University of Idaho - 4 college students murdered

512,500 Views | 3614 Replies | Last: 2 mo ago by Divining Rod
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rodney Ruxin said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.




What are the things that are "off" with these stories so much that would lead anyone to believe at this point in time that's a realistic scenario? The fact the he didn't kill the girl that saw him and didn't call the cops for a while are both slightly odd but also easily explainable in a more than believable manner.


The HUGE time gap between when Dylan saw the creepy guy at 4am and didn't call 911 or her boyfriend or parents or anyone who could help her! She heard and saw things that most people would call 911 right away. Especially vulnerable women.
Jabin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiehawg said:

PA24 said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

I appreciate your attempt to out-lawyer a trial lawyer, but…
Sorry guy, I had zero idea you were an attorney and certainly meant no offense. Just trying to set the record straight for the IANAL types who have been watching TV for all of their lives and hearing, "Means, motive and opportunity," as the holy mantra in murder trials. Simply is not true.

Again my apology if I offended you.
His screen name is perfect for him/her/it.
How was I to know? He mentioned he wanted evidence of motive. I replied that is not necessary under legal standards. Which is completely true. But he got upset with me anyway.
Don't fret it, Hawg. Although he may have been "precisely" correct, he failed to communicate his meaning clearly and effectively. I read his post the same way you did.
Bunk Moreland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think we can all look at these photos of the victims and survivors and know they are very sociable people in college.

I don't think any of them at age 20-22 were romantically involved with a 28 year old criminology nerd who had social issues from another university who had only been there in the region for 6 months. If that ends up being the case it'll be more shocking than the murders themselves.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I am always wrong said:

aggiehawg said:

PA24 said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

I appreciate your attempt to out-lawyer a trial lawyer, but…
Sorry guy, I had zero idea you were an attorney and certainly meant no offense. Just trying to set the record straight for the IANAL types who have been watching TV for all of their lives and hearing, "Means, motive and opportunity," as the holy mantra in murder trials. Simply is not true.

Again my apology if I offended you.
His screen name is perfect for him/her/it.
How was I to know? He mentioned he wanted evidence of motive. I replied that is not necessary under legal standards. Which is completely true. But he got upset with me anyway.

I didn't get upset. Good lord, you are a drama queen of the highest order.
I'm the drama queen here? LOL. Other posters were calling you that. Not me.
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiehawg said:

I am always wrong said:

aggiehawg said:

PA24 said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

I appreciate your attempt to out-lawyer a trial lawyer, but…
Sorry guy, I had zero idea you were an attorney and certainly meant no offense. Just trying to set the record straight for the IANAL types who have been watching TV for all of their lives and hearing, "Means, motive and opportunity," as the holy mantra in murder trials. Simply is not true.

Again my apology if I offended you.
His screen name is perfect for him/her/it.
How was I to know? He mentioned he wanted evidence of motive. I replied that is not necessary under legal standards. Which is completely true. But he got upset with me anyway.

I didn't get upset. Good lord, you are a drama queen of the highest order.
I'm the drama queen here? LOL. Other posters were calling you that. Not me.


To be fair I didn't read that in Not Wrong's posts.
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bunk Moreland said:

I think we can all look at these photos of the victims and survivors and know they are very sociable people in college.

I don't think any of them at age 20-22 were romantically involved with a 28 year old criminology nerd who had social issues from another university who had only been there in the region for 6 months. If that ends up being the case it'll be more shocking than the murders themselves.


Not a relationship, just Tinder hookups maybe.
Rodney Ruxin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
She was likely in traumatic shock. I just saw a a clip of Megan Kelly interviewing a retired FBI criminal profiler who was also a nurse who indicated it was completely believable this girl was in a state of extended shock. Said she had seen it herself and that in some instances it could last hours or even days.

You think if BK knew one of them personally and was actually going into the house those 12 or so times he was pinging in the same area, that NOBODY could confirm that they had seen this guy in the house before other than those living there? That there wouldn't be any evidence of his communication with this person living there??? They have all of BK's phone records.

I grant her behavior is a little odd on the surface but that's pales in comparison to the number of holes that I'm sure could blow up that "theory" in about 5 min by anyone with a connection to the case. If there was a relationship like that, there would have been some evidence trail to it that authorities would almost certainly have access to.
TexasRebel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

We don't know what time he left the house. All we know is what Dylan has said.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.





