Murders of 4 Idaho College Students - suspect arrested

[novaphile]

I was wondering why all these attempts to put down Bolger were being made.

It made me wonder if she was an attractive woman or something.

So I checked.

OK. Now I understand what is going on.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Why do you keep sneering at the guy's degrees? DeSales says he earned a BA in 2020, and a master's in 2022. If classes were conducted on-line, that's no different from many, if not most, colleges during the pandemic. That's not the same as a diploma mill.
https://www.desales.edu/news-events/...ryan-kohberger

I ask again, so what? What does that have to do with killing four people? You think if he had gone to better schools, he wouldn't have (allegedly) committed the crime, or he would have gotten away with it, or what? Why does this matter?

Rhetorical query: if the killer was a black high school dropout who killed four other black ugly dropouts, do you think this story would be of international intrigue? Cuz that happens like all the time in the States. There's a reason this story has legs.

That doesn't answer Bob's question. But to answer your question: your scenario is comparing apples to oranges as to why there's interest in this case. Just like a case where a gang member killing four rival gang members in a drive-by shooting wouldn't garner the same interest as two American students in Rome killing a police officer and being sentenced to decades in prison. Yes, there's a reason this story has legs and it has nothing to do with race; it has to do with unusual circumstances.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Thermal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge View Post
I thought it meant one of only two masters degree students she recommended upgrade to study for a PhD instead, though I may be confusing how the US and UK system work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
You are correct.

Doesn't seem to be correct. He went to DeSales for his bachelor's and online Masters, then she recommended him for the PhD program at Pullman. Are you guys saying that he was recommended to go into the PhD program, but then didn't, and stayed at DeSales for the Masters for some reason?

The highlighted is correct, but that is how I read Jack by the hedge's post, too.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Exactly, and if he was au-fait with the patterns of behaviour of criminals, he would have known that many notorious killers switched off their phones in advance and for the duration of the crime (for example, Jodi Arias and you-know-who). The softly-softly approach of the law enforcement was brilliant, as Kohberger will have had no idea he was a suspect, thus, when they searched his student accommodation and parental home, he will have had no time to tidy up the remainder of things since the murders. The search warrant doesn't mention any clothes taken away or the Vans shoes, so he obviously had the nous to dispose of them and the knife pronto.

"You-know-who" is not a notorious killer. "You-know-who" was definitively acquitted.
I guess everyone who turns off their phone is a notorious killer?

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Axxman300

The sooner people get beyond the whole PhD=Brilliance in All Things, the better.

A PhD (candidate) is educated in a specific field of academics, and (at least in science) usually focused on a very niche branch of that subject.

Having a Masters in Criminology does not translate into criminal mastermind. I've read over 30 books about US Navy SEALs, but if I drive down to San Diego, they'd fail me before I got out of the parking lot. Being knowledgeable about US Navy Special Warfare does not make one a SEAL. Being educated in Criminology does not make one Ted Bundy.

Being a killer makes you Ted Bundy.

Here's something to consider, I've never killed anyone. Not on purpose nor by accident. This means I have no clue what it is like to kill someone. There is a huge experience gap when it comes to the ability of assess the actions of a killer by people who have not themselves killed someone. I'm glad I don't have this knowledge, I have friends who've killed in combat, and they carry that act with them even though justified.

This case seems straight-forward. Kohberger became obsessed with one of the girls, stalked them, and killed them. The motive is up for speculation, but it seems that he may have been compelled to act on the night he did because Kaylee was graduating that week. This is supported by the fact that on the night of the murders, there was a hit and run accident across the street from Kohberger's apartment building, meaning the street in front of his place was packed with police cars, and would be for the rest of the night. He went anyway. Why risk being seen on police dashcams? Why not go another night? That night, in his mind, was his last shot.

This isn't rocket science. And you'd be disturbed at how many rocket scientists who stay at my motel can't figure out how to work the in-room air conditioners.

No, obviously you don't need to study Criminology or Criminal Justice to understand how to commit a crime. However, here's the rub. There are entire modules on ethics and governance in most courses, and especially in the medical profession and professions which interface with the public, such as social workers or the police. This is why when a doctor or nurse is reported as murdering their own patients, or social workers failing to protect vulnerable children in imminent danger, the public perceives such a shortfall far more seriously than were it a random yobbo in the street. For example, Harold Shipman or the nurse currently on trial for allegedly killing several newborn babies and allegedly attempting to kill several more. Then there is the issue of the policeman Couzens, recently convicted of raping and murdering a women alone at night whom she was looking for his help (Sarah Everard). These ethical standards are there for a reason. There seems little point in DeSales or WSU having the ethics modules at all if the college itself makes little effort to ensure the candidate is psychologically suitable for the course - note how Kohberger applied to be a Research Assistant for Pullman Police Department as a sideline job - and that entails some effort on the part of the course provider to meet the candidate and find out what motivates them to take the course. In Kohberger's case, what motivated him to travel 5,000 miles across the continent to study at WSU and what sort of character he exhibited. There needs to be more criteria than 'I think he's brilliant'.

There has been some speculation that it was Kaylee that Kohberger was targetting; for example messaging on Instagram (he followed all three murdered females) plus a claim he knew Kaylee from two years before and she failed to answer 27 of his messages (some claim a brief fling) others claim he was stalking Madison and Xana who had both worked at the Mad Greek Restaurant and had slighted him. Kaylee's father did say there was a connection to Kohberger, and her injuries are reported to be especially horrendous. Your theory that Kaylee was about to graduate that week is the first I have heard of that.

The questions that arise from this theory are:

• Why didn't Kohberger just get Kaylee on her own?
• Wouldn't taking on a whole houseful of people be too arduous and risky?
• Wouldn't a fixed-blade sheath knife blunt very quickly (as they are known to do)?
• How did Kohberger get up to the second floor balcony at all to enter through the sliding doors?
• How was he to know they would be open?

IMV there doesn't even need to be a motive for a sociopath if it was some kind of fantasy thrill-killing. He may not have any real reason for the crime at all.

