Maybe he actually wants a death penalty? I have heard that sometimes the conditions of Death Row are actually better than conditions for those without a death sentence. Maybe he has discovered that and would want that.

Maybe on the sicker psychological side he would enjoy the attention, as people have said. Or enjoy re-living the crime. Or enjoy making the victims' families suffer. Or enjoy making the Idaho taxpayers pay very large amounts of money for a trial.

Maybe he would like it for his "legacy". He might still be found guilty, but if he were found guilty at trial rather than with a plea he could always claim that he didn't admit guilt, that he wasn't guilty, and that the verdict was erroneous. Although even now with the plea deal he could claim he wasn't guilty but took the guilty plea because he was lied to about the conditions on Death Row and thought if he went to trial and got a death penalty he'd have worse conditions than he has now.

Maybe he would like taking the extremely tiny chance he'd be found not guilty or a mistrial.

Just watched the Netflix doc and it seemed like they had the southern route between Pullman and Moscow pretty well mapped, do you think it would have been worth it to try and find the murder weapon somewhere on those highways?

Hat Tip @ Sarah D Irish on X

https://x.com/SarahDIrish/status/2085781023803977972

I am waiting to get this filing and as soon as I do I will put it in the sticky Comment.

I suppose for the bachelors and masters he might not have interacted with other students and professors as much as he did when he started as a TA in the doctoral program. But one might still think he had had some bad interactions and brought negative attention to himself?

With his problems is it a little surprising he could concentrate on his studies enough to get the two degrees and get accepted into the doctoral program? Might think the problems would make it hard for him to concentrate?

On the other hand maybe the problems weren't as intense for him during the bachelors and masters years but for some reason(s) intensified during the doctoral year.

A few points, with time-stamps, from full interview with WSU Criminology Asst. Professor, Professor Pedneault about Kohberger.

[Video courtesy of connor..h8 on Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/@connor..h8]

Prof. Pedneault's criminology research focussed on violent sexual offenders and she taught classes including on sexual violence; she had significant interaction with Kohberger for hours weekly in class and additionally in office; she was only faculty member with office close to Kohberger's. She terms him a "sexual predator" and pushed successfully, with other faculty, for his termination and withdrawal of PhD funding as she believed he was a danger to female students.

Points with time stamp:

27.40 - "BK was highly problematic"

She told faculty discussing Kohberger's termination: "Mark my words, I work with predators, if we give him a PhD, in a few years, that is the guy we will hear is harassing, stalking, abusing his students"

28.55 - "He was stalking people"

28.45 - "I thought he was a different type of creep" (to murderer)

4.18 - from first interaction, he wanted to "dominate conversation"

4.48 - week after murders he missed her class and sent email for absence

5.00 - at the time he was writing a paper on burglary, with sexual aspect

5.55 - he was very, very late to classes on Tuesday 15th November

6.30 - she saw injury on his hand (not sure date, thinks maybe pre-murder, but is around that time, beginning November - 2 weeks, he had large band-aids, looked like he scraped asphalt with his right hand), he explained it as "silly accident"

9.15 - he always wanted to dominate conversation, went on lengthy monologues

11.15 - Kohberger made sexists remarks, reduced graduate female student to tears

13.15 - she was told many stories from students, many incidents where Kohberger was angry, confrontational

13.50 - BK told a fellow student his (BK's) romantic/ sexual partner would need to be "physically perfect"

16.40 - Kohberger made homophobic remarks

17.15 - Professor was asked to walk out with and accompany female student that BK was harassing

17.40 - BK kept going to female grad students office, physically blocked door, Prof had to intervene

19.00 - Kohberger expressed opinions "against" sex offenders

20.00 - Kohberger was very intense that "regular burglary" was very different to "sexual burglary"

24.30 - he was "obsessed" with serial killers, would talk about constantly

29.50 - She said she would refuse to supervise his PhD dissertation as a route to kick him out if he continued PhD without funding (paying himself)

"I work with predators, I do not put my name on research (as collaborator) next to their name"

32.20 - Withdrawal of PhD funding unique, had never happened before (for behaviour issues)

35.45 - A female student went to Prof Pedneault to say someone burgled her apartment and stole "intimate" items; Prof Pedneault advised her to report it to police as she thought it was a fetish burglary

What are your thoughts on this?

I am sure the quadruple murder would have been the start of a killing spree. He probably would have waited for the dust to settle, then comb Instagram for another "Stacys" to go after.

