Quote:

---

A week and a half later, Guillard posted more than 20 videos claiming falsely that Scofield had been involved with one of the students and ordered the killings to conceal the relationship, the suit says.

---

Internet detective falsely accused a university professor of ordering the killings. Videos viewed millions of times. Cease-and-desist order ignored. Put innocent person and their families at risk of harassment and potentially physical danger.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/idaho-police-dismiss-tiktok-theory-that-university-professor-is-involved-in-college-murders/ar-AA15KkGi

Private PoopyPants said:

---

Quote:

---

A week and a half later, Guillard posted more than 20 videos claiming falsely that Scofield had been involved with one of the students and ordered the killings to conceal the relationship, the suit says.

---

Internet detective falsely accused a university professor of ordering the killings. Videos viewed millions of times. Cease-and-desist order ignored. Put innocent person and their families at risk of harassment and potentially physical danger.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/idaho-police-dismiss-tiktok-theory-that-university-professor-is-involved-in-college-murders/ar-AA15KkGi

---

My apologies. I thought you were referring to comments on this thread.

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

10thYrSr said:

---

Private PoopyPants said:

---

I've tried to stay away from this case. At this point the victims have largely been forgotten and it's become a wild spectacle for public entertainment. Not saying that's the case here, but internet in general.



These ridiculous online "investigators" who played a few crappy fake true crime board games think they know everything and ended up causing real damage to real people. Eff them and this informative murderporn craze. I'll check back in when the trial process starts because that's all I'm really interested in with these cases.

Maybe I'm just in a mood today.

---

What was the real damage and to what people?

---

I think he is talking about the people who these internet sleuths vey directly and publicly blamed for the crime. One was Kaylees ex boyfriend, another was a U of Idaho professor who has filed suit against some internet sleuth psycho over it. There was also a guy who lived next door.

And yeah the type of harassment they received is real damage.

---

I can understand that line of thinking. I imagined they were speaking to this thread and not the global discussion.

Ernest Tucker said:

---

10thYrSr said:

---

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/crime/article270876677.html

Gives some input from BK classmates.

Summary: nobody knew anything was off. He was gregarious an the only indicator was that he did not speak up when discussing the Idaho Murders. An exceptional student. One professor commented that he seemed to be more vocal against women when they were speaking in the class. Other than that anecdotal comment, no signs of psychopathy

---

Who the hell was this other "classmate" who agreed to be interviewed;

The other master's student said Kohberger "talked down to LGBTQ+ individuals, those who are in a marginalized community, those who were disabled, and women." Kohberger also declared himself someone who "believed in 'traditional marriage,'" his classmate said.

So in the short time he was there BK was able to hit all the marginalized groups with disparaging comments? Even the disabled folks? Just seems odd that no one else mentions it (besides his well documented belligerence towards women) and that would be a pretty big deal in a college setting.

Just really makes me wonder who these people are and what their agenda is to make sure they frame him as a traditional conservative. I'm surprised they didn't add in that he wore a red Maga hat.

---

I also felt that slant when reading the article. What does his reaction to lbtq matter? And saying he supports traditional marriage?

Seems like the article had an agenda to make sure they highlighted certain points. It would be ok if they presented his entire bio, but it seems like they cherry picked.

Make no mistake, this is the most likely guy who did it based on the evidence we have so far. But beyond that, one would hope there were more signs of a killer than " he had traditional values".

I'm looking forward to the trial and the information that will be released, because the information we have now is just so full of holes.

Kudos to the investigation team for keeping a tight lid on this, because we really don't know anything.

Private PoopyPants said:

---

Quote:

---

A week and a half later, Guillard posted more than 20 videos claiming falsely that Scofield had been involved with one of the students and ordered the killings to conceal the relationship, the suit says.

---

Internet detective falsely accused a university professor of ordering the killings. Videos viewed millions of times. Cease-and-desist order ignored. Put innocent person and their families at risk of harassment and potentially physical danger.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/idaho-police-dismiss-tiktok-theory-that-university-professor-is-involved-in-college-murders/ar-AA15KkGi

---

Sounds like that dummy TikTok star is about to get a cold hard dose of reality.

One of BKs old Tinder hookups from 8 years ago is giving interviews but nothing Earth shattering for her to report other than he was awkward.

They should ask Alex Jones how kindly people take to trying to make a name or profit of off slander and conspiracy theories about a murder.

