the defense attorneys.
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: I don't know how they're going to explain this. There
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: was no one else's DNA on it. And even if
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: you say, oh, it was stolen. Well, how do you
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: prove that? How do you prove that your knife was
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: stolen and used in these murders? Now, if it was
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: just the knife in the sheath, I could see you
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: trying to make a logical defense around that. But with
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: everything else that basically puts this dude at the scene
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: of the crime, forget it. And we haven't even talked
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: about yet the fact that he could have been caught
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: on a router at the King Road home or one
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: of the neighbor's homes. What if his Wi-Fi connected to it?
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: There's going to be a trace of that. There's going
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: to be a bit of evidence of that. So if
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: that's the case, that's just going to be stronger evidence
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: for the prosecution moving forward. And if the DNA on
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: the knife was extracted from a splatter of Koberger's own blood,
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: then even that weak defense goes out the window. At
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: this point, the DNA is the linchpin. It is no
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: accident that the probable cause affidavit, which is written chronologically,
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: concludes with a DNA match to Koberger's father. It was
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: at that point that the investigators knew it was time
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: to take the case down. So once they had that
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: match and they were relatively sure of the person they
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: were looking for, well, they moved in. The car videos.
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: No license plate was obtained from the videos. Nonetheless, Koberger's
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: car not only matches the car make and model filmed
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: near the scene, but it also coincides with the movement
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: of his mobile phone before.
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: And after the murders.
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: For instance, there is this sequence that occurs as the
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: car is tracked leaving the scene and after the Koberger
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: phone has apparently been turned off. 4.48am, phone goes live
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: again on State Highway 95 south of Moscow. 4.50 to 5.26 a.m.,
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: phone travels south on Route 95 to Genesee, Idaho, then west,
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: then north back towards Pullman. 5.25 a.m., car on video
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: at Washington State University, 1300 Johnson Road, Pullman, in the
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: vicinity of the suspect's home. 5.27 a.m., car on video
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: at WSU along Stadium Way, vicinity of suspect's home. 5.30 a.m.,
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: phone pings at the Koberger home. Could Koberger contend that
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: it wasn't his car? Certainly. But why then would it
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: exactly match the movements of his cell phone? And this
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: is what I've said. All of this other little stuff
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: that might not seem important or might seem mundane on
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: its own, it all adds up to the bigger picture here.
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: And that bigger picture is pointing directly at Koberger. And
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: now that the task force has the car, It may
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: well yield further forensic evidence, no matter how hard he
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: tried to clean it.
• 6:12
  Speaker 2: Oh, that's a fact.
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: If there's forensic evidence to be found in that car,
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: no matter how much he cleaned it, they're going to
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: find it. They have all kinds of ways of finding
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: old blood and even just a trace amount.
• 6:26
  Speaker 2: Digital phone forensics.
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: Like the car, the pings Koberger's phone sent to nearby
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: cell phone towers. are more circumstantial than direct, but taken
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: with the movement of his car, this will be.
• 6:38
  Speaker 2: Tough to refute.
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: Further, what possible reason could Koberger give for his phone
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: being in close proximity to the victim's house 12 times
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: in the months leading up to the murders, 11 of those.
• 6:50
  Speaker 2: Late at night?
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: So again, the totality of what we see here is
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: very damning for Brian Koberger. How are you going to
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: explain this? Look, I'm not a lawyer, right? So I
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: certainly don't have the training, but in my opinion, dude
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: better call Saul. Could he contend someone else had his phone?
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: That would require him to identify this person.
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: Unlikely. Could he contend that he lost his phone or
• 7:17
  Speaker 2: that it was stolen?
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: Sure. But why didn't he report that and cancel it?
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: And if so, how to explain that the phone's activity
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: continued to fit the pattern of his own use, calling family,
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: for instance. So you see, all of these little reasons
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: that Koberger could use for this not being him and
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: him not being involved, none of them are sound and
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: none of them are going to convince a jury. Aside
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: from the fact that he would have to explain why
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: in the middle of the night he was regularly in
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: an area 10 miles from his home, there is this.
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: According to a recent interview of Steve Gonsalves, the father
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: of victim Kaylee Gonsalves, Kohlberger at times was so close
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: to the victim's house, his phone was picked up by
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: their Wi-Fi.
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: It's a wrap, folks.
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: If that's the case, creepy-ass Kohlberger is as good as cooked. Hi,
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: Maricopa County.
• 8:14
  Speaker 2: The eyewitness.
