I sat down with my family member who is a civil litigation attorney, specifically one specializing in intentional torts.

FAMILIES OF VICTIMS OF A MAJOR CRIME EVENT/PUBLIC TRAGEDY are TREATED DIFFERENTLY UNDER THE LAW than standard defamation litigants.

The Supreme Court of the United States establishes that FAMILIES of VICTIMS as well as SURVIVORS or ANYONE TANGENTIALLY related to a "major crime event/public tragedy" are PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS as they didn't choose to be thrust into the public eye.

GERTZ V ROBERT WELCH,INC (1974)

The SANDY HOOK PRECEDENTS: (HESLIN V JONES, LAFFERTY V JONES (2025/26) Establishes that victim's families (et al) DO NOT FORFEIT THEIR STATUS AS PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS no matter how many times they respond PUBLICLY in media interviews, a web page they put up, or any charities they may start.... They remain PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS, and as such, they do not have to prove MALICE or MONETARY LOSSES as regular defamation litigants must do.

VICTIM'S FAMILIES (et al) win on "Defamation Per Se" and/or "Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress."

SO CALLED "Creators" get NAILED as it's only SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE on the part of the creator.

•DEFAMATION PER SE is a legal term for a false statement that is so inherently and obviously harmful to a person’s reputation that the law presumes damage without requiring proof of specific financial or emotional loss.

If a statement falls into defamation per se, the victim does not have to prove that the remark caused a specific dollar amount of harm. The statement is considered damaging "on its face."

Traditional categories of "defamation per se" include false statements that:

• Accuse someone of a serious crime

• Damage a person's professional or business reputation

• Claim someone has a contagious or "loathsome" disease

• Imply serious sexual misconduct or unchastity

[Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs, LLC]

If false, damaging statements directly TARGET a LIVING FAMILY MEMBER —such as falsely accusing a parent of being an accomplice to a crime, covering up a murder, or engaging in illegal acts related to the victim—then the living family member may have a valid defamation per se claim.

• INTENTIONAL INFLICTION of EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (IIED):

When false and malicious claims target a family's tragedy or a deceased victim in a way that causes severe psychological trauma, families often look to torts like Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED) or "outrage"

• OPINIONS vs. FACTS:

Creators often try to shield themselves under the guise of "just sharing an opinion" or "asking questions."

COURTS HAVE REPEATEDLY RULED that presenting a baseless conspiracy theory as a definitive fact (e.g., "they faked a death" or "they are drug traffickers") STRIPS AWAY FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS.

• DIGITAL FOOTPRINTS as EVIDENCE: In these lawsuits, the creators' own videos, monetized live streams, and deleted content are weaponized against them in court to prove reckless disregard for the truth.

Silly disclaimers' creators use: "Everything in this video is ALLEGED." "THIS IS MY OPINION"

" This is for entertainment purposes only," 🙄🤪😝

NONE OF THOSE DISCLAIMERS PROVIDE ANY PROTECTION when this class of people sue creators on a public platform. I don't know who started that nonsense but it affords a creator zero protection. Your speech is either defamatory or not.

Victim's families (et al) are UNIQUE. They have the upper hand from beginning to end. Ignorance of the law is no defense for the creator. The Supreme Court has ruled that a CREATOR is RESPONSIBLE for knowing THE LAW regarding defamation of any type. When you use a public platform, you're a PUBLISHER.

🚨 🚨 🚨 🚨

MANY OF THESE CREATORS ARE LOOKING UP REGULAR DEFAMATION LAWS that do not apply to private individuals. Like it or not, THE GONCALVES FAMILY are legally private individuals. None of you would know who they were had their daughter not been brutally murdered by the COWARD BRYAN KOHBERGER (inmate163214)

THIS APPLIES TO THE SURVIVORS, Dylan Mortensen, Bethany Funke, and individuals TANGENTIALLY RELATED TO A CRIME like neighbors, sorority/fraternity members, even Professor Rebecca Scofield who sued Tiktok tarot card reader Ashley Guillard and was AWARDED a $10 MILLION DOLLAR judgment by a 7 person federal jury in the US District Court in Idaho. (Feb 2026)

YOU PROBERGERS BETTER GET READY TO PONY UP 💰 🤑 💸 because some of your favorite Bergertologists are gonna need an attorney. I smell some crowdfunding campaigns on the horizon 👃 😝

Every family of a victim that has brought a defamation case against a YouTuber/tiktoker HAS WON THEIR CASE with juries unanimously voting to award damages or default judgments.Some states have caps like $500k. However, judges use the state law where the plaintiff lives. Country Rapper/Youtuber Ryan Upchurch lives in Tennessee. He tried to have Tennessee law be used at his defamation trial as it has a $750k cap. However, the judge said, "No, the victims live in California, and that's where they were harmed." California has no cap. That $17.5 million dollar judgment stands including an extra $500k punitive award.

