stetson said:

---

They may have collected security video but I will be very surprised if any of it predates the murders. I think these videos are used for more immediate events such as robberies and not kept.

---

All security cameras I have used over the last 20 years have been connected to a Digital Video Recorder and the ones I use hold the files for 90 days before purging for storage. If he was already a suspect by early December they would likely be able to find him on any visit from middle of September to the murder date.

I imagine it would be simple to track the dates because most everyone pays with a credit or debit card. I have no doubt cops have reviewed all of his credit and banking charges, unless he always paid cash it would be easy to get the video.

I suspect they also tracked the purchases of the items he bought at WalMart through his credit cards.

Surely you don't really think he was on the fbi's radar as a prospective employee. I mean, in an infinite universe I guess all things are possible, and this has proven to be a pretty wild timeline we are in, but still.

Quote:

---

This was confirmed true. Lots of fake accounts created after his arrest, but supposedly an authentic one that was actually his before the arrest has now been deleted.

---

Was that the one on the subreddit about these murders?

At this point I would think any social media account with the suspect's name would most likely be fake. Same for the victims.

MsDoubleD81 said:

---

It was a typo. Either using voice to text or auto correct or fat fingers.

You should see what comes across when my sister texts.

---

I told someone last week all I had to do was go lick up the cake and then I'd be on my way.

Lock up the gate?

pick up the cake

Hmm. I missed this.

Quote:

---

Kohberger is due back in court in late June for a preliminary hearing, where his defense team intends to challenge the probable cause laid out against him.

However, as Fox News Digital has reported, prosecutors could sidestep his stall tactic if they secure a grand jury indictment before that.

---

LINK

Diet Cokehead said:

---

unmade bed said:

---

Quote:

---

OR people made fake accounts as soon as he was arrested

---

Wtf is wrong with people

---

This was confirmed true. Lots of fake accounts created after his arrest, but supposedly an authentic one that was actually his before the arrest has now been deleted.

---

I knew about that. What my WTF was about was what would make someone think it was a cute idea to make a fake instagram/Twitter/Acorn whatever the **** account in the name of some azzhole accused of quadruple murder and then make that account go follow the accounts of the victims?? And apparently several people did that. That's taking trolling a bit far.

torrid said:

---

At this point I would think any social media account with the suspect's name would most likely be fake. Same for the victims.

---

No. their instagram accounts are still up. The girls I mean.

I don't follow them but here they are, I think they are quite sad to look at.


https://www.instagram.com/maddiemogen/?hl=en

https://www.instagram.com/kayleegoncalves/?hl=en

https://www.instagram.com/xanakernodle/?hl=en

aggiehawg said:

---

Hmm. I missed this.

Quote:

---

Kohberger is due back in court in late June for a preliminary hearing, where his defense team intends to challenge the probable cause laid out against him.

However, as Fox News Digital has reported, prosecutors could sidestep his stall tactic if they secure a grand jury indictment before that.

---

LINK

---

Can't the probable cause affidavit be presented to a grand jury without defense counsel?

Quote:

---

Can't the probable cause affidavit be presented to a grand jury without defense counsel?

---

While true there is no defense counsel present during any grand jury proceeding, the affidavit alone would be insufficient. Need witnesses, autopsies, etc. to establish enough to indict.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Can't the probable cause affidavit be presented to a grand jury without defense counsel?

---

While true there is no defense counsel present during any grand jury proceeding, the affidavit alone would be insufficient. Need witnesses, autopsies, etc. to establish enough to indict.

---

Not meant to derail the overall topic, but the defense counsel in regards to grand jury proceeding was news to me.

My SIL had the devastating experience of finding her drugged up friend from rehab incoherent from slipping back on to drugs. The friend was a new mother and infant was found in the bedroom, deceased.

SIL was asked to come back to the DA's office for questions prior to them charging the mother. Told her to make sure she took her attorney with her - the who do not talk to cops without counsel. I was surprised to learn her lawyer was NOT allowed to be there for the questioning and come to find out it was because it was testimony for the grand jury. This is Louisiana.

What are the rules for someone who was witness to a crime (or crime scene, etc) having representation when being asked questions by a DA or if asked to testify / provide information for a grand jury?

Generally speaking, witnesses are not entitled to counsel within the grand jury room itself. They can be outside in the hallway but not in the room. Same for the target of the investigation.