Occam thinks you need to shave.
AggieAces06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Would it be possible that the girl who actually was in the first floor is the one who called 911 because the witness roommate was in such a shock she was still unresponsive in the morning?

She could have assumed the other four were still passed out from late night partying, but was expecting to see the other one already?
Bunk Moreland
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10thYrSr said:

Bunk Moreland said:

I think we can all look at these photos of the victims and survivors and know they are very sociable people in college.

I don't think any of them at age 20-22 were romantically involved with a 28 year old criminology nerd who had social issues from another university who had only been there in the region for 6 months. If that ends up being the case it'll be more shocking than the murders themselves.


Not a relationship, just Tinder hookups maybe.


Nah. Not even tinder hookups. That's not happening with this guy at his age and those girls.

I still think he could have easily met xana and another at the restaurant they worked at and been too forthcoming or something

He could have been an Uber/lyft driver and took home a girl or people in the past to that house and if the person ordering it was named Xana that's a very unique name so he could have easily found her on SM and began stalking her.

Those are all so much more plausible than he actually had the swag to hook up with a 20/21 year old given how new he was to the area and how awkward he apparently was according to people who knew him.
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rodney Ruxin said:

She was likely in traumatic shock. I just saw a a clip of Megan Kelly interviewing a retired FBI criminal profiler who was also a nurse who indicated it was completely believable this girl was in a state of extended shock. Said she had seen it herself and that in some instances it could last hours or even days.

You think if BK knew one of them personally and was actually going into the house those 12 or so times he was pinging in the same area, that NOBODY could confirm that they had seen this guy in the house before other than those living there? That there would be any evidence of his communication with this person living there??? They have all of BK's phone records.

I grant her behavior is a little odd on the surface but that's pales in comparison to the number of holes that could be poked in that "theory" in about 5 min by anyone with a connection to the case.


They have what you can get from ATT which is probably cell tower and call history. I doubt those records contain dating app information.

However, they likely now have his physical phone. So we will see what that yields.

Also, Dylan's room is right by the sliding door. BK wouldn't pass by anyone else on his way to her room for a hookup. Especially if Dylan didn't want anyone to know.
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10thYrSr said:

aggiehawg said:

I am always wrong said:

aggiehawg said:

PA24 said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

I appreciate your attempt to out-lawyer a trial lawyer, but…
Sorry guy, I had zero idea you were an attorney and certainly meant no offense. Just trying to set the record straight for the IANAL types who have been watching TV for all of their lives and hearing, "Means, motive and opportunity," as the holy mantra in murder trials. Simply is not true.

Again my apology if I offended you.
His screen name is perfect for him/her/it.
How was I to know? He mentioned he wanted evidence of motive. I replied that is not necessary under legal standards. Which is completely true. But he got upset with me anyway.

I didn't get upset. Good lord, you are a drama queen of the highest order.
I'm the drama queen here? LOL. Other posters were calling you that. Not me.


To be fair I didn't read that in Not Wrong's posts.
To be fair, insulting me as trying to "call out" another trial lawyer is not exactly a moderate comment.

Not when I was completely correct on the law and he was inarticulate on the subject. I noted a correction. The same correction I have made several times on this long thread.

Motive is not critically important in a murder case. He knows that but he took offense for some reason.
aggiepanic95
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I am always wrong said:

aggiehawg said:

PA24 said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

I appreciate your attempt to out-lawyer a trial lawyer, but…
Sorry guy, I had zero idea you were an attorney and certainly meant no offense. Just trying to set the record straight for the IANAL types who have been watching TV for all of their lives and hearing, "Means, motive and opportunity," as the holy mantra in murder trials. Simply is not true.

Again my apology if I offended you.
His screen name is perfect for him/her/it.
How was I to know? He mentioned he wanted evidence of motive. I replied that is not necessary under legal standards. Which is completely true. But he got upset with me anyway.

I didn't get upset. Good lord, you are a drama queen of the highest order.
Hi. This is very weird. You came across professionally and personally offended by what hawg posted. She apologized. Based on your last response, you do not seem very sensible, compassionate, or reasonable. I am sure all of your many, many clients feel differently. Just like my opinion man.
CowboyGirl
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TexasRebel said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

We don't know what time he left the house. All we know is what Dylan has said.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.





