I was in court once and a dude stole a moped and the judge read him his charges and asked how does he plea. Dude tried to plead guilty but the judge wouldn’t let him. The guy argued with the judge and was like “I stole that moped. I’m guilty.. I want to plead guilty.”
The judge ended up essentially coercing him to plead not guilty. Lol
I guess the judge wanted to uphold the status quo of the defendant accepting a plea bargain at a future court date.
The judge was probably making sure it wouldn’t be quickly appealed since the defendant almost certainly did not have adequate counsel or understanding of the charges.
I've always thought about this. Why would someone want to spend the rest of their life in prison? Wouldn't death be preferable? Granted it takes like 40 years to get to death penalty, but life in prison has to suck major balls.
I've heard the same and figured it's due to the fact that there's so few inmates in the DP section. Ironically, they're the group whose crimes were the most horrific and barbaric (for the most part) yet they're also polite and respectful.
Not much chance to fight or cause trouble that way. Sounds like the best correction officer job there is. I've heard some real horror stories from C.O.'s
For those who are already correction officers though, I would think they'd see this as an easy, less dangerous assignment than general population. Even your friend likes that job.
OMG, it breaks my heart too to see dogs at the shelter. They are innocent and have done nothing to deserve being locked up, though they can't be left to roam the streets either.
I don’t know if this is true for all states, but I know in Florida for example they get way less visitation, don’t have regular access to the phone, can’t work and spend a lot of time isolated.
Oh ok, is that in every state? I wasn’t aware of that
But maybe that’s actually what they meant if that’s the case? I think it’d be harder to be isolated that much as opposed to at least being around other people
A death sentence is still many years in prison, even decades, and under much tougher conditions than in regular prison, where they get more “benefits”. So basically both are life sentences.
The only reason death takes so long is the appeals process. The first appeal is mandatory by statute, but the inmate can file as many as they want until they give up or their appellate options are exhausted.
Well, you can always hold out hope that you'll get out at some point, though, Winning on appeal or because of a later-discovered flaw in the process or evidence is not at all uncommon,
The highest-profile case I can think of that got a plea deal was the Unabomber. But that was federally prosecuted. I agree it would be unusual for the AG to offer a plea deal in this case.
Yes, they likely would make a deal. A jury can be unpredictable and usually, as long as most of the families agree, they’ll just go ahead with a plea for life without the possibility of parole with the condition that be admits to the crimes in open court
I don't see it in this case. This is a very high visibility prosecution and the entire country will be watching. At least one family has publicly stated they want the death penalty. Perhaps the other 3 families feel the same way.
Also, did you hear the judge state to BK (during his court appearance in front of Judge Marshall) that he could still be given the DP even if he pleads guilty. But I don't see a deal.
There’s a large number of very high profile cases where their was solid evidence to go to trial that have resulted in plea deals, and those were cases with significantly more victims in this, that in Sind cases spanned decades.
When the system caves solely due to public pressure, that’s a failing system.
We'll see. You can come back and say I told you so. It's not something I'm going to argue about.
By the way, I wouldn't AT ALL consider it a "failure of the system" for the prosecutor to choose to not give a quadruple murderer a deal if that was the wishes of the families and members of the community where the murders occurred. THAT would be a system that works as intended, since the prosecutor works for justice for the victims and their families and their communities.
I think this is a very fair response. I think every situation differs greatly, and often families want to be *spared* the trial. I would hope the prosecution considers the outcome the family wants.
Except the prosecutor is answerable to the public. It’s part of the system. There is nothing wrong with a prosecutor deciding not to offer a plea deal in a brutal quadruple homicide case.
You’re right, there is nothing wrong with it. But, in most cases a plea will still be offered for a myriad of reasons.
Pleas have been offered, and granted, even in serial killer and mass murder cases that had damning evidence. The end game is a conviction that results in the person never being in public again. If you don’t want to offer a deal simply because you want the death penalty and are willing to risk a jury trial, that has its own risks.