This is five days old but still interesting. Detective and death penalty lawyer.former judge discussion.

Found this overview posted.

Dumb question, but how does the law define an "accessory?" Would prosecutors have to prove that the dad knew he committed the crime before transporting him across state lines, or does the mere fact that he did it (regardless of what he knew or didn't know about his son's alleged crimes) automatically make him one?

Saw an interesting thing today. I guess it was posted 2 days ago but Kaylees dad states that not only did he ping cell towers in the area but "he was close enough that he was touching their wifi" with his cell phone.

So if that is true that is very interesting. That was not in the affidavit. That would not mean connecting to their Wifi but a router picks up any active wifi device that is within range - that is how it shows you available routers when you look at your wifi options. And routers keep logs of devices that they have been in proximity of.

He would be referring to during some of the other visits to the area (the affidavit said 12 previous times) before the night of the murders because his phone was off on that occasion.


Now he could be mistaken and confusing cell phone tower hits with wifi but I don't know he was kind of specific and seemed to be emphasizing that.

At about 4:40 in this interview:

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Saw an interesting thing today. I guess it was posted 2 days ago but Kaylees dad states that not only did he ping cell towers in the area but "he was close enough that he was touching their wifi" with his cell phone.

So if that is true that is very interesting. That was not in the affidavit. That would not mean connecting to their Wifi but a router picks up any active wifi device that is within range - that is how it shows you available routers when you look at your wifi options. And routers keep logs of devices that they have been in proximity of.

He would be referring to during some of the other visits to the area (the affidavit said 12 previous times) before the night of the murders because his phone was off on that occasion.


Now he could be mistaken and confusing cell phone tower hits with wifi but I don't know he was kind of specific and seemed to be emphasizing that.

At about 4:40 in this interview:

---

We already have proof that he was using tinder from a woman who hooked up with him from that app that was quoted earlier in the thread. I reiterate that he may have been hooking up with one of the girls in the house through this app. Hence his presence in the area. Far fetched for sure, but a possibility.

I remember Ted Bundy, the wanta be lawyer, defending himself with a smirk on his face, getting a delight in cross examining the relatives of his victims. Making a mockery of justice or at least trying too. I remember when they executed him, the monster was finally dead.

As the father said, BK looked defeated in the court room. So, I don't think he will kill himself but I think he may confess, claim a heroine relapse and he doesn't remember the actual killings.

Life without parole and dies in prison.

I think his dad was super proud that his son wanted him to ride with him. Sad deal.

PA24 said:

---

I remember Ted Bundy, the wanta be lawyer, defending himself with a smirk on his face, getting a delight in cross examining the relatives of his victims. Making a mockery of justice or at least trying too. I remember when they executed him, the monster was finally dead.

As the father said, BK looked defeated in the court room. So, I don't think he will kill himself but I think he may confess, claim a heroine relapse and he doesn't remember the actual killings.

Life without parole and dies in prison.

I think his dad was super proud that his son wanted him to ride with him. Sad deal.

---

I don't see that happening. I think he'll stay smug and arrogant throughout.

zgolfz85 said:

---

10thYrSr said:

---

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Saw an interesting thing today. I guess it was posted 2 days ago but Kaylees dad states that not only did he ping cell towers in the area but "he was close enough that he was touching their wifi" with his cell phone.

So if that is true that is very interesting. That was not in the affidavit. That would not mean connecting to their Wifi but a router picks up any active wifi device that is within range - that is how it shows you available routers when you look at your wifi options. And routers keep logs of devices that they have been in proximity of.

He would be referring to during some of the other visits to the area (the affidavit said 12 previous times) before the night of the murders because his phone was off on that occasion.


Now he could be mistaken and confusing cell phone tower hits with wifi but I don't know he was kind of specific and seemed to be emphasizing that.

At about 4:40 in this interview:

---

We already have proof that he was using tinder from a woman who hooked up with him from that app that was quoted earlier in the thread. I reiterate that he may have been hooking up with one of the girls in the house through this app. Hence his presence in the area. Far fetched for sure, but a possibility.

---

There's absolutely no way that dude was hooking up with any of those chicks. I know because I have eyes

smh

---

People hook up all the time.

It would also explain why DK saw the suspect, was "scared", but then went back to bed and didn't call the police for 8 hours.