Maybe his coldblooded personality could have been spotted earlier with better interviewing techniques.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Vixen

No, obviously you don't need........... are there for a reason.

Deleted for irrelevancy.

Originally Posted by Vixen

There seems little point in DeSales or WSU having the ethics modules at all if the college itself makes little effort to ensure the candidate is psychologically suitable for the course -

I suppose, then, that all candidates for a degree at all universities be given psychological evaluations to make sure they're 'suitable for the course'?

Originally Posted by Vixen

note how Kohberger applied to be a Research Assistant for Pullman Police Department as a sideline job - and that entails some effort on the part of the course provider to meet the candidate and find out what motivates them to take the course.

Applying to be a Research Assistant for the Pullman Police Dept. had nothing to do with the "course provider"/Desales University, nor was it a 'course' connected to the university. He applied to the police department directly:

Quote:

Brian Kohberger, the criminology Ph.D. student accused of stabbing four University of Idaho students to death in November, applied for an internship in the fall with the local police department in Pullman, Washington, according to a newly released probable cause affidavit

.

Quote:

He submitted his application to the police department at some point during the fall semester,

Originally Posted by Vixen

In Kohberger's case, what motivated him to travel 5,000 miles across the continent to study at WSU and what sort of character he exhibited. There needs to be more criteria than 'I think he's brilliant'.

Well, yeah...since there is more criteria than just "I think he's brilliant". You might look up the criteria at the WSU website before making statements like that.

Originally Posted by Vixen

IMV there doesn't even need to be a motive for a sociopath if it was some kind of fantasy thrill-killing. He may not have any real reason for the crime at all.

You gave a motive in the same sentence you said a sociopath doesn't need none. Every murder has a motive whether it seems "real" to others or not.

Originally Posted by Vixen

Maybe his coldblooded personality could have been spotted earlier with better interviewing techniques.

Maybe not. People are interviewed online all the time, especially when they live a distance away.

Quote:

The parents of a University of Idaho student who was killed along with three others said she had recently moved from the house where the slayings took place in November, but had gone back to show her close friend her new car and attend a nearby party.

Kristi and Steve Goncalves told Dateline that their daughter, 21-year-old Kaylee Goncalves, was due to graduate from college early and had lined up a job with an IT firm in Austin, Texas.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...move-rcna65727

[Vixen]

The advert for the PA at Pullman Police Department clearly states that the successful candidate for the post must be an MA Student/graduate of Criminal Justice.

It is nonsense to say that universities can't test for personality defects - Kohberger had the unusual characteristic of having been a heroin addict, an obsessive OCD, extreme veganism and some kind of anorexia - these can all be assessed as to whether someone can withstand the pressures of a course that requires an understanding of the justice system and a supportive attitude towards it.

It is untrue that colleges don't test for suitability. When I applied for my psychology course, it was heavily oversubscribed so we sat further a selection test, having fulfilled academic criteria and from then on, there were various personality tests all the time to help normalise them. I am assuming the private Catholic DeSales college course was linked to psychology or sociology and thus should be quite familiar with selection testing.

It is quite incorrect to claim Kohberger's crime had nothing to do with his profession or studies. Here's the thing. At some point Kohberger will have made a conscious lightbulb decision to commit a heinous unspeakable crime involving unimaginable cruelty and fear on innocent victims - young females less able to defend themselves from an athletic assailant with a lethal weapon - and this 'brilliant' idea will have intersected with the sure knowledge that he was in a trusted field, there to uphold the principles of justice and fairness. Thus, there is a clear issue of how Kohberger managed to trick the college into admitting him at all. Given that his course tutor had never even met him and a clue lies in the cost of the course (You can afford it? You are in!).

The other lesson to be learnt is that when a suspect in an outrageous murder case is arrested, perhaps as a professor who recommended him and another lecturer who writes books about serial killers, it might be best to say, 'No comment' rather than gushing about how brilliant your prodigy is even though you never once met him in person.

How do the victims parents feel knowing that the suspect's immediate supervisors think he is wonderful rather than realising they may have made a massive booboo in even letting such a monster onto their course at all.

Of course, it is not something that is completely foreseeable. That responsibility lies fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the perpetrator. However, it is valid to look back and ask how did the guy get onto the course at all. In the case of the Soham murders, there were plenty of clues that Ian Huntley was totally unsuitable for the role of 'school caretaker', yet, once past the negligent interviewers who failed to check his background he was free to perv over young schoolgirls.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

How do the victims parents feel knowing that the suspect's immediate supervisors think he is wonderful rather than realising they may have made a massive booboo in even letting such a monster onto their course at all.

I don't have a moment's doubt that neither the victims parents not anybody else shares your frankly weird interpretation of what Bolger said about her shock and horror on learning what her former student Kohberger had seemingly done.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

It is nonsense to say that universities can't test for personality defects.

Are you advocating for all universities to assess all applicants for personality disorders?

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

Are you advocating for all universities to assess all applicants for personality disorders?

If Prof Bolger honestly did not know Kohberger was a nutcase, maybe it is time to review her selection processes...?

After all, we don't want rogue murderer policemen or killer doctors let loose on society do we?

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

If Prof Bolger honestly did not know Kohberger was a nutcase, maybe it is time to review her selection processes...?



After all, we don't want rogue murderer policemen or killer doctors let loose on society do we?

She taught him in one class and assisted him with his thesis. There's no reason to imagine she selected him to attend the university she works at.

Again, are you saying all universities should assess all candidates for personality disorders, or perhaps only faculties like law, medicine or psychology where it would seem ironic if their graduate became a crazed murderer?

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

She taught him in one class and assisted him with his thesis. There's no reason to imagine she selected him to attend the university she works at.

Again, are you saying all universities should assess all candidates for personality disorders, or perhaps only faculties like law, medicine or psychology where it would seem ironic if their graduate became a crazed murderer?

You are approaching it from the wrong direction. If a newly-enrolled PhD student in Criminal Justice murders four other students in cold blood and in a particularly cruel way, then of course there are question arising re:

• What is the link between the murders and the perpetrator's profession, if any?
• How did the perpetrator get accepted onto the programme at all?
• Was there anything about the course of studies that triggered the perpetrator?
• How much of this crime was to do with the perpetrator wanting to please his course supervisor with his 'brilliance'?

