What worries me is he has a good lawyer. But they are saying the knife sheath was planted
Like its some big conspiracy against him.
Does anyone know the type of DNA that was found? Was it touch DNA?
What worries me is he has a good lawyer. But they are saying the knife sheath was planted
Like its some big conspiracy against him.
Does anyone know the type of DNA that was found? Was it touch DNA?
"The love for all living creatures is the most noble attribute of man" -Charles Darwin
Originally Posted by bowieluva
Right, his lawyer is really good. I also don't know how they will try to explain away the knife sheath other than to say it was planted to frame him. I believe the DNA on the sheath was found to match his. I am not sure what other DNA they have and/or if they have revealed what they have on him at the scene yet. They do have proof of him being near the house before the murders, and I think (offhand) possibly after.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/university...y?id=113242163
University of Idaho murder trial: Venue will be moved, judge rules
I am not surprised they are moving it to another city.
Just another way to delay the whole thing.
You can take those Fleets and shove them up your ass
Glad they're moving it. If the prosecution has a solid case it shouldn't matter; plus it removes a possible point of appeal.
You are talking to a woman who has laughed in the face of death, sneered at doom and chuckled at catastrophe.
...Collector of Chairs. Reader of Books. Hater of Nutmeg...
So many people try to get the venue changed and cant, why is he special?
"The love for all living creatures is the most noble attribute of man" -Charles Darwin
I think this is a legit request. This is huge news there and the population of the entire county is only 41,000, that's a pretty small jury pool. I think the judge was smart to grant the change of venue. If BK is convicted (and I'm not convinced he's going to be), it would likely be overturned on appeal due to pre-trial publicity. It was the biggest thing to happen in that county in modern memory. I think the judge is being prudent.
You are talking to a woman who has laughed in the face of death, sneered at doom and chuckled at catastrophe.
...Collector of Chairs. Reader of Books. Hater of Nutmeg...
I agree entirely, Kim. The case has consumed that community since it happened. In order to assure him a fair trial, moving it to another city is the best option.
Im not saying a change of venue is a bad idea, I just think everyone has heard of this case, and unless they live in a basement with no lights, they know about it. Changing the venue isnt going to change that fact.
Yes, but it's not just knowing about the case, it's being so intimately connected to it. When you live in a small town like that, there aren't six degrees of separation, more like one or two degrees - almost everybody is a secondary victim and it's hard to get an unbiased jury under those circumstances. A change of venue is never a bad thing for the prosecution if they have a solid case; I think they fought it because their case is weak and they were depending on the local outrage to win a conviction. I hope I'm wrong because I think he did it, but it will be interesting to see exactly what they've got. I think it was a huge mistake to tear down the house, but it just shows how much pressure a community can exert on authorities. The same community that will make up the jury pool if there's no change in venue.
You are talking to a woman who has laughed in the face of death, sneered at doom and chuckled at catastrophe.
...Collector of Chairs. Reader of Books. Hater of Nutmeg...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
