aggiehawg said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Kohberger waived his right to a speedy trial today.

---

He did? After those long hearings over a possible stay? Bet that ticked off Judge Judge.

---

Judge gave him until Sept 8th, but in reality, he could have done it until the eve of opening arguments.

Judge is probably happy he didn't wait until after they sent out jury notices and happy that the defense gets plenty of time to prepare.

Guitarsoup said:

---

zgolfz85 said:

---

so does that mean the timeline the judge set out still intact or no?

---

Definitely not.

---

that's what I thought, but wanted to be sure. welp, that sucks! so, how long we thinking now? a year out?

MsDoubleD81 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Kohberger waived his right to a speedy trial today.

---

---

Highly doubtful the trial was going to start in October anyway. Jury selection alone will take like a week or so. And defense is still arguing over discovery. (A lot of that is the FBIs fault, since they have not turned over all of their early stuff to the DA's office so they can in turn produce it to the defense.)

Guitarsoup said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Kohberger waived his right to a speedy trial today.

---

He did? After those long hearings over a possible stay? Bet that ticked off Judge Judge.

---

Judge gave him until Sept 8th, but in reality, he could have done it until the eve of opening arguments.

Judge is probably happy he didn't wait until after they sent out jury notices and happy that the defense gets plenty of time to prepare.

---

There's a distinction between a motion for continuance and a motion to stay. What the defense had requested was a stay or a tolling of the time under speedy trial provisions without waiving the right to a speedy trial. Not blaming defnse counsel because they have to play the hand their hand they re dealt but the judge was not happy about them wanting their cake and eating it too.

aggiehawg said:

---

MsDoubleD81 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Kohberger waived his right to a speedy trial today.

---

---

Highly doubtful the trial was going to start in October anyway. Jury selection alone will take like a week or so. And defense is still arguing over discovery. (A lot of that is the FBIs fault, since they have not turned over all of their early stuff to the DA's office so they can in turn produce it to the defense.)

---

The FBI was never going to turn it over. In previous cases, they have not been forced to turn over their investigative methods.

The defense was never going to get the IGG data and it was never going to be used in trial.

Guitarsoup said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

MsDoubleD81 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Kohberger waived his right to a speedy trial today.

---

---

Highly doubtful the trial was going to start in October anyway. Jury selection alone will take like a week or so. And defense is still arguing over discovery. (A lot of that is the FBIs fault, since they have not turned over all of their early stuff to the DA's office so they can in turn produce it to the defense.)

---

The FBI was never going to turn it over. In previous cases, they have not been forced to turn over their investigative methods.

The defense was never going to get the IGG data and it was never going to be used in trial.

---

While likely true but that didn't stop the defense from filing motion after motion trying to get it.

I also understand Judge Judge's frustration here because he has a busy docket to manage and setting aside such a large block of time is a logistical nightmare for him. And although I don't know this for sure but it seems likely that Ann Taylor and her team are only focusing on this one case. She's high enough in the PD's office that she wasn't line PD with a whole docket of cases to begin with. And a one the few DP certified attorneys in the state, her caseload, such as it was would have beenlargely reassigned and cleare off of her plat.

aggiehawg said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

MsDoubleD81 said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

Kohberger waived his right to a speedy trial today.

---

---

Highly doubtful the trial was going to start in October anyway. Jury selection alone will take like a week or so. And defense is still arguing over discovery. (A lot of that is the FBIs fault, since they have not turned over all of their early stuff to the DA's office so they can in turn produce it to the defense.)

---

The FBI was never going to turn it over. In previous cases, they have not been forced to turn over their investigative methods.

The defense was never going to get the IGG data and it was never going to be used in trial.

---

While likely true but that didn't stop the defense from filing motion after motion trying to get it.

I also understand Judge Judge's frustration here because he has a busy docket to manage and setting aside such a large block of time is a logistical nightmare for him. And although I don't know this for sure but it seems likely that Ann Taylor and her team are only focusing on this one case. She's high enough in the PD's office that she wasn't line PD with a whole docket of cases to begin with. And a one the few DP certified attorneys in the state, her caseload, such as it was would have beenlargely reassigned and cleare off of her plat.

---

I think same should have been for Judge. Clear some of his plate as he's presiding over one of the most interested criminal trials since…?

Quote:

---

I think same should have been for Judge. Clear some of his plate as he's presiding over one of the most interested criminal trials since…?

---

Boy did that point go waaaaaaaayy over your head. He's not allowed that "flexibility" that you seem to think is so easy.

It is not.

Kohberger is making a motion to have the death penalty taken off the table because he had to decide between waiving his right to a speedy trial or having effective assistance of counsel.

What does that mean? Is that kinda like an admission of guilt? A plea of sorts? Sorry, the legal terminology isn't all that easy to follow.

jrrhouston98 said:

---

What does that mean? Is that kinda like an admission of guilt? A plea of sorts? Sorry, the legal terminology isn't all that easy to follow.

---

It is dumb and it will be thrown out.

He's saying he has the right to effective counsel and the right to a speedy trial - both true.

But he's saying he has to waive speedy trial to get effective counsel so that his public defenders have enough time to study the evidence, come up with a plan and be effective.