Unfortunately, when there is a crime of this nature, questions will be asked. The fact is, the nature of the crime is depraved in itself. The fact that the perpetrator was in a field of criminal justice intensifies the magnitude of the crime in the perpetrator's mind. Just how much more evil and wicked could he be? And how much consideration did the perp show his family, his course tutor, his fawning professor when he acted out his crime? There are psychological tests that can root out fantasists. It will be uncomfortable for his professors but apart from Professor Bolger who helped Kohberger with his MA project which appeared to be in the theme of 'looking into the mind of a criminal' vis-a-vis the questionnaire she helped him devise requesting criminals respond in confidence what goes on in their mind when they commit a crime, there is also DeSales Professor Ramsland [_sp] who writes books on serial killers and is in one-to-one communication with a notorious serial killer. Unfortunately, should Kohberger be found guilty, there will be questions as to whether any of this was an influence on Kohberger that acted as a catalyst to turning him into being a killer. There maybe a link or there may not be. However, it is totally unrealistic to expect that nobody should look into his acceptance at WSU for a PhD programme, especially if he was considered exceptionally 'brilliant' by one of them that she became his mentor and champion. Something has gone wrong somewhere.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

You are approaching it from the wrong direction.

Wrong direction? You're the one playing Captain Hindsight wanting to know why this particular student didn't receive a psychiatric evaluation just in case allowing him to study would somehow turn him into a crazed murderer. But you don't follow the logic of your question to consider that you are basically calling for all university applicants everywhere to be tested for personality disorders without even having any good reason to believe that this particular student's education was what triggered him. Do you have any worthwhile reason to think if he hadn't attended university he'd have been harmless?

Quote:

... his fawning professor...

You're obsessed with that woman, and not in a healthy way. It's worrying.

Quote:

it is totally unrealistic to expect that nobody should look into his acceptance at WSU for a PhD programme, especially if he was considered exceptionally 'brilliant' by one of them that she became his mentor and champion. Something has gone wrong somewhere.

Yes. Something has gone wrong. His MA tutor recommended him for a PhD. You have twisted that into some kind of sick hero-worship. Merely "brilliant" has now escalated to "exceptionally brilliant". It's all in your head.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

Wrong direction? You're the one playing Captain Hindsight wanting to know why this particular student didn't receive a psychiatric evaluation just in case allowing him to study would somehow turn him into a crazed murderer. But you don't follow the logic of your question to consider that you are basically calling for all university applicants everywhere to be tested for personality disorders without even having any good reason to believe that this particular student's education was what triggered him. Do you have any worthwhile reason to think if he hadn't attended university he'd have been harmless?



You're obsessed with that woman, and not in a healthy way. It's worrying.


Yes. Something has gone wrong. His MA tutor recommended him for a PhD. You have twisted that into some kind of sick hero-worship. Merely "brilliant" has now escalated to "exceptionally brilliant". It's all in your head.

Are you sure about your [personalised] stance? (Are you able to debate without getting personal? - Try it - it might improve your debating skills.)

Even the daughter of Professor Ramsland's special subject, Dennis Rader, Kerry Rawson, fears that Kohberger had been in contact with her serial killer father via Ramsland.

Quote:

Ramsland developed a relationship with Dennis Rader and co-wrote Confession of a Serial Killer: The Untold Story of Dennis Rader, the BTK Killer with him.

Rader was arrested in February 2005 and confessed to 10 killings in the Wichita, Kansas area between 1974 and 1991. He called himself BTK, which stood for "bind, torture, kill."

Note the similarity of Bryan Kohbergers initials.

Quote:

Rader's daughter Kerri Rawson told NewsNation's Brian Entin that her "stomach turned" when she learned that Ramsland had previously taught Kohberger.

<snip>

She added that Kohberger could have been communicating with her father, who is serving consecutive life sentences at the El Dorado Correctional Facility in Kansas.

"Well, obviously we know he studied my father in criminology classes," she said.

It is indeed valid to look at Kohberger's tutors given the serious nature of the crime, if only to prevent history repeating itself in the future.

Dennis Rader was also a student of Criminal Justice.

Quote:

She also noted that her father "graduated with a bachelors in Criminal Justice, from Wichita State University, making a mockery of this important field, using his college courses to study his own ongoing murders and get access to [law enforcement] information in the 1970s."

Newsweek


So you might want to reevaluate why you want to censor discussion of this aspect. Perhaps concentrate on the topic header instead of me.

[junkshop]

Originally Posted by Vixen

....

Quote:

...He called himself BTK, which stood for "bind, torture, kill."

Note the similarity of Bryan Kohbergers initials.

Are you being ******* serious?

You think we should "note" that one murderer's initials are similar to the nickname that another murderer (that they may have had contact with) gave themselves?

Why? Are you implying some influence? Causality? Cursed letter combinations?

My initials have exactly as much similarity with Rader's self-annointed nickname. Am I destined to be a murderer?

Should we be wary of Bryn Terfel? Tom Kerridge? Bonnie Tyler?

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Are you sure about your [personalised] stance?

I'm sure that you alone are taking every opportunity to denigrate and disparage Bolger, which seems to be due to a very peculiar interpretation of what she said.

Quote:

Even the daughter of Professor Ramsland's special subject, Dennis Rader, Kerry Rawson, fears that Kohberger had been in contact with her serial killer father via Ramsland.

If and when you have anything more concrete than someone's "fears that" Kohberger communicated with Rader, please let us know.

Quote:

Note the similarity of Bryan Kohbergers initials.

Why?

Quote:

It is indeed valid to look at Kohberger's tutors given the serious nature of the crime

Add it to the list with the books he liked as a kid, his shoe size, his pets' names and his favourite pizza. If you find any reason to bump it up the list please let us know.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

I'm sure that you alone are taking every opportunity to denigrate and disparage Bolger, which seems to be due to a very peculiar interpretation of what she said.