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: Much has been made of Dylan Mortensen's delay in calling
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: the police. What has been somewhat overlooked, however, is that
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: her description of his height, physique and bushy eyebrows were
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: all confirmatory as Koberger became a suspect. Now, I think
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: that of all of their evidence, her looking at Koberger
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: here in a mask is probably the weakest evidence they have,
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: because how are you going to tell who's who underneath
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: that mask? Sure, he could fit the description, the same build,
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: the bushy eyebrows, but you can't confirm 100% anyway that
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: that was Brian Koberger. If you doubt that, consider this.
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: On November 29th, roughly two weeks after the murders, two
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: separate Washington State University campus police officers discovered Koberger's car
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: as a match to the Hyundai Elantra the task force
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: was seeking. They or the task force member would next
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: have looked at the license photo of the car's owner.
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: Now ask yourself, would Koberger be in custody if Dylan
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: had described him as 5'3 and heavily overweight? And even
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: if so, would the case be anywhere near as strong?
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: That's a good point, honestly. Definitely a good point. And
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: maybe I should reevaluate about this being the weakest part
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: of the evidence. It would just seem to me that
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: in front of a jury, if you can't actually, you know,
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: point to somebody in the courtroom and say, definitively, that's
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: the person, then it's not going to have as much weight.
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: But I guess that maybe with all of the other factors,
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: it could come into play here. Dylan's description of the
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: suspect's path when leaving the house also matches a latent
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: footprint discovered at the scene. Important evidence if it's matched
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: to cohabitation. I mean, a lot of people wear vans, though,
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: like a whole ass college campus. I'm guessing a lot
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: of those kids are wearing vans. Just about every pair
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: of shoes I own are vans. You know, I like vans.
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: I've been wearing them since I've been a kid. And
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: I just enjoy the way they feel on my feet.
• 10:17
  Speaker 2: They're comfortable. And I like the shoes. But they're very popular.
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: So I don't know how they're going to match that.
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: Directly to Koberger. Considering my guess. And this is just
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: a guess here. That some of these kids had vans themselves.
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: So it might be a little difficult. To tie that
• 10:33
  Speaker 1: to Koberger.
• 10:34
  Speaker 2: Unless of course.
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: When they searched his apartment. Or raided wherever he was at.
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: He had the shoes on him. Koberger's internet postings. Without
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: a clear motive. Which may never be learned, the prosecution
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: can introduce Koberger's previous Reddit postings in which he attempted
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: to query criminals on what it felt like to commit crimes,
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: what steps they took to avoid capture, how they prepared,
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: and so on. Including the questions, why did you choose
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: that victim or target over others? And how did you
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: approach your victim or target? Now, he's going to say
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: that this was just a project he was working on
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: in school. And under normal circumstances, people would shrug their
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: shoulders and say, yeah, criminologists seems to fit the bill.
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: But again, when you look at the totality of everything
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: we know, all this shit looks more sinister. For their
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: ending summations to a jury, prosecutors labor to construct a
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: compelling narrative, a story that explains what the accused did
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: and why he did it. Adding Koberger's intense interest, in
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: criminality and the creepy questions he had previously asked in
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: his Reddit survey, suggests a possible motive in the possible
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: absence of one come trial time. And again, look, you
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: don't need motive to get the conviction.
• 11:54
  Speaker 2: It helps.
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: It certainly does. But you do not need motive. All
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: you need to do is prove that the crime was committed.
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: As noted, there is much more investigation and likely more
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: evidence to come. For instance, the steps Koberger took post-murder,
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: like wearing surgical gloves and hiding his garbage. There will
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: also be a great deal of criminal procedure. And there
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: is also the defense's case, glimpses of which may be
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: gained during the discovery process. But at this writing, the
• 12:25
  Speaker 1: task force appears to have done its job. Now it's
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: over to the prosecution. So that's definitely where it's at now, right?
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: The investigators, their job is to find the suspect, compile
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: all the evidence, and then pass that to the prosecutors.
• 12:40
  Speaker 2: Now it's in their court.
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: It's up to Bill Thompson and the other prosecutors on
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: the team to slam this bad boy home and get
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: a conviction. All right, folks, that's going to do it
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: for this one. If you'd like to contact me, you
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: can do that at bobbycapucci at protonmail.com.
• 12:56
  Speaker 2: That's B-O-B-B-Y-C-A-P-U cci at protonmail.com.
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: You can also find me on Twitter at B-O-B-B-Y underscore C-A-P-U-C-C-I.
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: The link that I discussed can be found in the
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: description box.