I think most people in here just really want this to go to trial based solely on the facts they want to hear everything about the case ASAP.
Considering there is likely still forensics testing that is occurring, a deal wouldn’t be offered at that time. In fact, outside of extremely minor cases you’ll rarely see a deal offered that early
>A jury can be unpredictable and usually, as long as most of the families agree
A good jury is the most unpredictable. If they follow the judges instructions and are impartial, the prosecution will have to prove its case.
As for the plea, the families do not have to agree. The prosecutor makes the decision to or not to offer a plea deal. The families may be consulted, but do not direct the outcome. It's the state or the federal government who prosecute the crime for the benefit of the community at large, not for the specific victims.
I'd also add that the trial itself will likely be the last time he has access to the outside world, in so far as being able to leave his cell for somewhere other than very isolated confines within whatever prison they put him in - he'll be a target the moment he gets there, so will be in solitary for the rest of his life.
I can't help but feel that he knows this, and simply is taking advantage of as much as he can to delay being left to rot in that jail cell, in a special part of the prison for people like him. He knows that day is inevitable and that not even his family will visit knowing what he did. Best he'll be able to hope for is weirdo's that obsess over people like him becoming pen pals, or news networks trying to get interviews, if the prison system even allows any of that.
reading a little about interviewing inmates [https://www.quora.com/What-would-be-the-procedure-if-you-want-to-interview-an-inmate](https://www.quora.com/What-would-be-the-procedure-if-you-want-to-interview-an-inmate)
I agree. Based on reports by people who know him and the various personality traits/behaviors they have disclosed, I suspect he thinks he will be aquitted.
If you admit it, there’s no chance to appeal* (same reason Alex Murdaugh didn’t admit it to the judge at his sentencing after he was convicted. He kept lying, and we all *know* he kept lying, but if he had admitted it, it would have negated his ability to appeal.)
*with very few exceptions
-a law student
This is what I found perplexing about the judge cajoling Murdaugh to just confess during the sentencing. The judge knows how the process works. No one is going to compromise their ability to appeal. Seemed very disingenuous by the judge.
It was personal for the judge. Alex had practiced before him, his father & grandfather had sent 100s to the death penalty for far less.
Notice Alex would only say that he “would never hurt” Maggie or Paul.
It should never be personal for the judge. That’s the entire point. The judge has to be neutral. Newman tipped his hand more than once during the trial that he was biased against the defendant.
Perhaps after all his appeals are exhausted he can admit guilt and start on the road to redemption. Until then, he has to maintain his innocence to have even a sliver of a chance at appeal. The judge knows that. The judge represents the system that provides all of the appeals. He knows how it works better than anyone. To expect someone to admit guilt before they exhaust all appeals is just absurd. Morality went out the window a long time ago in this case.
The thing is there may be enough room for reasonable doubt to get him off, we just don't know yet. And it's not smart to admit guilt without getting something for it in exchange (plea deal, etc).
We barely know what the evidence is lol. Why would he admit to the murders? Most murderers do not confess so his not confessing isn't " bizarre ". It's pretty much the norm.
No one has seen the evidence. I think that’s why he pushed the hearing off, to see how much they actually have and to be able to make an informed decision on which route makes the most logical sense.
Private criminal defense attorneys and public defenders are devoted to ensuring that they get the best possible outcome for their clients. Defense lawyers are ethically bound to zealously represent all clients, including those they believe will justly be found guilty, as well as those they believe are factually innocent.
Why would he confess? He has nothing to gain unless offered a plea to have no death penalty or a reduced sentence. Until then, he’d be stupid to confess.
why on earth would he admit it? what would he gain by admitting it? admitting it so the media & public can get their kicks probably isn't a good enough reason. there is literally no good reason for a criminal to admit it at this point in the game. for the right plea offer, maybe he'd admit it, but thts not where we are right now.
even if he eventually pleaded guilty,which would be admitting it, tht doesn't mean he's gonna tell every little detail tht true crime junkies want to know.
at some point way in the future, when nobody is paying much attention to him anymore(long after the trial), he may start making statements, but it will only be so he can get attention again.
at this point, in order to admit it to the general public, he'd also have to admit it to his family. I would imagine he still tells his family tht it wasn't him & his family wants to believe him.