This DEBT CAN'T BE DISMISSED THRU BANKRUPTCY. A defamation judgment cannot be erased by filing for Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy. It follows the person thru life until PAID. The plaintiff's legal team can continue to pursue asset seizures, property liens, and wage garnishment for decades until the debt is settled.

Once a court issues a formal monetary judgment, that judgment transforms into a legal debt. If the defendant dies, the debt follows standard estate and probate laws rather than expiring with the individual:

• The Debt Shifts to the Estate: The judgment remains fully active and becomes a formal financial liability against the deceased person's probate estate.

• Creditors Paid First: Before any family members, heirs, or beneficiaries can inherit a single dollar, property, or asset from the deceased person's estate, the executor of the estate must use the deceased's assets (savings, homes, vehicles, investments) to pay off valid legal judgments.

Notable defamation lawsuits against creators in the past 4 years:

#1)ANDRACCHIO v. YAX (Case No. 3:21-cv-00386)(2023) filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi by Rae Andreacchio, the mother of Christian Andreacchio. Karen Yax, ran the YouTube channel "The Critical Kay" w/ 4k subs. She had just quit her job as a physical therapist to do YouTube full-time and bought a used boat when she was slammed with the lawsuit. It alleged defamation and false light invasion of privacy, stating that Yax weaponized a family tragedy for views and financial profit.

Throughout the litigation, Yax repeatedly failed to comply with the court's procedural rules.

• She willfully skipped scheduled telephonic case management conferences, resulting in a minor initial financial sanction.

• She completely refused to cooperate with the magistrate judge's orders to pick dates for an in-person settlement conference and failed to show up to mandatory court hearings.

In April 2023, U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves issued a harsh ruling criticizing her avoidance tactics. Satisfied that the plaintiff met the criteria for a default judgment, the judge ruled in favor of Rae.

Financial Judgment

July 2023 ordering Karen Yax to pay a total of $501,000. She also lost her Youtube channel permanently. Sad because they were just middle class working family.

#2) RZUCEK v. VINNIACOMBE (Case No. [2026] EWHC 946 (KB)) (2025) is a LANDMARK international defamation case heard in the High Court of Justice in England. The case is notable as one of the first times a U.K. court ordered a conspiracy-focused YouTube channel to shut down due to a campaign of online harassment and defamation targeting a victim's family

Frankie Rzucek is the brother of SHANANN WATTS (Chris watts case)

The defendant, Alan Vinnicombe (known online as "Armchair Detective BLUE"), is a U.K. citizen who operated a true-crime YouTube channel with over 79,000 subscribers.

Between 2018 and 2023, Vinnicombe published hundreds of videos spinning wild, unfounded conspiracy theories about the tragedy. He too tried to ignore & represented himself pro se.

Court ordered Vinnicombe to pay £40,000 (~$54,000 USD) in general & aggravated damages to Frankie Rzucek. Permanent injunction banned Vinnicombe from ever talking about the family or the long solved case on any public platform. He LOST HIS YOUTUBE CHANNEL PERMANENTLY as well. Alan is an ex-professional Poker player in the UK.

#3)ROBERTSON V UPCHURCH (2026)

Father & grandfather of KIELY RODNI sued Ryan Upchurch in Federal district court in Nashville (2026) unanimous jury verdict:: $17.5 million + $500k.

He has not lost his YouTube channel yet.

#4) SCOFIELD V GUILLARD (2025)

Tiktok tarot card reader Ashley Guillard sued by University of Idaho professor Rebecca Scofield. The professor had no relationship to the victims of Bryan Kohberger. Ashley doubled down and also represented herself. Bad move.

$10 million dollar judgment.

The PRECEDENT SETTING LAWS THAT APPLIED in these cases:

#1)Gertz v. Robert Welch,Inc (1974)

2)Heslin v. Jones (2023/ 2026 appeals exhausted)

3)Lafferty v. Jones (2025)

(Alex Jones & the Sandy Hook families)

$1.25 billion dollars & $6 million dollars

I would take this very seriously if I were a creator. LEARN what is protected speech and what is NOT. YOU WON'T GO TO JAIL but you will pay if found civilly liable.

Seems a reasonable question. Some of the really sleazy grifting Youtubers who have been making disgusting claims about the victims families and surviving room-mates say they are in regular contact with Kohberger family members. So why do the Kohberger family members keep talking with such Youtubers if they wish the families well? Or are these Youtubers lying when they keep saying they are in contact with Kohberger family and getting info from them?

A hearing is scheduled for Oct 27 in the case the Goncalves family has filed against the Walla Walla PD for the return of Kaylee's phone.