If and when you have anything more concrete than someone's "fears that" Kohberger communicated with Rader, please let us know.


Why?

Add it to the list with the books he liked as a kid, his shoe size, his pets' names and his favourite pizza. If you find any reason to bump it up the list please let us know.

If you are seriously claiming that Kohberger's tutors are beyond any valid criticism perhaps you should ignore a thread that deals with..er... criminology.

As for Kohberger's pet likes, you seem to have a sentimental attachment to personalities, unable to assess crime with detachment.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by junkshop

Are you being ******* serious?

You think we should "note" that one murderer's initials are similar to the nickname that another murderer (that they may have had contact with) gave themselves?

Why? Are you implying some influence? Causality? Cursed letter combinations?

My initials have exactly as much similarity with Rader's self-annointed nickname. Am I destined to be a murderer?

Should we be wary of Bryn Terfel? Tom Kerridge? Bonnie Tyler?

If you had ever studied criminology you would know that many 'career' murderers do have their own heroes. For example, Dennis 'BKT' Rader's was...Ted Bundy.


If you think that Kohberger just got out of bed one day and committed the crime on impulse, you are extraordinarily naive.

Next someone will be coming along racing to Kohberger's defence.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by junkshop

.....
Should we be wary of Bryn Terfel?
....

I dunno. When someone makes a career of portraying the King of the Gods, Sweeney Todd and a murderous Russian czar, we should probably keep an eye on him.

[junkshop]

Originally Posted by Vixen

If you had ever studied criminology you would know that many 'career' murderers do have their own heroes. For example, Dennis 'BKT' Rader's was...Ted Bundy.


If you think that Kohberger just got out of bed one day and committed the crime on impulse, you are extraordinarily naive.

Next someone will be coming along racing to Kohberger's defence.

I asked you some questions in my post. Care to answer any of them?

ETA: re: the highlighted - BTK, not BKT. It's kinda tricky to torture someone after you kill them. Or so I've heard, I wouldn't know, obviously...

ETA 2: is Kohlberger a "'career' murderer"?

ETA 3: just wait until the truth comes out about the extent of the vile, stomach-churning crimes of The Barron Knights. Will nobody think of the children?

[junkshop]

Originally Posted by Bob001

I dunno. When someone makes a career of portraying the King of the Gods, Sweeney Todd and a murderous Russian czar, we should probably keep an eye on him.

A fair point.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

If you are seriously claiming that Kohberger's tutors are beyond any valid criticism ...

Oh, not at all. I'm greatly in favour of valid criticism.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

Oh, not at all. I'm greatly in favour of valid criticism.

Let's test this. So let's say a government minister wants to know how come the then Chief Constable Cressida Dick had the likes of Couzens - Sarah Everard's killer - appointed and protected amongst the ranks of her officers. Is that minister blackening Dick and being obsessive because you think she's attractive? Or is it a valid and reasonable question based not on Dick's looks but on her professionalism?

Now apply the same question to anyone who appoints a mass killer.

Be sensible.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by junkshop

I asked you some questions in my post. Care to answer any of them?

ETA: re: the highlighted - BTK, not BKT. It's kinda tricky to torture someone after you kill them. Or so I've heard, I wouldn't know, obviously...

ETA 2: is Kohlberger a "'career' murderer"?

ETA 3: just wait until the truth comes out about the extent of the vile, stomach-churning crimes of The Barron Knights. Will nobody think of the children?

I think it is quite possible that Kohberger somehow got a twisted desire to emulate what he saw as one of his professor's cause célèbres, BTK. After all anyone who can butcher four innocent people has to be a little bit twisted, no? So Kohberger decides to give his tutors a case study of his own. Or do you think he just woke up one morning and did it on impulse?

As an aside, I'll choose Bryn Terfel. His rendering of All Through the Night is incredibly moving. That is one BT that gets my vote.

[Axxman300]

Originally Posted by Vixen

There has been some speculation that it was Kaylee that Kohberger was targetting; for example messaging on Instagram (he followed all three murdered females) plus a claim he knew Kaylee from two years before and she failed to answer 27 of his messages (some claim a brief fling) others claim he was stalking Madison and Xana who had both worked at the Mad Greek Restaurant and had slighted him. Kaylee's father did say there was a connection to Kohberger, and her injuries are reported to be especially horrendous. Your theory that Kaylee was about to graduate that week is the first I have heard of that.

Kohberger was in Pennsylvania two years ago, and only moved to Washington in 2022. There's no way he knew Kaylee two years ago, She lived her life on social media, there would be clear evidence of this.

Reports of the injuries are all second and third-hand, and must be taken with copious amounts of salt.

And yes, Kaylee was leaving for Texas for an internship. She'd just bought a Land Rover for the move.

The questions that arise from this theory are:

Quote:

Why didn't Kohberger just get Kaylee on her own?

Maybe he thought he had her alone when he entered the house.

Quote:

Wouldn't taking on a whole houseful of people be too arduous and risky?

That assumes that was the plan. Quite possible he went there only to rape her only to find her in bed with Mattie. The other two seem like the result of a confrontation after the fact. Risk in 2022/2023 is relative. One roommate heard and saw things but took eleven hours to call for help, and those first calls were to friends, not the cops. The other roommate (for now) seems to have slept through it all. Everyone on the house that night was drunk and or stoned. Kohberger was not, giving him a huge advantage.

Quote:

Wouldn't a fixed-blade sheath knife blunt very quickly (as they are known to do)?

So...you're not ex-SAS? Just asking because a Ka-Bar is a combat knife. The Ka-Bar was designed for one job: killing Japanese soldiers, which was a serious job in WWII. The Ka-Bar is a capable weapon in the hands of a motivated individual, which Kohberger, who was a boxer in high school, certainly was that night. And the Ka-Bar is an intimidating weapon psychologically, and can be used to force people to comply without having to use it. Many rapes happen at knife-point. The bigger the blade, the lest the woman resists. This is not in dispute. It they ever find the knife, the blade will be plenty sharp.

Quote:

How did Kohberger get up to the second floor balcony at all to enter through the sliding doors?