Occam thinks you need to shave.
If he's being framed, why did he just happen to turn his phone off on the way to the house and leave it off for the time surrounding the murders?
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aggiehawg said:

10thYrSr said:

aggiehawg said:

I am always wrong said:

aggiehawg said:

PA24 said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

I appreciate your attempt to out-lawyer a trial lawyer, but…
Sorry guy, I had zero idea you were an attorney and certainly meant no offense. Just trying to set the record straight for the IANAL types who have been watching TV for all of their lives and hearing, "Means, motive and opportunity," as the holy mantra in murder trials. Simply is not true.

Again my apology if I offended you.
His screen name is perfect for him/her/it.
How was I to know? He mentioned he wanted evidence of motive. I replied that is not necessary under legal standards. Which is completely true. But he got upset with me anyway.

I didn't get upset. Good lord, you are a drama queen of the highest order.
I'm the drama queen here? LOL. Other posters were calling you that. Not me.


To be fair I didn't read that in Not Wrong's posts.
To be fair, insulting me as trying to "call out" another trial lawyer is not exactly a moderate comment.

Not when I was completely correct on the law and he was inarticulate on the subject. I noted a correction. The same correction I have made several times on this long thread.

Motive is not critically important in a murder case. He knows that but he took offense for some reason.


You didn't mean offense, you had no idea he is a trial lawyer. It was a misunderstanding and I think that those facts make it clear that he was just trying to present his credentials (although that could have been executed more gracefully) and not impugning you.
Post removed:
by user
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aggiepanic95 said:

I am always wrong said:

aggiehawg said:

PA24 said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

I appreciate your attempt to out-lawyer a trial lawyer, but…
Sorry guy, I had zero idea you were an attorney and certainly meant no offense. Just trying to set the record straight for the IANAL types who have been watching TV for all of their lives and hearing, "Means, motive and opportunity," as the holy mantra in murder trials. Simply is not true.

Again my apology if I offended you.
His screen name is perfect for him/her/it.
How was I to know? He mentioned he wanted evidence of motive. I replied that is not necessary under legal standards. Which is completely true. But he got upset with me anyway.

I didn't get upset. Good lord, you are a drama queen of the highest order.
Hi. This is very weird. You came across professionally and personally offended by what hawg posted. She apologized. Based on your last response, you do not seem very sensible, compassionate, or reasonable. I am sure all of your many, many clients feel differently. Just like my opinion man.
Thank you. I have no way of knowing who are real lawyers and who are pretend lawyers as we do have many of those on this board.

When I am wrong, I own it immediately and apologize for it. I was not wrong there but apologized for stepping on his toes a bit. Quite unintentionally.
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CowboyGirl said:

TexasRebel said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

We don't know what time he left the house. All we know is what Dylan has said.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.





Occam thinks you need to shave.
If he's being framed, why did he just happen to turn his phone off on the way to the house and leave it off for the time surrounding the murders?


Phone died on the drive over. He left it on the charger in his car to recharge and it came to life on his way back home.
akaggie05
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
No way in hell.
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
akaggie05 said:

No way in hell.


Tell me more.
Inca
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10thYrSr said:

CowboyGirl said:

TexasRebel said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

We don't know what time he left the house. All we know is what Dylan has said.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.





Occam thinks you need to shave.
If he's being framed, why did he just happen to turn his phone off on the way to the house and leave it off for the time surrounding the murders?


Phone died on the drive over. He left it on the charger in his car to recharge and it came to life on his way back home.


On the longest route you could possibly take from Moscow to Pullman. There is no way this dude is being framed. Unless you are related to him, I don't see how you could possibly believe he is being framed.
MsDoubleD81
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Need tag similar to doctors.
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Inca said:

10thYrSr said:

CowboyGirl said:

TexasRebel said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

We don't know what time he left the house. All we know is what Dylan has said.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.





Occam thinks you need to shave.
If he's being framed, why did he just happen to turn his phone off on the way to the house and leave it off for the time surrounding the murders?


Phone died on the drive over. He left it on the charger in his car to recharge and it came to life on his way back home.


On the longest route you could possibly take from Moscow to Pullman. There is no way this dude is being framed. Unless you are related to him, I don't see how you could possibly believe he is being framed.


You know who goes the wrong way out of town? People with a dead phone who have relied on GPS their whole life to get them where they are going. It's not like this guy had Key maps like we all used to carry back in the day to tell him where to go.
Rodney Ruxin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10thYrSr said:

CowboyGirl said:

TexasRebel said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

We don't know what time he left the house. All we know is what Dylan has said.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.