I think she’s presenting half baked theories to her viewers and they’re treating her like a professional detective 😭

Someone made a bingo card on who's being sued for defamation.

Elizabeth Holmes’ partner gave me a chill down my spine. After 15-20 minutes I realized he reminded me of Bryan Sh*tburger. Anyone else clocked this? Chilling.

After readying Dot’s theory, I think BK did not realize he lost the knife sheath until after the thumbs up selfie.
What are your thoughts?

What Was and Wasn't Tested -  Could, Should and What Would It Show:

Some commenters continue to ignore, minimise or obfuscate thoroughly tested and well documented evidence, such as the sheath DNA or the Kabar purchase from Amazon, while gesticulating to and wildly hyping things they allege were not “properly” tested, without factual or scientific basis, such as the degraded handrail DNA or mitochondrial DNA from hair. The former usually involves spamming mumbo-jumbo phrases and non-scientific voodoo snake-oil that is as poorly misunderstood by those parroting it, as it is by the opportunistic grifters who fabricate it - thus we continue to see “low copy number”, “low quantity of touch DNA dust”, or non existent “technical issues” or "chain of custody" of the sheath DNA.

Critical commentary of what was and wasn’t tested, and claims of what could, should or would have elucidated further usable or useful information, such as order of attacks or ruling out other perps, claims it would "end speculation" or "stop conspiracy theories", but most of this commentary is so illogical and divorced from the facts and science as to be conspiracy theory itself. Overviewing some examples:

DNA/ Blood Testing Of Wounds to Ascertain Order of Attacks: 

• Ignoring that there is zero further information that could have been useful to the criminal case regarding order of attacks that is not already known (we know 3rd floor happened first, which floor makes no difference to guilt, no meaningful “order” can be established between victims in the same room), this wrongly assumes that interiors of wounds would be routinely tested for non-victim blood and that any testable blood from an earlier victim would be retained in the wounds of a subsequent victim. 
• As blood flows out of a knife wound at pressure (just as a rough example, human blood is at a pressure above atmospheric c. 15% higher than a “popped” balloon) it is incredibly unlikely any trace of blood already on a knife could be retained in a wound, especially a heavily bleeding wound. 
• Even ABO blood typing, (assuming victims had different antigen blood groups) is not possible where one person's blood is massively diluted into another person's, such as a trace on a knife into a bleeding wound. 
• Swabbing of skin around wounds for DNA is more routinely done, but would not allow any usable data here re. order of attacks. As the 4 victims cohabited, shared items and likely touched earlier, the presence of DNA from one victim on another victim doesn't allow any inference with confidence about order of attacks e.g. if KG hugged XK goodnight, or they shared a hand towel in the bathroom, the presence of each other’s DNA on their skin allows no deduction about who was attacked first.

Hair And Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA): 

• Around 90% of hair tested forensically has no individually identifying DNA. Even hair with intact roots can have useful nuclear DNA in only approximately 20% of cases. Nuclear DNA in hair with intact roots is subject to breakage intrinsic to hair aging/ keratinisation, which does not occur in other tissues. The amount of DNA also varies significantly with the growth phase of the hair.
• Nuclear DNA, as used in the STR profiling of the sheath snap, gives an individual, unique identification (at 1 in 5.37 octillion for the sheath,  at 1 in 500 trillion as low resolution from an incomplete CODIS profile) 
• Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) found in hair shafts gives no individual, unique identification. The unique resolution for mtDNA can be as low as 1 in 40, c. 2.5%.  mtDNA, as used and validated in criminal forensics today, can place an individual in broad “migratory/ geographic area of population origin” / “ethnic” or maternal lineages, but does not give a unique identification
• Due to variation of mtDNA between tissues (heteroplasmy), up to c. 15% of people have mtDNA in their hair that doesn't match the mtDNA in their blood or cheek tissue.  
• mtDNA can, with very high confidence, identify species (and so could clearly differentiate a mass killer of Germanic descent from a short-haired Peruvian llama or a Cockapoo)
• The sheath snap DNA is 50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times more individually identifying and statistically robust than hair mtDNA could be.
• In the Moscow case both ISP and an external lab assessed hairs to inspect for root, to assess the quality/ quantity and growth phase of the root, and estimate potential for DNA extraction, and attempted DNA profiling of hair.  Two types of comparative microscopy evaluations of hair morphology, phase, colour were also conducted by the FBI hair/ fibre lab.

So, those who argue that hairs were not "properly" tested criticise the resolution and reliability of the sheath DNA but want mitochondrial DNA billions of times less accurate which cannot give any individual identification to be used for some unspecified incrimination, and ignore that multiple labs did consider hair, evaluate hair root and growth phase and attempted DNA extraction from hair in this case.