Different DAs use different procedures and if an interview is intended to be under oath, transcribed or recorded specifically for use by the grand jury, then counsel is advised of that and excluded from the interview. DAs can decide that not all witnesses need to testify in person before the grand jury but can submit their statements instead in many jurisdictions

Grand juries are not adversarial proceedings, so there is no right to cross examination nor to introduce evidence by the defense.

Can someone testifying before a grand jury still invoke the Fifth?

Why anytime there is a report on these murders the repeat the names of who was killed think we know by now.

torrid said:

---

Can someone testifying before a grand jury still invoke the Fifth?

---

Sure.

girlfriend_experience said:

---

Why anytime there is a report on these murders the repeat the names of who was killed think we know by now.

---

So people searching by those names can find it. It's all about the clicks.

Thanks Hawg. My concern for my SIL was that she would say or indicate something that would open her up to potential accusations. Though all she did was go to check on her friend who would not answer the phone and instead finds a dead infant, I do not trust that an over zealous prosecutor would not try and implicate her in some way.

I guess best advice would be to be perfectly honest with your attorney and have them advise on whether or not to take the 5th during grand jury testimony?

Interesting "side bar". Sorry if anyone considers this off topic.

fka ftc said:

---

Thanks Hawg. My concern for my SIL was that she would say or indicate something that would open her up to potential accusations. Though all she did was go to check on her friend who would not answer the phone and instead finds a dead infant, I do not trust that an over zealous prosecutor would not try and implicate her in some way.

I guess best advice would be to be perfectly honest with your attorney and have them advise on whether or not to take the 5th during grand jury testimony?

Interesting "side bar". Sorry if anyone considers this off topic.

---

She should consult with an attorney and be honest. But I'm not seeing any potential criminal liability for merely discovering that a potential crime was committed before her arrival. Taking the 5th is proper only when there is something incriminating such as selling drugs to her friend etc.

There is also a possibility of an immunity deal if there is something incrminating. Again, talk to a local criminal defense attorney for a consultation.

Thanks Hawg.

Is it me or has this thread turned into a cold case?

Sully said:

---

Is it me or has this thread turned into a cold case?

---

Judge keeps expanding the gag order to include anyone the police talked to in connection with the investigation.

Hawg

What protection does the witness have to keep the prosecutor from misleading your attorney and go on a fishing expedition or turning Mr Hyde in the Grand Jury Room?

H2Ag said:

---

Hawg

What protection does the witness have to keep the prosecutor from misleading your attorney and go on a fishing expedition or turning Mr Jekill in the Grand Jury Room?

---

None.

That doesn't sound like a very good deal for anybody.

H2Ag said:

---

That doesn't sound like a very good deal for anybody.

---

Maybe not but it is the system we have. The old adage that a DA could indict a ham sandwich if they wanted to is essentially true, if hyperbole.

For most of the time I lived and practiced in Travis County, Ronnie Earle was the DA. He was infamous for using his office to settle personal and political scores. Some people tried to suggest that he went after both Dems and Republicans but the Dems he went after were his political enemies, Jim Mattox comes to mind.

Our system depends on the ethical conduct of all the lawyers(and judges) involved. One of the founding fathers noted our constitution only worked in a godly nation. Sounds like the Judicial System is the same way.

Crap like the lawyers pulled in the Rittenhouse prosecution makes good people that want to help the system not trust any of you b*stards. your profession really needs to start policing your own. If the witness has no credibility to you, don't put them on. Defense lawyers have just as much responsibility as prosecution. In my opinion OJs lawyers (and many others like them) should be disbarred for the antics they pulled in that trial! In a profession where reason and basic intellect are required, you must demonstrate that you have it and try to seat jurors that can do the same.

I feel better now!

This seems like a conflict of interest… the attorney Xana's family hired to represent them quit and joined BK's defense team.

Is this allowed?

ETA: Ann Taylor (the attorney) is his court-appointed attorney, so she didn't actively seek to join the defense (as I initially thought), but could she not pass on the appointment because of the existing conflict?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11677897/I-trusted-Mom-Idaho-victim-slams-lawyer-abandoning-represent-accused-KILLER.html

Anti-taxxer said:

---

This seems like a conflict of interest… the attorney Xana's family hired to represent them quit and joined BK's defense team.

Is this allowed?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11677897/I-trusted-Mom-Idaho-victim-slams-lawyer-abandoning-represent-accused-KILLER.html

---

Actually, she was appointed to represent Xana's mother in her drug cases before the murders.

Oooooh. Well that's a lot different.