From what I've read, the probable cause will be revealed once he's back in Idaho tomorrow.
This story will probably spark a national conversation over the personal safety implications of social media. Rumors are swirling around that he was a sort of social media stalker of the victims. That would be very creepy if he didn't have any personal connection to them beyond social media following.
When the news broke it gave the impression he fled across the country. Turns out he went home for the holidays over a month after the crime? That’s pretty bizarre for a guilty person. If they just destroyed this guys life that DNA evidence better hold up when they actually test him.
Not bizarre at all. Why would you apply normal person thinking to someone that knifed 4 people to death for the thrill of it?
If so, where is the mastermind strategy in play there?
What I said was kind of tongue in cheek because of his studies and people claiming he wanted to commit the perfect crime.
It seems they identified him from entering his DNA into an ancestry site which would then give them phone, car and other information.
The point I was trying to make was that although he should have known DNA evidence was probably the only way he would be identified, he managed to leave some anyway.
He had such a big head start on law enforcement. It's crazy to think he didn't leave the country, and even crazier that he just went about his normal life.
That would arouse suspicion. Plus it seems plausible that, assuming he is indeed guilty, he enjoyed the thought of getting away with murder and might have made it a regular part of his lifestyle.
Early thoughts on this guy are, much like an arsonist, he wanted to watch the craziness around his actions.
It will be interesting to see if there's any connection between the victims and this guy or they just happened to pick the wrong house to reside in.
That would arouse suspicion. Plus it seems plausible that, assuming he is indeed guilty, he enjoyed the thought of getting away with murder and might have made it a regular part of his lifestyle.
Early thoughts on this guy are, much like an arsonist, he wanted to watch the craziness around his actions.
It will be interesting to see if there's any connection between the victims and this guy or they just happened to pick the wrong house to reside in.
There was a cnn article saying he stalked the house a lot, based on cell tower data. Unclear if he had a personal vendetta against any of the victims.
Still no murder weapon or motive though? This doesn't exactly scream open and shut case.
Assuming his DNA is shown to be in the home plus the video evidence of the car setting a timeframe, it's going to be a tough defense to sell to a jury. He's not OJ and won't have any sympathy going for him.
Open and shut cases at this point in a criminal timeline are rare but it looks bleak for this guy.
My ex-wife has a PhD in Criminology and has worked as a professor in that area for nearly twenty years. She is nationally recognized and is, frankly, brilliant. There is literally nothing in her education that would prepare her to commit a crime like this and leave no trace, or mastermind it, any better than most of us could attempt based on watching true-crime television shows. This suspect, as a first semester PhD student, likely has no great insight either. We all know you could wear a hazmat suit, cover your hair, wear gloves, etc. Leave your phone at home. Don't have your phone on you when you stake out the property. Don't be seen staking out the property.
Second, there are a lot of posts suggesting he should have ran after committing the crime (if he did it). I would suggest that would have gotten him caught even faster. Four people are murdered and a local student and teaching assistant disappears from his classes and his teaching duties? A 28-year-old male just vanishes at the exact time that everyone is on high alert and wondering who could have done it? Law enforcement would have been on him like white on rice. And a head start would probably not help him evade the law for too long.
It is common when someone is caught for a high-profile crime and the evidence is brought to light, people, like all of us, will talk and write about what we would have done differently, about how he was a fool, how getting away with it would be easy, or at least possible, and to describe what we would have done differently.
There really is something interesting there; about how we want to cast ourselves as smarter, more capable, more qualified to think critically and be a criminal mastermind, all from the safety of our couch. You can find such posts in this thread and many others on similar topics. It seems a perverse way to self-congratulate for things we have never done and never would do (I hope).
My ex-wife has a PhD in Criminology and has worked as a professor in that area for nearly twenty years. She is nationally recognized and is, frankly, brilliant. There is literally nothing in her education that would prepare her to commit a crime like this and leave no trace, or mastermind it, any better than most of us could attempt based on watching true-crime television shows. This suspect, as a first semester PhD student, likely has no great insight either. We all know you could wear a hazmat suit, cover your hair, wear gloves, etc. Leave your phone at home. Don't have your phone on you when you stake out the property. Don't be seen staking out the property.