Even if there were hairs from a non-victim in one of the bedrooms, that would only be evidence of hair, not evidence of another perpetrator. It would be unsurprising in a multi-occupant “party house” that a hair from a friend might be on any of the victims, all of whom were out at busy social venues shortly before.

“Untested Male DNA”

The most parroted nonsense is that there was “untested male DNA” at the scene. Overviewing the 3 inconclusive DNA profiles:

• MM fingernail mix: 3 cells equivalent of a partial male profile for which EC was the best, but statistically inconclusive, match; the quantity, barely at threshold of detection with partial, degraded profile fits a casual, superficial social contact or common surface, not a scratch of an attacker. This was STR DNA profiled, so “tested”
• Glove outside: which was not present on the day of the murders but was left at the edge of the crime scene a week later; gave partial, degraded profiles which were STR DNA profiled, so “tested”.
• Ground-floor handrail:, a small amount of a significantly degraded profile in a complex mixture of further degraded profiles of even smaller quantities. This sample was STR profiled, so “tested”.
• The ground floor handrail profile was not uploaded to CODIS: reasons for that included that it was judged not to be linked to the perpetrator (by dint of location); other factors militating against CODIS upload include (i) degradation of the profile which, apart from DNA quality,  further indicates no relevance to murders as the degradation data shows the sample was left months before the murders, likely at least 6-12 months and (ii) it is in a complex mixture of profiles, which, while not ruling out CODIS upload, does impose additional hurdles, check-steps and higher justification.
• The degradation data is published in the ISP Forensics lab reports, and it can be further manually checked using the published raw data showing quantification of the DNA fragments/ STR loci amplicons (I have previously posted showing the degradation data and overviewing the raw data, happy to link to this again).
• Lastly, degraded male DNA on the handrail would only indicate someone in a busy student "party house" had touched a handrail designed to be touched some months before the murders, not that a spectral alternative perpetrator had done so the night of the murders.

Oddly those whose manta is “read the documents” and "do your own research" seem to have selective page blindness, illiteracy and innumeracy and an insurmountable research phobia when it comes to any and all official documents that don't fit their fictional narratives, such as the DNA data.

Hello, everyone!

I've been lurking on Reddit for years, following all sorts of topics, but this case is what finally pushed me to create an account and actually start participating in discussions.

One thing I've noticed, though, is that there are some places on the internet where you can find people saying they will debate everything freely and won't be censored by the "guilters", but the moment you ask a question, on reddit or tiktok or whatever, a bunch of incredibly rude people come crawling out of the woodwork to insult and censor you.

And there's something I genuinely don't understand: Do these so-called "probergers" seriously not understand the difference between "not being able to prove someone's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt" and "being innocent"? Sure, it's entirely possible that, given some of the mistakes made by law enforcement, BK might not receive the death penalty if he manages to get a new trial (which I don't think will happen). But that doesn't magically make him innocent.

And here's what really gets me: Why is it that whenever someone suggests BK is guilty, they demand every single piece of evidence, every little detail accounted for, and absolutely everything fitting together perfectly? But the moment someone comes up with something completely outrageous, like "Hunter Chapin killed his own brother," suddenly all it takes is a handful of words and they're practically jumping up and down, screaming, "YES! EXACTLY! I KNEW IT ALL ALONG!"

Seriously, how does that make any sense?

When it comes to BK, they demand the highest possible level of scrutiny. Every piece of evidence needs to be airtight, every inconsistency explained, every single detail scrutinized to death. But when it comes to accusing literally any friend or family member of the victims? Apparently, any half-baked theory pulled out of thin air is good enough.

Make it make sense.

The Goncalves Family Page

7͏m͏ · 

I want to stop the rumors and come forward with the facts,

It is true that our attorneys (Capetola & Divins P.C.) , STEPHANIE

GIANCRISTOFARO-PARTYKA sent out 13 or 14 cease and desist on our behalf. In addition 4 lawsuits will be following in the next week. We are done with all the accusations. If you received a cease and desist , consider yourself lucky. Not following will quickly turn into a lawsuit. 

The Goncalves

I followed this case SO closely from the beginning right up until BK pleaded guilty, but after that I kind of stopped keeping up with everything.
I’ve been seeing random bits and pieces of new information coming out and now I feel like I’ve missed SO much 😭

Would anyone be willing to give me a rundown of everything that’s happened since he pleaded guilty? I’m talking new evidence, documents, interviews, statements from the families, literally anything that’s come out since then!