Occam thinks you need to shave.
If he's being framed, why did he just happen to turn his phone off on the way to the house and leave it off for the time surrounding the murders?


Phone died on the drive over. He left it on the charger in his car to recharge and it came to life on his way back home.


I have nothin against ya bud, but when you have to have all these things happen just perfectly for a theory to work that doesn't have a shred of common sense backing in the first place, I think you may working backwards from a theory to tie it to facts rather than the other way around.
Inca
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10thYrSr said:

Inca said:

10thYrSr said:

CowboyGirl said:

TexasRebel said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

We don't know what time he left the house. All we know is what Dylan has said.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.





Occam thinks you need to shave.
If he's being framed, why did he just happen to turn his phone off on the way to the house and leave it off for the time surrounding the murders?


Phone died on the drive over. He left it on the charger in his car to recharge and it came to life on his way back home.


On the longest route you could possibly take from Moscow to Pullman. There is no way this dude is being framed. Unless you are related to him, I don't see how you could possibly believe he is being framed.


You know who goes the wrong way out of town? People with a dead phone who have relied on GPS their whole life to get them where they are going. It's not like this guy had Key maps like we all used to carry back in the day to tell him where to go.


He'd been there at least 12 times. It's not a long drive. It's pretty inconceivable that he didn't know how to get back to Pullman. Or would not quickly realize if he had made a wrong turn.
TexasRebel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10thYrSr said:

aggiehawg said:

10thYrSr said:

aggiehawg said:

I am always wrong said:

aggiehawg said:

PA24 said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

I appreciate your attempt to out-lawyer a trial lawyer, but…
Sorry guy, I had zero idea you were an attorney and certainly meant no offense. Just trying to set the record straight for the IANAL types who have been watching TV for all of their lives and hearing, "Means, motive and opportunity," as the holy mantra in murder trials. Simply is not true.

Again my apology if I offended you.
His screen name is perfect for him/her/it.
How was I to know? He mentioned he wanted evidence of motive. I replied that is not necessary under legal standards. Which is completely true. But he got upset with me anyway.

I didn't get upset. Good lord, you are a drama queen of the highest order.
I'm the drama queen here? LOL. Other posters were calling you that. Not me.


To be fair I didn't read that in Not Wrong's posts.
To be fair, insulting me as trying to "call out" another trial lawyer is not exactly a moderate comment.

Not when I was completely correct on the law and he was inarticulate on the subject. I noted a correction. The same correction I have made several times on this long thread.

Motive is not critically important in a murder case. He knows that but he took offense for some reason.


You didn't mean offense, you had no idea he is a trial lawyer. It was a misunderstanding and I think that those facts make it clear that he was just trying to present his credentials (although that could have been executed more gracefully) and not impugning you.


Now we're assuming genders.
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rodney Ruxin said:

10thYrSr said:

CowboyGirl said:

TexasRebel said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

We don't know what time he left the house. All we know is what Dylan has said.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.





Occam thinks you need to shave.
If he's being framed, why did he just happen to turn his phone off on the way to the house and leave it off for the time surrounding the murders?


Phone died on the drive over. He left it on the charger in his car to recharge and it came to life on his way back home.


I have nothin against ya bud, but when you have to have all these things happen just perfectly for a theory to work that doesn't have a shred of common sense backing in the first place, I think you may working backwards from a theory to tie it to facts rather than the other way around.


I understand, but the only data we really have is from an affidavit for arrest.

Those don't present ALL information. It only says why we should arrest this guy and figure it out.

So of course it looks like this is the guy. The investigators have run a tight ship with no leaks. So of course we have no info other than "This is the guy!"
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TexasRebel said:

10thYrSr said:

aggiehawg said:

10thYrSr said:

aggiehawg said:

I am always wrong said:

aggiehawg said:

PA24 said:

aggiehawg said:

Quote:

I appreciate your attempt to out-lawyer a trial lawyer, but…
Sorry guy, I had zero idea you were an attorney and certainly meant no offense. Just trying to set the record straight for the IANAL types who have been watching TV for all of their lives and hearing, "Means, motive and opportunity," as the holy mantra in murder trials. Simply is not true.