Pretty sure Judge Judge will say too bad.

Isn't his counsel supposed to be very good and well versed in DP cases? Claiming poor counsel is a farce.

jrrhouston98 said:

---

Isn't his counsel supposed to be very good and well versed in DP cases? Claiming poor counsel is a farce.

---

He's saying if they go to trial in a month, she doesn't have enough time to go over and prepare with all the evidence. I would bet that's true.

It's dumb.

Last week they filled a motion to throw out the grand jury indictment because 48 people were called for grand jury duty and 30-something people showed up.

They filed a motion to throw out the grand jury indictment because the grand jury found probable cause, not beyond a reasonable doubt. But they are there to determine probable cause.

I think these filings show they know they are absolutely smoked when this goes to trial.

And yes, by all accounts, the public defender team is solid

I appreciate your explanations, thank you. One final question here. Does this just seem like he knows he's smoked and he's stretching this out as long as he can before he gets the gavel dropped after being told he gets the firing squad? Essentially delaying his impending doom?

Guitarsoup said:

---

jrrhouston98 said:

---

What does that mean? Is that kinda like an admission of guilt? A plea of sorts? Sorry, the legal terminology isn't all that easy to follow.

---

It is dumb and it will be thrown out.

He's saying he has the right to effective counsel and the right to a speedy trial - both true.

But he's saying he has to waive speedy trial to get effective counsel so that his public defenders have enough time to study the evidence, come up with a plan and be effective.

Pretty sure Judge Judge will say too bad.

---

Public defenders by virtue of their being assigned to defendants, like the box of chocolates, never know what you will get. I go back to the Waukesha parade killer, Darryl Brooks. Guy was a nut job but not dumb. Which is why he ultimately fired them and went pro se.

Now with Kohberger, studying for a graduate degree in criminal justice and thinks he knows it all. He doesn't but his highly qualified defense counsel has to do what he directs, within the law even if it is unreasonable and will be smacked down by the judge.

It is what it is.

jrrhouston98 said:

---

I appreciate your explanations, thank you. One final question here. Does this just seem like he knows he's smoked and he's stretching this out as long as he can before he gets the gavel dropped after being told he gets the firing squad? Essentially delaying his impending doom?

---

I think he wants to go forward, but with the evidence we know, and knowing the defense has received over 50 terabytes of discovery and discovery isn't over, he has to know he's toast.

It he is convicted in 2023 or 2025, it's so going to be the 2030s before he is executed.

aggiehawg said:

---

Guitarsoup said:

---

jrrhouston98 said:

---

What does that mean? Is that kinda like an admission of guilt? A plea of sorts? Sorry, the legal terminology isn't all that easy to follow.

---

It is dumb and it will be thrown out.

He's saying he has the right to effective counsel and the right to a speedy trial - both true.

But he's saying he has to waive speedy trial to get effective counsel so that his public defenders have enough time to study the evidence, come up with a plan and be effective.

Pretty sure Judge Judge will say too bad.

---

Public defenders by virtue of their being assigned to defendants, like the box of chocolates, never know what you will get. I go back to the Waukesha parade killer, Darryl Brooks. Guy was a nut job but not dumb. Which is why he ultimately fired them and went pro se.

Now with Kohberger, studying for a graduate degree in criminal justice and thinks he knows it all. He doesn't but his highly qualified defense counsel has to do what he directs, within the law even if it is unreasonable and will be smacked down by the judge.

It is what it is.

---

Brooks wasn't that smart. He would have been way better off with his public defender. He was also a sovereign citizen nutjob in addition to just being a nutjob in general.

I think by all accounts, Kohberger public defender Anne Taylor is a talented and well respected attorney. Not exactly the PD you would get in Harris County or something.

Kohberger has a bachelor's in psychology, masters in criminal justice and was first semester in his PhD. There were some stories about his demeanor and that his peers got the impression that he thought he was significantly more intelligent than he was.

I think some of her filings are clearly meritless, but she's gotta pull out all the stops in a death penalty case with the facts this case has.

Quote:

---

Brooks wasn't that smart. He would have been way better off with his public defender. He was also a sovereign citizen nutjob in addition to just being a nutjob in general.

I think by all accounts, Kohberger public defender Anne Taylor is a talented and well respected attorney. Not exactly the PD you would get in Harris County or something.

Kohberger has a bachelor's in psychology, masters in criminal justice and was first semester in his PhD. There were some stories about his demeanor and that his peers got the impression that he thought he was significantly more intelligent than he was.

---

Agree with all of that. Brooks did himself no favors. That prosecution team was the best proecution for such a large case, I have ever seen. Even if he had PDs at counsel table with him, there's not much they could do to introduce a scintilla of reasonable doubt.

And as to Kohberger, think he does believe he is smarter than everyone else and he'll get away with it.

Emily will be discussing the waiver of speedy trial shortly.

Defense motion for no cameras.

One interesting caveat about him 'thinking' he is smarter than others… it is very possible that he may actually be much smarter than others.