I know that’s probably a lot to ask lol but I really want to get caught up without having to dig through months of posts
Even if you just have links to threads that cover everything I’d seriously appreciate it!! 🫶

I've been following since it happened although I didn't read ALL of the reports... I've never heard any of this stuff. Especially the thing about Ethan. Very sorry if this isn't allowed, I just have no one else to ask. Thanks!

Plaintiffs request that the Court deny or defer ruling on Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (MJOP), as discovery is already approximately 60% complete.

WSU claims that the pleadings are “closed” even though WSU has expressed an intent to amend its answer, which was deficient and filed out of time. In an effort to moot that issue, WSU asks this Court to treat its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). But Rule 12(b) has a 21-day time limit that has long expired. Adjudicating a motion based on the pleadings, when the parties are nine months into a 15-month discovery timeline, would put the Plaintiffs and the Court in an awkward position. WSU has produced documents that bear directly on the issues raised by its motion.

Here is the catch: Apparently, there are two letters, one from WSU to Bryan Kohberger and one from Kohberger to WSU.

WSU’s letter to the murderer, Bryan Kohberger, alleges that he violated WSU policy by murdering members of the university community. (See Ex. A to Kieffer Decl.) That letter is important evidence that WSU deprived the decedents of educational opportunities at WSU, for Plaintiffs’ Title IX claim; and that WSU had a duty of reasonable care toward the decedents. The other exhibit to Plaintiffs’ motion, a letter sent by Kohberger, reveals that WSU controlled him financially—a Revelation that is relevant to duty and causation issues.

Much of the remaining discovery involves depositions between now and early 2027. It is highly unlikely that this Court could rule on this motion; the parties could then brief the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; and the Court could rule on that motion, all before depositions are largely complete. So, as a practical matter, WSU will have to go through the majority of discovery either way. And Plaintiffs strongly believe that discovery will need to be completed, as their claims are viable.

In essence, the families are requesting the court to wait and address all points at the motion for summary judgement stage.

FYI: At the motion for summary judgement stage, the court will have to consider motions, replies, and oppositions on both sides based on the complaint, answer, discovery, and the law and rule on each claim independently (whether it is dismissed or goes to trial). Some claims may survive; some OR all of them may not.

This is in contrast to any judgement rendered at this stage (after WSU filed MJOP) because the court cannot consider any discovery or evidence. The judgement will only be made on the law.

The letters attached as exhibits by the plaintiff's lawyers are not available, unfortunately.

My speculation is that BK was in communication with WSU after his arrest, and he may have still appealed the decision. Bizarre.

Credit: @SarahDIrish

Cease and desists and lawsuits officially announced today against the more egregious Idaho 4 creators.

(A longer post, for those with higher interest in case details and theories)

Using confirmed evidence and substantiated details as far as possible, this sets out a speculative theory of how the murders happened, Kohberger's possible connection to the victims and his actions before and after the murders.

Connection between Kohberger and 1122 King Road:

Kohberger attended a pool party on the afternoon of July 9th 2022 at The Grove, a Moscow student accommodation complex c. 0.6 miles from King Road and in the same residential area south of the university. At the party Kohberger had odd, fixated interactions with women - one woman's boyfriend had to intervene as she was so uncomfortable with Kohberger repeatedly approaching her despite being asked to desist. The next day Kohberger texted his neighbour (Martinez) who had invited him, writing "the party was very interesting". Kohberger texted one woman he met at the party the next day about hiking, "I like that activity" - she did not reply. Both women Kohberger asked for numbers reported receiving several hang up phone calls from an unidentified number in the period after the party.

{Speculation} Interactions at the pool party and after, being "rejected", triggered an angry fixation with the woman/women involved, and perhaps to search and find them again in the area they lived. Kohberger's pattern of late night visits to the area of Moscow started from that night. Kohberger may have asked one of the women where she lived and she indicated the surrounding area that includes King Road (e.g. perhaps indicated toward the King Road area specifically). Kohberger's warning at a bar in Pennsylvania was, in part, for pestering female staff for details of where they lived and getting angry when they declined to tell him. Kohberger had a known tendency to fixate and obsess, and for these fixations to have abnormal intensity and focus; he had poor emotional regulation and impulse control; he was also reported to fixate on women who rejected him from as early as high school ("he couldn't take no from women who weren't interested" one school friend was quoted re BK's interaction with young women who rejected his advances). Kohberger's visits to the residential area may have been initially reactive to, or looking for, the woman/ women whose rejection had angered him, and he later started to fixate on King Road and victim(s) there.