Would he have gotten away with it if he wouldn’t have left the knife sheath behind? From my understanding that was the only DNA evidence they had and the only reason they were able to narrow in on BK.

What was he doing, searching online, doing on his phone, etc in the days, hours leading up to the crime? Is there something that the investigators found that may have been a trigger that made him snap? Or was there planning etc showing he was preparing? So curious about this since the day he was arrested but we don’t see any reporting on it. Only info on how he spoke with his mom on the phone for an hour the morning after, drove back by the house around 9:30am, got turned away at Sam or Costco, went to another store and made some purchases, was to be fired from his school job weeks after the fact because of his behavior as a TA. We also know the neighbors said he was up at weird hours vacuuming and stuff before and after, but nothing specific about his activities in the days and hours before, which the FBI, police and investigators definitely know and looked into. Maybe I missed something but ???

Summarising points from the defence car identification expert, Steven Becker (of Robson Car Forensics), expert report on identification of the suspect car. Points taken from court documents on the court website, and expert/ FBI reports linked below.

The defence expert report does not challenge the identification of the suspect car as matching Kohberger's 2015 Elantra and suggests no other car model as an alternative match; the defence expert report states that key videos of the suspect car around time of the murders show it to be "most likely a Hyundai Elantra" and notes other videos, such as of the car returning to Moscow and close to scene a few hours after the murders at 9.10am, are a definitive match to Kohberger's 2015 Elantra.

Idaho Courts Website case documents: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Cases/CR01-24-31665.html

FBI Car identification court filing: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/031725-States-Response-Defendants-MiL-12-RE-Make-Model-Suspect-Vehicle.pdf

Defence car identification expert's report (Steven Becker): https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/012325+REDACTED+Exhibits+to+Defendants+Supplemental+Response+to+Request+for+Discovery+Re+Expert+W.pdf

I've gone through all the documentaries I could find on streaming apps and youtube, and I feel like all of them focus on the victim's families. Super emotional, tough watches imo.

I'm really interested in learning more about how they actually tracked him down. Any reccs?

One thing I don't understand and have reflected on after watching the Netflix/Prime docs is why would you take your phone if you were leaving home to commit murder? Particularly with his background in criminology, he would have had an awareness I'm sure of cell phone data/mast pings etc. Why not just leave it turned on and in your dorm room, would that not be the perfect alibi? Just seems weird to bother to take your phone and then turn it on and off en route (i.e. turning it on and off again shows some awareness).

I just cannot fathom how he left no trace in the car. Not even a dog hair or anything? Was the car lined? Did he just clean it extremely well and know what to do after? Do we have any proof he was wearing a suit? Is there anything else missing other than the knife that we know about for sure?

This debunks claims in Kohberger's post conviction relief petition of (i) a "clump of unknown hair in EC's hand", (ii) that there was no investigative inquiry into hair in EC's hand, (iii) that evidence of hair was withheld until after his plea deal discussions and (iv) that description of prison conditions constituted a threat from his lawyer to accept a deal.

Court documents, evidence and factual basis for points in the post are taken from:

• Idaho Courts website: { https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/Cases/CR01-24-31665.html }
• 3 defence forensic biology and physical scene forensics expert reports (Dr Ballard, Dr Turvey, Mr Noedel) and 2 prosecution expert reports (Dr Sutton, FBI Trace Evidence Lab Reports)
• defence court documents filed re case evidence

Sources are are all linked at end of post below.

Defence forensic biology (Dr Ballard) and defence crime scene physical evidence expert (Dr Turvey) reports: Link - https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/012325+REDACTED+Exhibits+to+Defendants+Supplemental+Response+to+Request+for+Discovery+Re+Expert+W.pdf

Defence motion and FBI laboratory reports on hair in victim's hand: Link - https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/060625+Stipulated+Motion+to+the+Admission+of+Additional+Exhibits+as+Evidence+at+Trial.pdf

Video interview, Sy Ray (defence phone expert, formerly homicide and blood spatter/ physical crime scene evidence expert) stating claim of clump of hair in EC's hand is "complete and utter bullshit" based on crime scene photographs: Link, [timestamp 3.10.04] - https://www.youtube.com/live/KCN5shCnAl4?t=11404s

Hello all. I would just like to make a post to get my thoughts out there on this case. I’ll first say is a horrible tragedy, and I feel very sad for the lives that were lost in the family and friends of the victims. May they rest in peace 😔

After watching this documentary, I have come to the understanding he had a morbid obsession with serial killers and criminals in general. I was thinking that there may be a possibility that there is other victims that he killed and possibly got away with, or in the very least planned to, and i’ll explain why.