No way those girls had any interest in that dude. Creepy, hook nose nerd. They were absolutely beautiful and one had a steady while the other one had just broke up with a friend of both.

The two girls were best friends since childhood. They were as close as sisters.

Creep had no business around these young girls.

We should load up in a DC3 and pull his punk ass out into the streets and hang, drawn, and quarter his vegan ass.

…..impale each quarter on a pole pointing toward a cardinal heading as a warning to any copy cat killers.

Then resume with the trial.

That is what I would order if I was King.

zgolfz85 said:

---

10thYrSr said:

---

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Saw an interesting thing today. I guess it was posted 2 days ago but Kaylees dad states that not only did he ping cell towers in the area but "he was close enough that he was touching their wifi" with his cell phone.

So if that is true that is very interesting. That was not in the affidavit. That would not mean connecting to their Wifi but a router picks up any active wifi device that is within range - that is how it shows you available routers when you look at your wifi options. And routers keep logs of devices that they have been in proximity of.

He would be referring to during some of the other visits to the area (the affidavit said 12 previous times) before the night of the murders because his phone was off on that occasion.


Now he could be mistaken and confusing cell phone tower hits with wifi but I don't know he was kind of specific and seemed to be emphasizing that.

At about 4:40 in this interview:

---

We already have proof that he was using tinder from a woman who hooked up with him from that app that was quoted earlier in the thread. I reiterate that he may have been hooking up with one of the girls in the house through this app. Hence his presence in the area. Far fetched for sure, but a possibility.

---

There's absolutely no way that dude was hooking up with any of those chicks. I know because I have eyes

smh

---

Lol! True. But you never know a person's proclivity.

zgolfz85 said:

---

agracer said:

---

zgolfz85 said:

---

10thYrSr said:

---

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Saw an interesting thing today. I guess it was posted 2 days ago but Kaylees dad states that not only did he ping cell towers in the area but "he was close enough that he was touching their wifi" with his cell phone.

So if that is true that is very interesting. That was not in the affidavit. That would not mean connecting to their Wifi but a router picks up any active wifi device that is within range - that is how it shows you available routers when you look at your wifi options. And routers keep logs of devices that they have been in proximity of.

He would be referring to during some of the other visits to the area (the affidavit said 12 previous times) before the night of the murders because his phone was off on that occasion.


Now he could be mistaken and confusing cell phone tower hits with wifi but I don't know he was kind of specific and seemed to be emphasizing that.

At about 4:40 in this interview:

---

We already have proof that he was using tinder from a woman who hooked up with him from that app that was quoted earlier in the thread. I reiterate that he may have been hooking up with one of the girls in the house through this app. Hence his presence in the area. Far fetched for sure, but a possibility.

---

There's absolutely no way that dude was hooking up with any of those chicks. I know because I have eyes

smh

---

People hook up all the time.

It would also explain why DK saw the suspect, was "scared", but then went back to bed and didn't call the police for 8 hours.

---

I don't think a familiar face, even if they thought he was weird, would result in "frozen state of panic." I can't believe there are humans that actually think there's even a remote chance that this creeper of a dude hooked up with any of these beautiful girls. Y'all sound like a bunch of incels yourselves

---

It wouldn't have necessarily had to be the suspect had done any hook ups with any of the girls. If one or more of the room mates had lots of random hook ups, the sight of a stranger in the house might have at first startled DK, then she realizes "it's a hook up" and she went back to bed. Especially if she was drunk or high on something. It was also dark and he had on a covid mask (IIRC) so she really did not get a good look at him.

Have you never walked into a room that you though was empty and suddenly realize someone else is in the room and frozen...then you realize it's your wife, brother, sister, whatever? You move along to whatever you were doing.

I don't think it was that dark. There was a "Good Vibes" neon light sign on the living room wall that was right outside her door. I think she got a good look at his masked face and was focused on that and did not see the knife.

The girl froze... she described it as a "shock phase", for several hours. Whatever she saw scared the crap out of her and she didn't just decide it was a hookup or nothing to worry about.

Problem is, we won't see or hear much from him in the trial. He won't give statements, he won't be put on the stand. This isn't like Attorney X/I'm not Darrell Brooks GROUNZ. If he shows any reactions during testimony, his lawyer will rein that in immediately. All we will be getting going forward are the lawyer versions and we know what the tone of those will be.