So you've read nothing on this case, nor looked at the hundreds of photos of the house? It sits on a tiered hillside, the second floor is accessible from the rear of the building just by walking up to it. There is no third-floor access from the outside without a ladder, or maybe getting lucky from the tree. He parked his car on the road above the house, maybe 30/40 meters from the glass doors.

Quote:

How was he to know they would be open?

Every story so far indicates that house was party-central. There are a few police body-cam videos of police responding to the house for noise complaints where many young people can be seen inside. In one of the videos, none of the residents of the house are present, which implies people knew they could drop in almost any time. It's not a huge leap in logic to assume Kohberger found out about the house, and went there to party.

Remember, he's socially awkward. He's a single dude on a college campus. We know he had problems meeting women from the stories from the bar near his PA home. We know from classmates in Washington that he'd alienated the coeds in his class after making some off-handed misogynistic, and homophobic comments in class, narrowing his potential new dating pool to zero. He's a single guy looking to get lucky, where does he go? Five miles away is University of Idaho, a legendary party school, an when I was a young man looking morally flexible, and hot looking women, a party school was always at the top of the list. Why? Because there are many good looking women out to have fun on a weekend night, and most of them are drunk, and that made U of I a target-rich environment for Kohberger.

[and no, I never got lucky at a party school, but I never regretted trying as it was always a good time]

Quote:

IMV there doesn't even need to be a motive for a sociopath if it was some kind of fantasy thrill-killing. He may not have any real reason for the crime at all.

They all have a motive. It's almost always a sad, stupid, and selfish one.

Quote:

Maybe his coldblooded personality could have been spotted earlier with better interviewing techniques.

And?

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Let's test this. So let's say ...

The attractiveness thing was someone else.

My problem with your disparaging Bolger is that you only appear to be doing it because you think she was defending the suspect in comments she made. But those were comments which I don't think anyone else on the planet would have interpreted as defending him. You've decided she's a wrong 'un and everything you say about her is twisted to fit that movie in your head.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by Vixen

.....
Now apply the same question to anyone who appoints a mass killer.

Be sensible.

Originally Posted by Vixen

I think it is quite possible that Kohberger somehow got a twisted desire to emulate what he saw as one of his professor's cause célèbres, BTK.
....

I can't even guess what your angle is. Why do you imagine Kohberger's professor -- one of several, presumably -- had or should have had any suspicion that her student could at some future time become a killer? And do you claim that by studying a famous crime, his professor in any way supported or embraced BTK? What's your point?

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Vixen

The advert for the PA at Pullman Police Department clearly states that the successful candidate for the post must be an MA Student/graduate of Criminal Justice.

You wrote: "...note how Kohberger applied to be a Research Assistant for Pullman Police Department as a sideline job - and that entails some effort on the part of the course provider to meet the candidate and find out what motivates them to take the course." Let me put it more clearly for you:
1) The job with the police dept. was not a university 'course',
2) the Pullman Police Department...not connected to or affiliated with DeSales University...requires the candidate to be an MA student/graduate of Criminal Justice PERIOD. It can be from ANY university.

Clear now?"

Originally Posted by Vixen

It is nonsense to say that universities can't test for personality defects - Kohberger had the unusual characteristic of having been a heroin addict, an obsessive OCD, extreme veganism and some kind of anorexia - these can all be assessed as to whether someone can withstand the pressures of a course that requires an understanding of the justice system and a supportive attitude towards it.

Your approach to this topic seems to be criticizing the Univ. and, especially, Prof. Bolger as if they did something wrong. They did nothing wrong.
For all you know, he may have disclosed being an ex-heroin addict when he applied for college in the first place.

" obsessive OCD":

LOL. So a former aunt by marriage said:

Quote:

“His aunt and uncle had to buy new pots and pans because he would not eat from anything that had ever had meat cooked in them. He seemed very OCD [obsessive-compulsive disorder].”

Ex-auntie doesn't know what OCD is if she thinks that is symptomatic of OCD. Different cookware like Kosher Jews who have two sets of dishes/pots & pans/utensils because they cannot mix meat/poultry with dairy products?

"Extreme veganism": If he were extreme he wouldn't have used a leather knife sheath. Lots of mentally healthy people are vegans.

"and some kind of anorexia": There is no indication he has any kind of anorexia. Vegans are seldom overweight and he could well have chosen the vegan lifestyle to control his weight which caused him to be bullied in school.

Originally Posted by Vixen

It is untrue that colleges don't test for suitability. When I applied for my psychology course, it was heavily oversubscribed so we sat further a selection test, having fulfilled academic criteria and from then on, there were various personality tests all the time to help normalise them. I am assuming the private Catholic DeSales college course was linked to psychology or sociology and thus should be quite familiar with selection testing.

No one said they 'can't or 'don't' in some cases...as in the one you described. However, if your psychology course had not been 'oversubscribed', would they have required sitting for a 'further selection test"? For some reason, you assume that Kohberger was never given a psychological test or that DeSales and WSU were somehow deficient in their selection testing.

Originally Posted by Vixen

It is quite incorrect to claim Kohberger's crime had nothing to do with his profession or studies.

Yes, and since that has not been claimed, why imply it has been claimed?

Originally Posted by Vixen

Here's the thing. At some point Kohberger will have made a conscious lightbulb decision to commit a heinous unspeakable crime involving unimaginable cruelty and fear on innocent victims - young females less able to defend themselves from an athletic assailant with a lethal weapon - and this 'brilliant' idea will have intersected with the sure knowledge that he was in a trusted field, there to uphold the principles of justice and fairness. Thus, there is a clear issue of how Kohberger managed to trick the college into admitting him at all.

"Trick the college into admitting him"? WTH are you talking about? The murders were committed AFTER he was done at LaSalles and AFTER he was admitted to WSU.

Originally Posted by Vixen

Given that his course tutor had never even met him and a clue lies in the cost of the course .

It was a freaking ONLINE/Zoom course!

Originally Posted by Vixen

(You can afford it? You are in!)

