FOUR IDAHO STUDENTS MURDERED

[Duchess]

I still feel like it was a mistake to tear down that house.

[rothschild]

I still feel like it was a mistake to tear down that house.

Meth residue is difficult and costly to eliminate. Far cheaper to demolish the structure and rebuild at some point in the future. That's the only reason I can think of to demolish it before a verdict has been rendered.

[Duchess]

So you found that odd as well? I was gobsmacked when I first heard that was to be done and I thought that surely there is some mistake.

[rothschild]

So you found that odd as well? I was gobsmacked when I first heard that was to be done and I thought that surely there is some mistake.

The coroner was the public defender for a local trafficker that had been arrested prior to the murders. The same one that ruled toxicology would play no part in the Kohberger prosecution. The first Kohberger Judge let this trafficker out on furlough shortly before the murders, he failed to return and was rearrested some time later. He ended up pleading guilty and received probation for charges that should have sent him to prison for 10 years minimum.

Add that to the demolition of the crime scene and I don't think there's any doubt that there's a coverup.

[Duchess]

Do we know who is paying for the alleged murderer's attorney/s?

https://apnews.com/article/kohberger-ida...ce=Twitter

[BigMark]

The public.

Not impressed. Sorry to sound like Debbie Downer, but that's about where this defense is headed, down the crapper.

Logsdon graduated from a good law school, Boston University, but maybe last in his class? He is not an impressive lawyer. He is active in gay rights. He worked for a non profit poverty center out of college and had no other legal experience before working for the Kootenai public defender's office.

Logsdon mainly does drug cases, assault, domestic abuse, shoplifting, etc. And he's not really even good at those. Here are only two examples:

He lost an appeal to modify the defendant's sentence in a drug case because he did not use the correct term in the motion. He aparrently did not understand the difference between concurrent and consecutive, so actually appealed asking for the same sentence the defendant already received. DUH?

Logsdon lost a shoplifting case where a man stole a calculator in Walmart and then returned it for a gift receipt because he was starving and had no money. The man had no prior theft convictions. The man ended up convicted of a felony and Logsdon's attempt at getting the charge reduced to a misdemeanor failed because he did not use the correct case citations in his argument and asked the wrong questions of the defendant during his testimony. BOOM

Taylor has about the same track record. Mostly drug cases. The one case she had long ago that everybody holds up like a banner was a washout. Yes, she did get the man's conviction overeturned, but he was re-tried and convicted again. Her basis for the reversal was based on flawed analysis of the prosecution's expert witness testimony, in other words, the man she accused to lying was found to not be lying. It was Taylor's investigator who presented flawed data.

No way in hell are either of these attorneys qualified or experienced in the way needed to defend BK. It's a dog and pony show. The term good Idahoan lawyer is an oxymoron.

[Duchess]

Thanks, Mark, I'm glad to know all that.

[BigMark]

That was copy and paste from Redditt.

[rothschild]

That was copy and paste from Redditt.

What was the explanation for why the case has been so slow to move forward?

[BigMark]

I have a Black belt in Google Fu but don't be lazy.

[rothschild]

I've already laid out my reasoning and it wasn't copypasta.


The hearing going on is important. Stay tuned.