Again my apology if I offended you.
His screen name is perfect for him/her/it.
How was I to know? He mentioned he wanted evidence of motive. I replied that is not necessary under legal standards. Which is completely true. But he got upset with me anyway.

I didn't get upset. Good lord, you are a drama queen of the highest order.
I'm the drama queen here? LOL. Other posters were calling you that. Not me.


To be fair I didn't read that in Not Wrong's posts.
To be fair, insulting me as trying to "call out" another trial lawyer is not exactly a moderate comment.

Not when I was completely correct on the law and he was inarticulate on the subject. I noted a correction. The same correction I have made several times on this long thread.

Motive is not critically important in a murder case. He knows that but he took offense for some reason.


You didn't mean offense, you had no idea he is a trial lawyer. It was a misunderstanding and I think that those facts make it clear that he was just trying to present his credentials (although that could have been executed more gracefully) and not impugning you.


Now we're assuming genders.


I tried to use neutral pronouns but it disgusted me. No Ragrets.
I am always wrong
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10thYrSr said:

Rodney Ruxin said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.




What are the things that are "off" with these stories so much that would lead anyone to believe at this point in time that's a realistic scenario? The fact the he didn't kill the girl that saw him and didn't call the cops for a while are both slightly odd but also easily explainable in a more than believable manner.


The HUGE time gap between when Dylan saw the creepy guy at 4am and didn't call 911 or her boyfriend or parents or anyone who could help her! She heard and saw things that most people would call 911 right away. Especially vulnerable women.

What I am about to post has not been verified and could easily be bull**** . HOWEVER…

There were a number of rumors on reddit very early on in this case that were shut down initially, but they have now turned out to be true. The assumption is that local cops and the roommates were talking to people until the Idaho State Police and FBI came in and put a stop to it. Among these very early rumors (which I personally read 3-4 days after the murders) are the following:

1. Kaylee and Maddie were sleeping in the same bed and murdered together (true). In fact there is a more graphic aspect to this rumor that is probably true but I won't post.

2. The sheath for the knife was left in the house (true).

3. One of the roommates saw an intruder wearing a black mask (true).

4. The two surviving roommates locked themselves in their room (true for Dylan at least).

5. The initial 911 call was for one of the surviving roommates who passed out upon realizing what had happened (mentioned by Kaylee's dad and appears likely true).

6. One of Ethan and Xana was found dead on the floor, rather than in bed (true, even though official reports lied about this and said all 4 victims were killed in their beds).

7. One of the surviving roommates actually lived on the second floor near Xana, not on the first floor (true, even though police would not discuss who lived where).

8. One or both of the surviving roommates were tripping on psychedelics and did not want to immediately call police.

There may have been a couple of other specific things posted that I can't remember. I know I also read that there was a dog in the house as part of that same groups of posts, although police allowed that to become public knowledge a few days later. These rumors were all posted in the same couple of early Reddit threads that were eventually deleted. I know rumor 8 sounds kind of ridiculous and accusatory, but that's what was out there early on before the FBI clamped down. It would explain a lot (pretty much everything) about Dylan's behavior.
TexasRebel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Do the facts on the PCA get treated as concrete in the trial?

Is that why there is a bare minimum of "this is what we're disclosing so far."
Rodney Ruxin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10thYrSr said:

Rodney Ruxin said:

10thYrSr said:

CowboyGirl said:

TexasRebel said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

We don't know what time he left the house. All we know is what Dylan has said.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.





Occam thinks you need to shave.
If he's being framed, why did he just happen to turn his phone off on the way to the house and leave it off for the time surrounding the murders?


Phone died on the drive over. He left it on the charger in his car to recharge and it came to life on his way back home.


I have nothin against ya bud, but when you have to have all these things happen just perfectly for a theory to work that doesn't have a shred of common sense backing in the first place, I think you may working backwards from a theory to tie it to facts rather than the other way around.


I understand, but the only data we really have is from an affidavit for arrest.

Those don't present ALL information. It only says why we should arrest this guy and figure it out.

So of course it looks like this is the guy. The investigators have run a tight ship with no leaks. So of course we have no info other than "This is the guy!"



Well to be fair, they ran a right ship (and even mislead the public a couple times) to A) Avoid any chance they would tip this guy off they were onto him and B) Protect the single witness. Makes perfect sense in hindsight.