Not saying that he is, but there is a difference between those who simply are over arrogant and think they are smarter and those who are indeed smarter and have no issues being smug about it.

fka ftc said:

---

One interesting caveat about him 'thinking' he is smarter than others… it is very possible that he may actually be much smarter than others.

Not saying that he is, but there is a difference between those who simply are over arrogant and think they are smarter and those who are indeed smarter and have no issues being smug about it.

---

My cousin is a professor at DeSales (where he got his bachelors and masters) and while she never taught him, her colleagues have. From what she has told me - he is not really remarkable intellectually.

But he will probably be able to provide more help than the average defendant. He will certainly understand the proceedings and may even be able to do legal research.

Interesting. Like I said, I have no idea if he is exceptionally smart and sounds like he likely may be above average, but when you look at average that is not saying much.

I would venture to guess there are probably a couple dozen or more extremely smart serial killers operating in the US at any given time. It's a scary thought but the number of unsolved homicides combined with long term missing persons is pretty huge.

Sorry for derail, appreciate you, Hawg and others for posting the updates on this case as it progresses.

I was also confused by that first post this morning. Thanks to all who helped clarify and provide insight.

fka ftc said:

---

Interesting. Like I said, I have no idea if he is exceptionally smart and sounds like he likely may be above average, but when you look at average that is not saying much.

I would venture to guess there are probably a couple dozen or more extremely smart serial killers operating in the US at any given time. It's a scary thought but the number of unsolved homicides combined with long term missing persons is pretty huge.

Sorry for derail, appreciate you, Hawg and others for posting the updates on this case as it progresses.

---

What is interesting is that some of the most "successful" serial killers have been not all that smart.

Gary Ridgeway killed maybe 100+ people and I think his IQ was sub-90. Green River Killer.

Israel Keyes really meticulously planned out his murders and he was average intelligence at best. Hell, he was caught (here in Texas) using the debit card of a victim. Keyes talked about studying other serial killers to be a better serial killer. Listen to the podcast True Crime Bull**** for his story. So little is known about him and his actual victims, that he has become kind of a boogie man of "is he responsible for X disappearance?" in true crime circles.

Otis Toole (notably killed Adam Walsh, son of Josh Walsh from America's Most Wanted) had an IQ lower than ERCOT's recommended room temperature.

Samuel Little was a little below the mean, but had 90+ victims.

Ted Bundy and Jeffery Dahmer were really smart, but both got caught with stupid mistakes.

There might be some really brilliant ones out there, but I think most aren't all that bright.

Trick being the not so bright ones were caught.

Sort of an unanswerable question, but just makes me curious how many operate out there and never are caught or even come close to being caught.

Mr. Brooks was a fascinating movie to me.

TBF, law enforcement largely sucked and were easily mislead, even with messages from the killer to the press and police themselves.

Forensics changed much of that.

fka ftc said:

---

Trick being the not so bright ones were caught.

Sort of an unanswerable question, but just makes me curious how many operate out there and never are caught or even come close to being caught.

Mr. Brooks was a fascinating movie to me.

---

There probably are some out there, but like Hawg said, forensics and especially DNA changed the game.

The Golden State Killer wasn't particularly bright, but man did he cause havoc.

I think that people like him or BTK that just stop one day are the ones that could be smart and out there. But I think forensics will eventually catch up with most of them.

The guys like Israel Keyes that really planned it and the bodies weren't found or looked like an accident (boating accident with several, I think) - those are the ones that are probably out there. He was a really unique one, because he spent years studying serial killers before becoming one.

Yeah, I think the golden age of serial killers is probably forever extinct and it just gets more difficult by the day. There's simply too many ways to get caught now and it would be near impossible to get away with it for long, even if you're incredibly well planned and Mensa level intelligent. Well, I'll throw in the caveat of the first world anyhow. I'm sure it's still easily possible in the third world. In the first world, it's impossible to get away with cheating on your spouse or love interest these days, much less commit multiple murders

The internet has also thrown an obstacle at it.

Time stamps, IPs, online presences…

It's uncommon for people to disappear for even hours these days to lead a double life like some of the known serial killers were able to.

In today's society their alibis and excuses wouldn't hold up like they once did.

Prosecution is saying that the self-taught genetic genealogy "expert" was going to change some of her testimony just days after giving it.

Time stamp: 41:11

TexasRebel said:

---

The internet has also thrown an obstacle at it.

Time stamps, IPs, online presences…

It's uncommon for people to disappear for even hours these days to lead a double life like some of the known serial killers were able to.

In today's society their alibis and excuses wouldn't hold up like they once did.

---

Unless your last name is biden

There are also cameras everywhere. Houses, businesses, doorbells, dashboards, roads, etc. Resolution continues to improve, but even at night when it's shaky, getting a color and narrowing down on make/model is still possible. Ingress and egress from a scene without popping up on a camera in some way is tough

US is tough, UK probably even tougher. CCTV over there is nuts compared to here.

Prolific killers still exist in S America. Makes you also wander how prevalent those sorts were in the old days of the US.

Peter breaks the hearing and talks about the potential camera ban.

Judge Judge was called for jury duty for the Kohberger trial. He asked both prosecution and defense counsel if they had an objection to him excusing himself from jury duty.