Welll now, isn't that quite the assumption? The WSU Pullman Fall 2022 PH.D. Criminal Justice Admission: 50 Applied, 31 Accepted, 18 Enrolled. I guess the 31 accepted just had the money, right? Sheesh.

Originally Posted by Vixen

The other lesson to be learnt is that when a suspect in an outrageous murder case is arrested, perhaps as a professor who recommended him and another lecturer who writes books about serial killers, it might be best to say, 'No comment' rather than gushing about how brilliant your prodigy is even though you never once met him in person.

Head shaking statement. Absolutely head shaking. Unbelievable. Your ability to twist things to your purpose never ceases to amaze me. No one was 'gushing' and Kohberger wasn't her "prodigy".

Originally Posted by Vixen

How do the victims parents feel knowing that the suspect's immediate supervisors think he is wonderful rather than realising they may have made a massive booboo in even letting such a monster onto their course at all.

NO ONE EVER SAID KOHBERGER WAS 'WONDERFUL'. NO ONE. Why do you insist on dishonestly misrepresenting things so egregiously? I challenge you to provide even one statement demonstrating where Kohberger's 'immediate supervisors think he is wonderful'.

Originally Posted by Vixen

Of course, it is not something that is completely foreseeable. That responsibility lies fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the perpetrator. However, it is valid to look back and ask how did the guy get onto the course at all. In the case of the Soham murders, there were plenty of clues that Ian Huntley was totally unsuitable for the role of 'school caretaker', yet, once past the negligent interviewers who failed to check his background he was free to perv over young schoolgirls.

You've done more than that, though, Vixen. You have repeatedly judged, criticized and disparaged Prof. Bolger and made erroneous and/or unproven assumptions and claims. Why this need to throw shade on her and the universities instead of placing the blame ONLY where it belongs? On Bryan Kohberger.

[junkshop]

Originally Posted by Vixen

...

Quote:

...He called himself BTK, which stood for "bind, torture, kill."

Note the similarity of Bryan Kohbergers initials.

Originally Posted by junkshop

Are you being ******* serious?

You think we should "note" that one murderer's initials are similar to the nickname that another murderer (that they may have had contact with) gave themselves?

Why? Are you implying some influence? Causality? Cursed letter combinations?

My initials have exactly as much similarity with Rader's self-annointed nickname. Am I destined to be a murderer?...

Originally Posted by junkshop

I asked you some questions in my post. Care to answer any of them?

...

ETA 2: is Kohlberger a "'career' murderer"?

...

Originally Posted by Vixen

I think it is quite possible that Kohberger somehow got a twisted desire to emulate what he saw as one of his professor's cause célèbres, BTK. After all anyone who can butcher four innocent people has to be a little bit twisted, no? So Kohberger decides to give his tutors a case study of his own. Or do you think he just woke up one morning and did it on impulse?...

Irrelevant and unresponsive.

All joking aside (hence the edits), I would really like you to answer these questions.

[Bob001]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

.....
No one said they 'can't or 'don't' in some cases...as in the one you described. However, if your psychology course had not been 'oversubscribed', would they have required sitting for a 'further selection test"? For some reason, you assume that Kohberger was never given a psychological test or that DeSales and WSU were somehow deficient in their selection testing.
.....

Not to digress too far, but I would be extremely surprised if American colleges could legally administer psychological tests as part of their admissions process. It would be impossible to prove that they are not discriminatory and culturally biased. Even SATs and GREs have been criticized on those grounds. And I suspect that the qualities that might make someone a future killer are not easily identified in a standardized test. There's no reason to think that this guy, a successful student, wouldn't have known how to pass such a test. This is just a distraction. His colleges played no role in his crimes.

[junkshop]

Originally Posted by junkshop

Are you being ******* serious?

You think we should "note" that one murderer's initials are similar to the nickname that another murderer (that they may have had contact with) gave themselves?

Why? Are you implying some influence? Causality? Cursed letter combinations?

My initials have exactly as much similarity with Rader's self-annointed nickname. Am I destined to be a murderer?

Should we be wary of Bryn Terfel? Tom Kerridge? Bonnie Tyler?

Originally Posted by Vixen

...As an aside, I'll choose Bryn Terfel. His rendering of All Through the Night is incredibly moving. That is one BT that gets my vote.

People whose singing moves you are your choice as potential murderers? And that gets them your 'vote'?

Either you need to work on your reading for comprehension, or you're a murder groupie. Neither is good, but lt's hope it's the former, eh?

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Vixen

You are approaching it from the wrong direction. If a newly-enrolled PhD student in Criminal Justice murders four other students in cold blood and in a particularly cruel way, then of course there are question arising re:

Quote:

[*]What is the link between the murders and the perpetrator's profession, if any?

You could ask that about a number of professions and murders. For example, these doctors all murdered multiple patients: Michael Swango, Christopher Duntsch, Maxin Petrov, Kermit Gosnell. Nurses have done the same thing: Charles Cullen, William Davis, and Beverley Allitt. Police officers, Firefighters, etc. have all been known to murder those they swore to protect.

Quote:

[*]How did the perpetrator get accepted onto the programme at all?

By applying and fulfulling the requirements. Unless you think every applicant should be given psychological evaluations to find out if they're latent killers just waiting to spring forth with the right 'gushing' by professors and courses that trigger them?

Quote:

[*]Was there anything about the course of studies that triggered the perpetrator?

You mean like how studying medicine can trigger a doctor or nurse to kill their patients. Or how studying the law can trigger a student to become a criminal?

Quote:

[*]How much of this crime was to do with the perpetrator wanting to please his course supervisor with his 'brilliance'?

There are no words, pictures or emojis to adequately express my reaction to that statement.

Originally Posted by Vixen

Unfortunately, when there is a crime of this nature, questions will be asked.

Yes, but they'll be about the perpetrator's background and the crime, not about how he got into university or about one of his professors making a remark about how smart he was in her course.

Originally Posted by Vixen

The fact is, the nature of the crime is depraved in itself. The fact that the perpetrator was in a field of criminal justice intensifies the magnitude of the crime in the perpetrator's mind. Just how much more evil and wicked could he be? And how much consideration did the perp show his family, his course tutor, his fawning professor when he acted out his crime?