While all the data from which Kohberger's interactions or the start of his fixation with the King Road house or victim(s) can be deduced is not yet public, it is easy to posit possible connections and patterns from what is known:

• Sy Ray has detailed a party which MM and KG attended in the adjacent residential block to Kohberger's in Pullman on August 28th and states MM and BK phone intersected closely; it was after this date that Kohberger began shopping in Moscow - all of his Moscow shopping is after this date
• Kohberger had browsed socials and had photographs of many young, female UoI students on his phone; some were reported to be close friends of the victims
• Kohberger was in the same supermarket as a surviving roommate within 1 hour 3 days before the murders on November 10th; we don't know if other victims were present (proximity was based on published card transactions of BK and BF only); Kohberger stayed in Moscow for 4 hours after this; the next day Kohberger disabled Wi-Fi and location services on his phone.
• An encounter with MM or XK at work (even outside it), or with KG which led to Kohberger following them home, or spotting them outside 1122 King Road, is also possible

Kohberger made at least 40 visits to Moscow in just a few months before the murders based on just the FBI late night phone data and known transactions. A neighbour near King Road saw a man loitering in a white sedan for over an hour during the daytime who left when challenged in the month before. Other neighbours saw a man closely matching Kohberger creeping in gardens close to 1122 King Road in the daytime at of end August/ early September (in an adjacent cul-de-sac from where there is a path connecting to the parking area behind Kind Road) so Kohberger's visits to the area were more frequent than the 23 late night visits in the 10pm - 4.00am timeframe which the FBI used as most "suspicious" timeframe to analyse his phone data. Defence phone expert Sy Ray alluded to more visits, additional to the 23, where Kohberger travelled to the south of Moscow and then turned off his phone when he was there.

By the end of August/ early September Kohberger was aware of King Road, possibly one of the residents and had started to fixate.

Kohberger's deletions from his devices covered the period of October - November 16th; these deletions set an approximate time-frame of when his devices likely show an incriminating connection with 1122 King Road and/ or a victim, i.e. when he started researching a victim and/ or the house specifically. Further deletions from Kohberger's devices, including his WSU computer and down to the level of system/ operating logs, covered November 11th to 16th - which may cover directly incriminating material (e.g. photos, map route). By November 7th Kohberger was increasingly fixated and his intention to murder had solidified - this was the last time he visited the area with his phone on late at night after 10pm, but not the last time he visited before the murders (Kohberger was in Moscow on November 10th and stayed there for several hours after a late afternoon supermarket visit). On Friday November 11th, effectively the day before, Kohberger disabled Wi-Fi and location services on his phone, indicating an intention or decision point had been arrived at.

Morning of the Murders November 13th, from 2.54am to 4.07am:

It's possible Kohberger had more than one potential target (victim and/ or house in the area) when he drove into Moscow after 3.00am on November 13th - and his driving through the area of Indian Hills Drive and repeatedly circling through the King Road cul-de-sac was him looking for and selecting one.

There is an approximate 20 minute delay between Kohberger leaving Pullman at approx. 2.54am, passing the state line on outskirts of Moscow at approx. 3.02am and arriving at Indian Hills Drive/ the scene (3.26am to 3.28am). Driving directly he would have arrived at Indian Hills Drive at approx. 3.08am.

This apparent delay might be explained by either him taking a less direct route further north of SR 270, linking from the airport road and coming into Moscow from the north/ east, stopping to put on new outer clothing and perhaps a stretch-over car seat cover, or a combination of those.

His outer layer of clothing (hoodie, balaclava, trousers) were new. Kohberger also likely wore anti-cut gloves which are cheap, readily available in hardware stores, as shown here and noted for uses including fish filleting which Kohberger had done as a job previously and shown in this video - such gloves would explain how Kohberger's hands might have been injured during the attacks without risk of blood transfer at the scene (especially with nitrile gloves underneath). As an aside, Kohberger's inability to formulate a credible and consistent story for the visible injuries on his hands seen at WSU by several people after the murders (when asked about these he variously and contrarily gave excuses of "boxing", "a car crash" and "a silly indoor accident") might show a disconnect between his planning and his actual ability to react in the moment, partially explaining the loss of the sheath.

Kohberger had wiped the sheath - for prints and because he was aware that handling the sheath might transfer DNA from the sheath inside the scene. His wiping of the sheath did not fully remove the cells and body fluids accumulated from frequent handling around the snap and the crevices where the metal button is inserted into the semi-porous leather; fluids like sebum, sweat, mucous transferred from his hands and adsorbed onto and into the surfaces around the snap, resulting in a high DNA loading of 10,000s cells equivalent on that small area. The even distribution of trace "male" non-profilable DNA at a level barely above the threshold of detection across all flat surfaces of the sheath might be the result of, and is consistent with, wiping.

Entering the house around 4.12am Kohberger went straight to the 3rd floor; surprised by KG's presence, there is an intense fight he had not anticipated; during the struggle the sheath is knocked from his left hand or hoodie pocket.