The affidavit only included enough info for for them to get the arrest warrant, I can almost guarantee you they have even more tying him to the crime we aren't privy of yet. Especially with how much of a dumbass this guy seemed to really be.

This kid is done. I only wish they could plug him in the back of the head and be done with it for the sake of these families, although he deserves 10x worse.
jrrhouston98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's Barnes, what do you expect?!?
10thYrSr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I am always wrong said:

10thYrSr said:

Rodney Ruxin said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.




What are the things that are "off" with these stories so much that would lead anyone to believe at this point in time that's a realistic scenario? The fact the he didn't kill the girl that saw him and didn't call the cops for a while are both slightly odd but also easily explainable in a more than believable manner.


The HUGE time gap between when Dylan saw the creepy guy at 4am and didn't call 911 or her boyfriend or parents or anyone who could help her! She heard and saw things that most people would call 911 right away. Especially vulnerable women.

What I am about to post has not been verified and could easily be bull**** . HOWEVER…

There were a number of rumors on reddit very early on in this case that were shut down initially, but they have now turned out to be true. The assumption is that local cops and the roommates were talking to people until the Idaho State Police and FBI came in and out a stop to it. Among these very early rumors (which I personally read 3-4 days after the murders) are the following:

1. Kaylee and Maddie were sleeping in the same bed and murdered together (true). In fact there is a more graphic aspect to this rumor that is probably true but I won't post.

2. The sheath for the knife was left in the house (true).

3. One of the roommates saw an intruder wearing a black mask (true).

4. The two surviving roommates locked themselves in their room (true for Dylan at least).

5. The initial 911 call was for one of the surviving roommates who passed out upon realizing what had happened (mentioned by Kaylee's dad and appears likely true).

6. One of Ethan and Xana was found dead on the floor, rather than in bed (true, even though official reports lied about this and said all 4 victims were killed in their beds).

7. One of the surviving roommates actually lived on the second floor near Xana, not on the first floor (true, even though police would not discuss who lived where).

8. One or both of the surviving roommates were tripping on psychedelics and did not want to immediately call police.

There may have been a couple of other specific things posted that I can't remember. I know I also read that there was a dog in the house as part of that same groups of posts, although police allowed that to become public knowledge a few days later. These rumors were all posted in the same couple of early Reddit threads that were eventually deleted. I know rumor 8 sounds kind of ridiculous and accusatory, but that's what was out there early on before the FBI clamped down. It would explain a lot (pretty much everything) about Dylan's behavior.


I understand 8. Tripping, you don't want to call authority figures, but you damn sure call your boyfriend or somebody else you know!
I am always wrong
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10thYrSr said:

Rodney Ruxin said:

10thYrSr said:

CowboyGirl said:

TexasRebel said:

10thYrSr said:

This may be improbable, but an interesting experiment as well as COMPLETE speculation:

Bethany Funke or Dylan Mortenson were involved with BK romantically or otherwise.

The reason he had been there so frequently wasn't stalking, it was visits to hook up with this girl he met on a dating app.

Dylan and Bethany may have known this guy.

If BK is innocent, it would be easy to frame him knowing he is coming over for a visit.

We don't know what time he left the house. All we know is what Dylan has said.

Perhaps one of the girls said she felt unsafe in the house. He gives her his knife to protect her.

All of this will be much easier to speculate on AFTER proceedings begin and we have more information, but as of now there are some things off with the stories.





Occam thinks you need to shave.
If he's being framed, why did he just happen to turn his phone off on the way to the house and leave it off for the time surrounding the murders?


Phone died on the drive over. He left it on the charger in his car to recharge and it came to life on his way back home.


I have nothin against ya bud, but when you have to have all these things happen just perfectly for a theory to work that doesn't have a shred of common sense backing in the first place, I think you may working backwards from a theory to tie it to facts rather than the other way around.


I understand, but the only data we really have is from an affidavit for arrest.

Those don't present ALL information. It only says why we should arrest this guy and figure it out.

So of course it looks like this is the guy. The investigators have run a tight ship with no leaks. So of course we have no info other than "This is the guy!"


The declaration of probable cause is not "we should arrest this guy and figure it out." It's "we've very likely figured it out. We believe it's this guy, and here is why."
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
jrrhouston98 said:

It's Barnes, what do you expect?!?
What? I am so confused as to which poster is Barnes now.
First Page Last Page
Page 67 of 104
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.