Stop with this intellectually dishonest disparaging of Prof. Bolger. Saying he was a brilliant student is NOT "fawning" or "gushing" nor was he her "prodigy".

Originally Posted by Vixen

It will be uncomfortable for his professors but apart from Professor Bolger who helped Kohberger with his MA project which appeared to be in the theme of 'looking into the mind of a criminal' vis-a-vis the questionnaire she helped him devise requesting criminals respond in confidence what goes on in their mind when they commit a crime, there is also DeSales Professor Ramsland [_sp] who writes books on serial killers and is in one-to-one communication with a notorious serial killer.

SO WHAT? None of that has the remotest link to Kohberger allegedly killing those 4 students no matter how much you attempt to twist it into doing so.

Originally Posted by Vixen

Unfortunately, should Kohberger be found guilty, there will be questions as to whether any of this was an influence on Kohberger that acted as a catalyst to turning him into being a killer. There maybe a link or there may not be.

No, there won't be.

Originally Posted by Vixen

However, it is totally unrealistic to expect that nobody should look into his acceptance at WSU for a PhD programme

You mean like they looked into why the doctors and nurses listed above who killed their patients were accepted into medical and nursing schools? Were they trying to impress their professors? Or did studying medicine trigger them into becoming killers?

Originally Posted by Vixen

especially if he was considered exceptionally 'brilliant' by one of them that she became his mentor and champion. Something has gone wrong somewhere.

Bolger was not his mentor or champion. Just. Stop.

[junkshop]

I realise that I have erred: as things stand Kohberger is accused of murder, but is not a proven or convicted murderer, and therefore not, as I described him, a murderer. Nonetheless, my questions to Vixen stand, and I look forward to their being answered.

I am an optimist (this is probably news to anyone that knows me).

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

The attractiveness thing was someone else.

My problem with your disparaging Bolger is that you only appear to be doing it because you think she was defending the suspect in comments she made. But those were comments which I don't think anyone else on the planet would have interpreted as defending him. You've decided she's a wrong 'un and everything you say about her is twisted to fit that movie in your head.

Please stop twisting my words and putting words in my mouth. I have not disparaged Bolger nor denigrated her as you are desperate to claim. She told the press after Kohberger was arrested that he was one of the best students she had ever had, good writer and 'brilliant'.

As he is one of only two people she has ever recommended for a PhD, as she said in the same interview, it is natural and reasonable to ask how come she didn't spot he was a complete oddball. Bolger replied that she had never actually met him!

Why wouldn't someone who appointed a mass murderer be asked how and why they appointed that mass murderer. I cannot see how it is in anyway disparaging as it is a professional job and an important appointment.

Everything seems to be personal to you. Perhaps take a step bac and look at things objectively.

If you hired a mass murderer, would it really be unreasonable for people to ask how did that happen? You would expect questions and it does not in anyway reflect an attack on you personally.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Bob001

Not to digress too far, but I would be extremely surprised if American colleges could legally administer psychological tests as part of their admissions process. It would be impossible to prove that they are not discriminatory and culturally biased. Even SATs and GREs have been criticized on those grounds. And I suspect that the qualities that might make someone a future killer are not easily identified in a standardized test. There's no reason to think that this guy, a successful student, wouldn't have known how to pass such a test. This is just a distraction. His colleges played no role in his crimes.

I totally agree. It's just another "Look! Squirrel!" Police applicants are routinely given psychological evaluations, but that is not the same thing as a college.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

The attractiveness thing was someone else.

My problem with your disparaging Bolger is that you only appear to be doing it because you think she was defending the suspect in comments she made. But those were comments which I don't think anyone else on the planet would have interpreted as defending him. You've decided she's a wrong 'un and everything you say about her is twisted to fit that movie in your head.

That's exactly how I see it. From Bolger saying Kohberger was a 'brilliant' student, 'excellent writer' and 'one of only two students I ever recommended for a Ph.D. program', Vixen warps her into being a 'novice tutor', 'gushing' and 'fawning' over Kohberger, 'a bit of a flake', and believing that 'because she selected him he must be special'.

But it only gets worse as Bolger becomes an 'unwitting victim' of BK's. Vixen then opines that it's 'mindboggling that she never even interviewed him in person'. Do all professors interview all their students in person even if they are on-campus classes, much less if the class is online? I don' think so, Lucy.

Vixen then resorts to more hyperbole and has Dr. Bolger 'bleat on about how brilliant Kohberger was' when she gave one interview and said he was 'brilliant' once. Apparently that is 'appearing to be singing the suspect's praises' which was 'naive' of this 'duped professor', too. According to Vixen, BK becomes Bolger's "prodigy" and she becomes his 'mentor' and 'champion'.


Just mind boggling.

[Axxman300]

Originally Posted by Vixen

As he is one of only two people she has ever recommended for a PhD, as she said in the same interview, it is natural and reasonable to ask how come she didn't spot he was a complete oddball. Bolger replied that she had never actually met him!

In the United States it is not against the law to be an oddball. Some people have "Murderer" written all over them, yet never produce. Many more actual murderers always have the, "He was nice/quiet/polite" label until they kill. Ted Bundy was a pleasant, charming guy. Someone you'd have a few beers with. He even worked at a suicide hotline, and would walk his female coworkers to their cars at night so they'd be safe.

If you think you can predict who will become a murderer, you need to post up in the paranormal thread under psychic powers and mind-reading.

Quote:

Why wouldn't someone who appointed a mass murderer be asked how and why they appointed that mass murderer. I cannot see how it is in anyway disparaging as it is a professional job and an important appointment.

She was asked, and she answered. And he wasn't a mass murderer at the time she made the recommendation.

Quote:

If you hired a mass murderer, would it really be unreasonable for people to ask how did that happen? You would expect questions and it does not in anyway reflect an attack on you personally.

She's not on trial. His being in a PhD program had nothing to do with him killing four people other than putting him in eastern Washington.