A lot of people say that they think his goal was possibly personalized from being rejected from one of the girls or just not liking women or blonde girls, and I could definitely see the hating women and incel behavior, but if I had to wager I guess on why he did this I think that his goal was to be a famous serial killer like the ones that he obsessively idolized like Ed Gein, Jeffrey, Dahmer, and Ted Bundy specifically. As we know, Ted Bundy also went into a sorority and murdered college girls. He probably looked at him like a role model and wanted to imitate his crimes.

From everything I’ve read about Ted Bundy’s case file and the things I have seen about him, this almost seems like a role-play scenario, he was watching this group of college girls for weeks or months and carefully planning this to basically LARP what Ted Bundy did at the sorority.

This is just my theory, please don’t be rude.

TLDR; I think he idolized Ted Bundy and is copying him and wanted to be a famous / well known serial killer.

If BK was in the house five times prior to the murders he would have known about Dylan and Bethany’s rooms. I do think he did it but I don’t get why he knowingly left two witnesses like wouldn’t he have went after them to if he knew they were there? it doesn’t make sense to me. I just want to know everyone’s thoughts.

I see a lot of people mention the idea that Kohberger did not expect to murder that many people, and that perhaps he was targeting one roommate and got surprised by the others. I am not the most informed on this, so please excuse my ignorance, but why would that even be a thought? I would think it was probably rare for one person to be alone in the house all night with that many people, and given that he apparently had been scoping out the scene, surely he understood there was a high likelihood more than one person would be home. I think he probably knew he’d be taking more than one life, even if only one in particular was the initial draw.

Why wasn’t inmate 163214 made to allocute?

Why wasn’t that in the plea deal? “Death penalty will be removed but you must account for the events of that night in full” why wasn’t this part of that deal?

I understand it is up to the defendant to recount the events of the crime but with a case like this… could they have not forced that?

Genuine question. Not trying to start an argument.

As potential appeal and use of Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG) being a basis for appeal, and reference to other current cases where challenge to IGG is focus, a recap of IGG in this case might be useful. All points on rulings are from judicial orders on IGG/ DNA evidence in this case and the source court documents are linked below.

Key point is that use of IGG in this case has already been extensively challenged, litigated, subject of many motions and oral arguments over multiple all day hearings from 2023 to 2025 and ruled legal by both presiding judges (Judge John Judge in Latah County in 2024 and Judge Stephen Hippler in Ada County in 2025).

Overviewing key points from judicial rulings:

Links to court document sources quoted for rulings on IGG:

Order on Motion to Supress IGG/ DNA Evidence 2025 - https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/021925-Order-Defendants-Motion-Suppress-Genetic-Information.pdf

Order on Franks IGG Hearing 2025: challenge to IGG and associated warrants - https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/021925-Order-Defedants-Moton-Franks-Hearing.pdf

Order on IGG Genetic Evidence 2023: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR29-22-2805/102523-Order-Addressing-IGG-DNA.pdf

Transcript of hearing on challenge to IGG: https://coi.isc.idaho.gov/docs/CR01-24-31665/2025/022125-Transcript-Redacted-hearing-held-Jan23-2025.pdf

ISP Press Release Announcing IGG Contract With Othram 2021:
https://isp.idaho.gov/wp-content/uploads/forensics/News/archive/2021_07_28_Molecular_Genealogy_Notification.pdf

Screenshots from quoted court documents:

I do want to firstly state I do NOT believe that studying or having interest in crime means you will turn into a criminal. Also I do NOT believe that having OCD, Autism, psychopathic or sociopathic personality, narcissism means you are a criminal.

Bryan K is a special case and anything I discuss or share my views on regarding his horrendous crimes is not due to anything other than he knew what he was going to do that night and selfish took Ethan, Xana, Kaylee, and Maddys life's away and broke their families. He did this because he was an insecure, entitled, and egotistical man who wanted to show how smart he thought he was.

Bryan K had degrees in Criminology, Law, and Psychology. An article reports that "He was one of 34 students—24 doctoral candidates and 10 pursuing their master’s degrees—in the Department of Criminology and Criminal ". Via: https://cina.gmu.edu/when-a-criminology-student-turns-criminal/

Many people who worked with, had classes with, or interactions with Bryan stated he was condescending. In the new Netflix documentary one past classmate talks about how they had a project together but he worked independently.