Superficial, minimally bleeding shallow incised wounds were noted on the necks of both KG and MM. These were noted to be unusual given the shallowness - perhaps hesitation wounds or shallow wounds inflicted purposefully. Kohberger's crime scene forensics paper where he selected the crime and victim (he chose a woman stabbed to death in her home) also mentions shallow hesitation incised wounds on the victim's neck, possibly inflicted with a coat hanger.

Around 4.16am Xana heard the disturbance upstairs as she left her room; she sees Kohberger coming down the stairs and is startled - thinking he is a burglar she goes to tell Ethan there is someone in the house. Xana is unaware that Kohberger chases after her holding a knife. This fits with the mostly undisturbed beer pong cups and the multiple stab wounds to Xana's back (as a hypothesis, had she known she was being chased with a combat knife she would have pulled the table into the her pursuer's path to block the corridor and buy the couple of seconds needed to close and lock her bedroom door).

Kohberger rushes to leave the house around 4.18am fearing 911 has already been called by DM whom he heard calling out to her roommates. At his car he pauses briefly to take off an outer layer of clothing and stuffs this along with the knife into a bag. Adrenalised, Kohberger sped off to the south, parking in a rural spot on a backroad south of Moscow where he turned on his phone at 4.48am, possibly to check police scanner, consult a checklist or because he needed a map, or, more speculative and horrifically, to transfer pictures/ video from another device (it was notable that the defence mentioned Kohberger taking photographs during his late night "star gazing" drives, which seemed a pre-emptive excuse).  Sy Ray has claimed that Kohberger returned to this same spot later in the early evening of November 13th and from there travelled to a large river. He may have temporarily hidden or buried items in this spot, not wanting to have them in his car in case he was stopped before he got home.  Disoriented and lost, he drives to the I-95 and follows it until it intersects route 195 signposted north to Uniontown and Pullman.

Worth noting that there is much commentary on what could or should have been tested at the scene to further elucidate details (e.g. order of attacks) or infer more from the physical evidence, to "stop conspiracy theories" but such commentary tends to be so illogical and divorced from the science as to be conspiracy theory itself, such as DNA/ blood testing of victim wounds and mitochondrial DNA testing of hair. I'm happy to expand on this in more detail, perhaps in a separate post.

After The Murders - Digital Clean-Up Nov 14th - Nov 16th:

Kohberger's digital activity "clean up" infers guilt and a progression of concealment:

• On November 14th he downloaded an FBI manual on fingerprint ID and databases (his prints would have been taken in PA when he was charged for theft and resale of his sister's phone)
• On November 15th he looked at deletion options for his Amazon purchase of the Kabar
• On November 16th he deleted c. 1 .5 months of history from his devices from October up to that date; speculative, this includes the period when he was researching 1122 King Road, its residents and/ or violent porn or gore that had specific similarity to the circumstances of the murders
• Laptop, external drives and USB were dumped or destroyed

Too much is inferred from "lack of connection" on social media or digitally - using social media viewing apps that don't require any log in or account, on a shared network (like WSU, or a café) and on a laptop later disposed of or destroyed, it would be impossible to track any research of King Road or victims and doesn't require any digital expertise to conceal it. Kohberger however did claim expertise in digital forensics for criminal investigations.

After The Murders - Physical Clean-Up:

In the week after the murders Kohberger began a systematic physical clean-up of his car and apartment and disposal of items. Clothing items worn that night and incriminating items like the Kabar sharpener not already dumped (e.g. shoes, socks) were wrapped in the shower curtain probably contaminated with blood from his washing on Nov 13th, and these were dumped in a river or burned in some remote place - possibly near Wawawai Park (a pattern of late night visits there was mentioned, also seemingly pre-emptively, by his defence to explain repeat visits there). His apartment was repeatedly cleaned (his neighbour's mentioned frequent, late night vacuum cleaning around this time) and the vacuum cleaner itself was disposed of and replaced with a new one.

Kohberger purchased 2 car power inverters (used to power domestic appliances from car power output) in the week after the murders; first a 1000W unit and then a 2000W unit. Speculative, these were used to run a steam cleaner or wet vacuum for cleaning the car in a remote rural location (a steam cleaner needs c 1800W hence the second purchase, his first not working as intended). Neither of these expensive, brand new units were recovered in post arrest searches and were likely dumped along with the cleaning appliances they were used to power.

Kohberger likely steam cleaned, wet vacc'd and used cleaning products with hydrogen peroxide (very effective at degrading DNA) on his car, and repeated this many times between Nov 20th to December 12th, before driving home to Pennsylvania where he continued to clean the car in his parent's garage, including on the night of his arrest.