She was questioned about it after she found out everyone was murdered. I have no doubt that knowledge influenced what she said about when she saw the guy in her house. Also you can be in shock there's a dude in your house without being scared or whatever.

Sea Speed said:

---

She was questioned about it after she found out everyone was murdered. I have no doubt that knowledge influenced what she said about when she saw the guy in her house. Also you can be in shock there's a dude in your house without being scared or whatever.

---

DING DING DING

Her responses to what she saw and get came after she knew they were dead maybe even days or a week after. You would want to think real hard about what you saw and what you felt. No one every actually remembers that factually.

Y'all are reading way too much into her statements. She didn't say it froze her and shook her for hours. It said she was frozen and then she locked the door. Which she probably does every night when she goes to bed.

Bluecat_Aggie94 said:

---

The girl froze... she described it as a "shock phase", for several hours. Whatever she saw scared the crap out of her and she didn't just decide it was a hookup or nothing to worry about.

---

There is nothing in the affidavit that says it was for several hours. It could have been very brief in fact. I suspect once he passed and she closed her door she might have decided it was nothing and went to sleep. In fact it said she stood in a "frozen shock state" which might imply it only lasted as long as she stood there.

The pertinent thing there might just be that she froze during the period when she saw him - and with his eyes affected by the neon light that may be why he did not see her - assuming the door was merely cracked open.


Here is the passage in the affidavit:

Quote:

---

D.M. stated she opened her door for the third time after she heard the crying and mw a figure clad in black clothing and a mask that covered the person's mouth and nose walking towards her. D.M. described the figure as 5' I 0" or taller, male, not very muscular, but athletically built with bushy eyebrows. The male walked past D.M. as she stood in a "frozen shock phase." The male walked towards the back sliding glass door. D.M. locked herself in her room after seeing the male. D.M. did not state that she recognized the male. This leads investigators to believe that the murderer left the scene.

---

agracer said:

---

zgolfz85 said:

---

agracer said:

---

zgolfz85 said:

---

10thYrSr said:

---

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

Saw an interesting thing today. I guess it was posted 2 days ago but Kaylees dad states that not only did he ping cell towers in the area but "he was close enough that he was touching their wifi" with his cell phone.

So if that is true that is very interesting. That was not in the affidavit. That would not mean connecting to their Wifi but a router picks up any active wifi device that is within range - that is how it shows you available routers when you look at your wifi options. And routers keep logs of devices that they have been in proximity of.

He would be referring to during some of the other visits to the area (the affidavit said 12 previous times) before the night of the murders because his phone was off on that occasion.


Now he could be mistaken and confusing cell phone tower hits with wifi but I don't know he was kind of specific and seemed to be emphasizing that.

At about 4:40 in this interview:

---

We already have proof that he was using tinder from a woman who hooked up with him from that app that was quoted earlier in the thread. I reiterate that he may have been hooking up with one of the girls in the house through this app. Hence his presence in the area. Far fetched for sure, but a possibility.

---

There's absolutely no way that dude was hooking up with any of those chicks. I know because I have eyes

smh

---

People hook up all the time.

It would also explain why DK saw the suspect, was "scared", but then went back to bed and didn't call the police for 8 hours.

---

I don't think a familiar face, even if they thought he was weird, would result in "frozen state of panic." I can't believe there are humans that actually think there's even a remote chance that this creeper of a dude hooked up with any of these beautiful girls. Y'all sound like a bunch of incels yourselves

---

It wouldn't have necessarily had to be the suspect had done any hook ups with any of the girls. If one or more of the room mates had lots of random hook ups, the sight of a stranger in the house might have at first startled DK, then she realizes "it's a hook up" and she went back to bed. Especially if she was drunk or high on something. It was also dark and he had on a covid mask (IIRC) so she really did not get a good look at him.

Have you never walked into a room that you though was empty and suddenly realize someone else is in the room and frozen...then you realize it's your wife, brother, sister, whatever? You move along to whatever you were doing.

---

Yes of course I've done that. I thought you were suggesting BK hooked up with one of these girls, which would be laughable

Multiple people have made that statement

I just feel so bad for Dylan, and not because she's being vilified in all this. There's just no way she'll be able to live her life without thinking about this and reliving it every single day and likely every hour for the rest of her life. She's blessed and lucky to be alive, but the life she knew and had will never be familiar to her again.