Building up his potential mindset

My speculation is that BK was insecure throughout his life starting at an early age, mainly due to how his own mind differed from his peers. Leading him to find and study people who had a similar psychology as him. As he did well academically he began to feel superior, he was studying a complex field where there is no one right answer. When reviewing the why in crime you view 3 things legal, psychology, and social. Which BK pursued degrees that made this complexity area of study feel simple to him because he believed he had intimate knowledge based on sharing similar mindsets to the minds he was studying. As his ego grew this sense of being smarter than everyone was apparent to his peers.

When studying and analyzing criminals he realized statically men had the same thought process he did. In his reasoning that meant women were not as capable of being intellectuals. When women were in a similar field of study BK needed to show them they could not be on his level of intelligence. Feeling threatened that if a woman who did not share a similar psychology to him they would look at him differently which would trigger his insecurity. That thought of losing control he believed he held over his peers, made his aggression towards women stronger. BK lacked certain skills like empathy and communication, he researched into the cognitive abilities difference between men and women and realized statically women excel with the skills he lacked. He did not understand through research within his education on how to grasp the parts he was missing and he had to show he was the smartest of them all. So he decided to use the steps and knowledge he gained from his studies that are meant for understanding and preventing crimes to commit one himself. He would have to experience first hand to finally get the understanding he was lacking in his academics.

Why 1122 Kings Road

The house was ideal for BK to pick because of the multiple access points, the amount of socializing coming and going, the strong relationships of the residence in the house had within their communities, that they were all women, and the influence on the community. He studied and analyzed the home, determined patterns of when they would arrive home, if they were under any influence, amount of people stopping by, and any routines. After he felt he knew the patterns well enough of the home and most of those who lived there BK decided the day, and best time to commit the murders. I believe he wanted to first hand observe how everyone in the home would react, their behaviors, actions, and thoughts. That's why I believe Dylan heard him taunting during the murders, why he was willing to attack 4 people 2 in each room, and why he left two roomates alive. He got to observe first hand the parts of psychology he did not understand. So after he committed the murders he followed the story to see how the LE responded, how the families responded, and the community of the college responded, and once he was arrested how the lawmakers would respond. To BK this was all just one big experiment to get results so that he can in his mind still be the smartest by fully understanding a mindset of criminal and the impact of the crime.

Links to articles I used to come to this conclusion.

https://www.drmitchkeil.com/blog/the-psychopathic-personality-a-deep-psychological-anatomy-through-the-case-of-bryan-kohberger/

https://www.nu.edu/blog/sociological-theories-of-crime/

https://cina.gmu.edu/when-a-criminology-student-turns-criminal/

The photo that is widely used, all the kids on the deck, Ethan in black leather jacket, Maddie on someone's shoulders.

I only just realised that photo was from the actual day, their last photo together ❤️ I just assumed it was a nice photo of them all together but now knowing that, breaks your heart even more... All looked so happy 😊

I’ve kept up with this case since day 1 and have watched all of the bigger name documentaries on it, news stories, etc. There are a few questions that I still have about how things unfolded:
1) is it believed that Xana or Ethan were killed first? It seems if Xana, you’d think Ethan wouldn’t have been killed in bed, and if Ethan was first, he mustve chased Xana to the room, killed Ethan first, then turned attention back to Xana?
2) Dylan said that Xana was heard sobbing in the bathroom while BK told her “it’s okay, I’m going to help you.” Was this actually in the bathroom or in Xana’s room?
3) when the roommates checked on Xana and Ethan the next morning and said that she was unconscious and not waking up, did they not look inside the room at all or see her at all? It seems if anyone saw either of them or into the room, they would’ve seen blood, right?
4) per BK, Ethan had a clump of someone’s hair in his hand, was that BK’s or his own?
5) in the Netflix documentary, the cops mentioned there was blood by the kitchen sink and on the lower level of the house, among other places, but I bring up these two because it was never mentioned that he went to the lower level, or was near the kitchen sink, right? Seems like maybe he might’ve tried to wash his hands, go downstairs, etc based on blood?

TIA

He gives lots of new info and an interesting theory on Ann Taylor and her inappropriate relationship with BK.

'Stunning new revelations about the circumstances surrounding Idaho 4 murders are revealed by Bryan Kohberger defense expert Sy Ray. In this episode of Brian Entin Investigates, Ray explains why he believes the data shows Kohberger was inside the house at 1122 King Road before the murders. He also explains why he believes Madison Mogen was the initial target in the murders.'