[junkshop]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Please stop twisting my words and putting words in my mouth. I have not disparaged Bolger nor denigrated her as you are desperate to claim...

Hello, Vixen.

Weclome to the internet. It never forgets, even if you do...

Originally Posted by Vixen

I'm sceptical he was of PhD material. He was only first year, and recommended by some novice tutor who thought him 'brilliant'.

Originally Posted by Vixen

He was first year doctorate. Only just started. Only had an 'online' MA in addition to a bachelors. It is true that he is just one of a couple she has put forward for a PhD on the grounds that she personally found him 'brilliant'. I was led to understand she had only been a tutor for a short while so it is quite possible the news outlet was incorrect in that respect if what you claim is true that she has been teaching for eight years.

Originally Posted by Vixen

You claimed he was not a new PhD student. From your own post, Bolger appeared to be an Associate Professor at some point. The fact that research students help with tutoring doesn't mean they are as long experienced as you appeared to claim, when you said Bolger had been a professor for eight years. In the UK it is not unusual for people to spend up to six years getting their doctorate so eight years as a research student and associate professor is hardly as a highly experienced professor as you claim. Obviously, I am not familiar with the US system but the report I read said Bolger was quite new.

Some bachelors degrees are only two years in the states so I got the impression that Kohberger is not quite the super genius student some people are claiming.

Originally Posted by Vixen

It is part of the picture, as Kohberger seems to have been tasked with the thesis of 'getting inside the mind of a criminal'. He last communicated with Bolger (Zoom?) 14 Nov 2022, the day after the killings. In addition, another of his lecturers had one-to-one communication with a notorious serial killer, BCT (Rader).

I cannot see that Kohberger is at all 'brilliant' or how someone can get an MA 'online' in a few months.


His tutor Bolger comes across as a bit of a flake proclaiming to the world that he was one of the best students she ever had.

Originally Posted by Vixen

All I said was that I was sceptical Kohberger was that brilliant, and in addition, hewas only a first-year PhD student plus his tutor saying he was one of the most brilliant student she had had, after his 'online' MA course. Someone else disputed this. However, my opinion remains the same. I daresay Prof Bolger believes that because she selected him he must be special but that is a typical halo effect that people have about their decisions.


I have no doubt at all that she is another unwitting victim of his. Cynically using the course to have access to laboratories and databases, and seeming to have the perfect cover, as a respected academic.

Getting onto a PhD programme has nothing to do with seeming 'brilliant'. You have to find a sponsor to fund the expected years of research and you need to outline what your line of research will be together with an academic track record that you have the necessary skill and basic education to progress. Kohberger did a two-year associate BA course up to 2018 and then started a BA course for two years up to 2020. He then did a short MA course. OK so it is a theoretical study of Criminal Justice up to July 2022. He then commenced the PhD in Autumn 2022. We have yet to be appraised of what exactly makes Kohberger one of only two students Prof Bolger has ever put forward for a PhD, given she has been a lecturer or research academic for eight years or more, given he doesn't seem to have started his degree courses until quite late in the day. I can't see in which way he shows academic inclination nor any signs of brilliance, if he thinks that switching his phone off before a murder makes him invisible. That is my opinion.

Originally Posted by Vixen

From NY Post:

NY Post


To me, it is mindboggling that she never even interviewed him in person. De Salles really need to looke into their selection processes.

Originally Posted by Vixen

I am sceptical he is of PhD material. Everybody exclaiming, wow he's a PhD student when he has barely started.

I think it would have been wise for his tutor Prof Bolger to not bleat on about how brilliant Kohberger was once the news came out he had been arrested as the main suspect in the murders.

Originally Posted by Vixen

No, I think she was most unwise to comment to the press when Kohberger was arrested. Hello? Think of the families of the four murder victims and here's the suspect's tutor appearing to be singing the suspect's praises. OK, so that was naive of her and I dare say she is horrified. However, I can't see how come she has never actually met him given presumably she is the tutor supervising him.

Doesn't sound very efficient to me. I am sorry you are upset that Kohberger's course credentials have come under scrutiny. However, my sympathies remain with the victims (including Bolger as a professor duped) and looking at how things could have been done better. As Bolger commented, then her comment is in the public domain for the public to express an opinion on it. Some posters here have taken it at face value that Kohberger is a brilliant PhD student because of her words. I remain sceptical that he is of the right material to be doing a PhD in Criminal Justice.


That is only my opinion. If you want to change it, you need to present a better debating tool from your debating toolkit than the old standby of telling me off.

Originally Posted by Vixen

If Prof Bolger honestly did not know Kohberger was a nutcase, maybe it is time to review her selection processes...?

After all, we don't want rogue murderer policemen or killer doctors let loose on society do we?

Now, about those questions I asked you....

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

That's exactly how I see it. From Bolger saying Kohberger was a 'brilliant' student, 'excellent writer' and 'one of only two students I ever recommended for a Ph.D. program', Vixen warps her into being a 'novice tutor', 'gushing' and 'fawning' over Kohberger, 'a bit of a flake', and believing that 'because she selected him he must be special'.

But it only gets worse as Bolger becomes an 'unwitting victim' of BK's. Vixen then opines that it's 'mindboggling that she never even interviewed him in person'. Do all professors interview all their students in person even if they are on-campus classes, much less if the class is online? I don' think so, Lucy.

Vixen then resorts to more hyperbole and has Dr. Bolger 'bleat on about how brilliant Kohberger was' when she gave one interview and said he was 'brilliant' once. Apparently that is 'appearing to be singing the suspect's praises' which was 'naive' of this 'duped professor', too. According to Vixen, BK becomes Bolger's "prodigy" and she becomes his 'mentor' and 'champion'.


Just mind boggling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Please stop twisting my words and putting words in my mouth. I have not disparaged Bolger nor denigrated her as you are desperate to claim...

Maybe the above words used by you are examples of "gushing", fawning over" and 'bleating on" about how great Prof. Bolger is?

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by junkshop

Hello, Vixen.

Weclome to the internet. It never forgets, even if you do...

Now, about those questions I asked you....

Settle in and get comfy. You're in for a long wait.....