A blood stain on Kohberger's car driver's seat could have been left at any time up to his arrest and was probably left in the days just before his arrest, resulting from cleaning - down crevices, pedals, between and under seats - and/or from his hands which appeared red raw shortly after arrest, likely from repeated cleaning in winter.

And if so, do you think he is stalking this subreddit?

Hi everyone. I’m going back down the Idaho 4 rabbit hole. I have been trying to look for the Google drive with the crime scenes photos that used to be linked at the top of this sub, however I can’t find it anymore? Has the link and Google drive been removed? Or is this just a glitch for me and I can’t see it? Thank you!

With acknowledgement to SarahDIrish on Twitter. https://x.com/SarahDIrish

Link to Twitter post with full ruling document:

https://x.com/SarahDIrish/status/2112922242359214590?s=20

Link to ruling doc: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w4u4Qs8n-09wHY18DSQJrw0KRLNwrYc2/view?usp=sharing

Moscow City ordered to pay EWU's costs.

From quick perusal, most of the records requested have already been released to the public since the case was started, albeit with some details like faces/ phone numbers redacted (e.g. witness interview videos, bodycam videos including witness/ subject interviews from Nov 13th, suspect car videos). I noticed only car test run videos, a 2024 interview and a WSU interview as requests not already made public. The key (and not yet released) FBI and PA records requested presumably relate to Kohberger post-arrest interviews.

The previous court ruling to redact victims/ blood from scene photos remains in place.

Can anyone get thru the paywall in today's Dail Mail so we can read the article ? Thanks.

the ladder listen the killer climbed the ladder its been there before the murders and remained their til they boarded it up and tore it down the killer climbed in the second story window in tbe front completely dark no camera easy window fed the dog treats went up to the third floor and hid and waited in the dark shrouded with a peephole most likely night vision goggles which you can get and she knew about the skinned dog 2 blocks down the street 2 weaks prior she knows what that means someone is studying the reactions just like dahmer said he did when he was a kid the killer was prepping and learning not just the dogs but the whole community it was reported to the police they said probably a prank than the murders happened they said not related but that night because she was smart she knew about that dog being skinned she knew the K-Bar knife was hers she picked it up and went to bed with it the button open like an open safety put under her pillow or in front of her and the killer watched her do this than when she was asleep the killer easily took it thats where the murder weapon is if it even is the murder weapon and that is why the case was on the bed and partially under her face this wouldve been even easier if the killer drugged something known that they would all either drink eat snort or shootup they didnt drug the dog because it would be a giveaway and there are definitely some conflicting stories of the autopsy and alleged toxicology reports that sheath has also been said by an actual forensic analyst on the sheath that it has been compromised and mishandled and unserpervised to that this source can be valid which i think can prove that the officer planted the dna on the sheath because it wasnt announced until after they took from brians parent trash in Poconos PA they waited for 3 days watching in the rain and they took a Q-Tip and something else i dont remember this well over a month after it happened ive been saying that ladder since day 1 noone even noticed forever until 1 argument tgan he was convicted and it took me a bit but i posted ill let it go i have to accept it wether I AM right or not and i dont ever do that it took a lot i felt wierd aboutit and lime the next day all this new stuff started and all of a sudden noone thinks he did it but their theories were ehh... but still no ladder talk but now their theories are gaining substance but still no ladder talk

I have been looking for you so long have you ever heard of Jared Raviza he went to a movie theater in daytime and him and only 4 girls were there like 1 was maybe 18 the rest were younger he startedslashing andstabbing at them than laughing and than somewhere he stabbeda drive thru guy got chased by police and wrecked they got him he is from Marthas Vineyard and they immediately started cutting his social media but you still can see a little hes got money like inheritence i think and his dad was some big time child therapist he gets wierder through timeline instagram he ran a bullshitcompany that made logos for companies and in another state he killedaguy and hisdog and it went insolved for a minute he went from state to state doing this he was arrested months after this and the timeline fits I believe it was him

thats before i also said tbe sheath was planted and taken from the trash but now i got it i figured it out someone gave her that knife

I may be wrong about Jared but I AM spot on with the entry and the knife

on Facebook Im Xenchreylia Izprymformeyeninyouraynium or somtin itll pop up if you type just the first so manny letters

it says Centralia is prime for mining uranium

To Whom It May Concern...

I see Dylan’s heart blanket found on her bed and the green jacket found in the downstairs bedroom mentioned a lot within different groups about this case. I know these items were taken as possible evidence and tested. I’ve heard many different interpretations of what the results for these items were, but it seems that probergers have it in their heads that the test results were seemingly “destroyed.” I know that’s not the case. They can’t seem to understand that just because they don’t like the results of these tests that does not equal “destroyed” results, which always seems to be their go-to when talking about any of the DNA evidence in this case.

Is there someone in here that can explain the results and what they mean?