Second, there are a lot of posts suggesting he should have ran after committing the crime (if he did it). I would suggest that would have gotten him caught even faster. Four people are murdered and a local student and teaching assistant disappears from his classes and his teaching duties? A 28-year-old male just vanishes at the exact time that everyone is on high alert and wondering who could have done it? Law enforcement would have been on him like white on rice. And a head start would probably not help him evade the law for too long.
Your wife being a criminologist doesn't make you smarter by association.
It's winter holiday break. People fly home all over the world on winter holiday break.
A flight to Chicago then to Paris then to Algiers and he would have been free. No Extradition Agreement with Algeria. No courtesy Extradition from Algeria to U.S.
My ex-wife has a PhD in Criminology and has worked as a professor in that area for nearly twenty years. She is nationally recognized and is, frankly, brilliant. There is literally nothing in her education that would prepare her to commit a crime like this and leave no trace, or mastermind it, any better than most of us could attempt based on watching true-crime television shows. This suspect, as a first semester PhD student, likely has no great insight either. We all know you could wear a hazmat suit, cover your hair, wear gloves, etc. Leave your phone at home. Don't have your phone on you when you stake out the property. Don't be seen staking out the property.
Second, there are a lot of posts suggesting he should have ran after committing the crime (if he did it). I would suggest that would have gotten him caught even faster. Four people are murdered and a local student and teaching assistant disappears from his classes and his teaching duties? A 28-year-old male just vanishes at the exact time that everyone is on high alert and wondering who could have done it? Law enforcement would have been on him like white on rice. And a head start would probably not help him evade the law for too long.
Your wife being a criminologist doesn't make you smarter by association.
It's winter holiday break. People fly home all over the world on winter holiday break.
A flight to Chicago then to Paris then to Algiers and he would have been free. No Extradition Agreement with Algeria. No courtesy Extradition from Algeria to U.S.
The assumption is that he wanted to flee. I think we'll find out he had more interest in the reaction than he would fleeing.
My ex-wife has a PhD in Criminology and has worked as a professor in that area for nearly twenty years. She is nationally recognized and is, frankly, brilliant. There is literally nothing in her education that would prepare her to commit a crime like this and leave no trace, or mastermind it, any better than most of us could attempt based on watching true-crime television shows. This suspect, as a first semester PhD student, likely has no great insight either. We all know you could wear a hazmat suit, cover your hair, wear gloves, etc. Leave your phone at home. Don't have your phone on you when you stake out the property. Don't be seen staking out the property.
Second, there are a lot of posts suggesting he should have ran after committing the crime (if he did it). I would suggest that would have gotten him caught even faster. Four people are murdered and a local student and teaching assistant disappears from his classes and his teaching duties? A 28-year-old male just vanishes at the exact time that everyone is on high alert and wondering who could have done it? Law enforcement would have been on him like white on rice. And a head start would probably not help him evade the law for too long.
Your wife being a criminologist doesn't make you smarter by association.
It's winter holiday break. People fly home all over the world on winter holiday break.
A flight to Chicago then to Paris then to Algiers and he would have been free. No Extradition Agreement with Algeria. No courtesy Extradition from Algeria to U.S.
I am in no way suggesting that I am smarter by association.
I am saying, and I thought it was clear, is that a PhD in Criminology is not designed to teach people how to get away with murder, or any other crime.
After that you go on to do exactly what my next post addresses; tell everyone how "getting away with it" could be done better, or more easily, and how you would have it all figured out. Believe me, nobody reads your post and thinks, "Oh, this guy is SO smart! He could get away with murder!"
I am going to reply to myself to add, that with a few minutes to think about it, I actually disagree with you.
I am smarter by association, on the topic of what someone learns in a standard PhD in Criminology program, and about basic Criminology theory.
When you are married to someone for twenty+ years and they have deep expertise in an area and you discuss it almost daily, you are probably better versed than the average person. I would say that for anyone who is married to an expert and they regularly discuss the topic. The spouse of an architect knows more about architecture than I would, if they discuss it daily. Perhaps that is not "be association," but rather "through constant communication," but the point remains.
This video answers the question: Can I offer an update on the Idaho quadruple murder case including the arrest of Bryan Christopher Kohberger?Support Dr. Gra...
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