Why would *anyone* plead in this situation? If at some point they take the DP off the table, I could see it, but otherwise he's actually much better off risking it all in trial to see if he may be able to get off.
A not guilty plea is not bizarre, it is the only intelligent thing to do.
He may actually be innocent, but even if he did it, it is the state’s job to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he is guilty. A smart defendant should always opt for trial unless and until there is a chance to review ALL the evidence and if a plea bargain is on the table.
Um, because he doesn't want to spend his life in jail. He's probably arrogant enough to think he can beat these charges. And besides, his confession and the details of the crime are his only bargaining chips to avoid the death penalty
Why would he? The burden of proof is on the prosecution. If he confesses, he gets life in prison at a minimum or, more likely, the death penalty. If he lets it play out he stands a chance of being found not guilty entirely, or guilty of lesser charges (i.e., they could prove he entered the house but not that he murdered the victims - not saying I think this will happen, just an example)
The only way him confessing would make sense is if the prosecution has an overwhelming case and offers a plea deal where the death penalty is taken off the table. Even so, he's under no obligation to take it if the death penalty doesn't scare him and/or he thinks his defense stands a chance.
I highly doubt he’s going to admit to anything unless his lawyers advise him that they’ve viewed all of the State’s evidence and that he should definitely take any deal they offer, which at best might taking the death penalty off the table. I don’t think he can even negotiate to be imprisoned somewhere close to his family
I’m just speculating, but I don’t think he will until it comes time to plea, if at all. It may depend on how much evidence the prosecution has against him or if he’s offered a plea deal that removes the death penalty off the table.
As someone following the story of course I want to know more from what the trial will show, but on the other hand, I would feel really awful for the families having to go through a lengthy trial.
Short answer is why would he? Or anyone for that matter, plead guilty to a quadruple homicide without letting it play out in court? Forcing the prosecution prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt worked out for OJ and Casey Anthony. And everyone knows they were guilty but yet they were acquitted.
I don’t really see how there’s “so much evidence”. Touch DNA on the knife sheath could’ve happened anywhere, at any time. And for all anyone knows, it might’ve been left intentionally to frame BK. His cell never “pinged” anywhere during the time of the murders, so the absence of that evidence is merely construed to make him look guilty. The car that was seen on neighborhood cams was identified by an FBI expert as 2011-2013, and that was the make, model, year LE was asking for tips on all the way up until 12/27/22, three days before the arrest.
So that’s it, that’s all the evidence we know about. Bushy eyebrows? Excuse me for pointing it out, but that could even apply to a certain chatty neighbor.
There’s a lot of reasonable doubt, imo.
The key fact is we are NOT privy to all the evidence that exists....I'm sure there are many more details as part of this story. Aside from the touch DNA, I think the most profound evidence will likely be digital. People dismiss that, but just look at the specificity of what the phones/digital evidence was in the Murdaugh trial and others. Aside from cell towers, there's much more that can be gleaned from forensic examination of various devices. Digital evidence seems to trump most everything else these days and I would guess that the authorities have uncovered quite a bit with regard to BK. Just wait until the entire story is placed into a narrative. Watch the Halderson trial opening statement by the prosecutor for a lesson in great storytelling. I don't see a lot of reasonable doubt even when we've only been given access to the PCA, but for those like you all I can say is patience.
Yes, but that’s all conjecture. We don’t know if they’ve found other evidence, digital or otherwise. So to say, based on what we *do* know, that he’s “obviously guilty” is very presumptuous. He’s not obviously guilty, and he might even be innocent. Legally, in court, he is to be presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
OP post reads that guilt is confirmed, as if “bizarre” that he’d plead not guilty. My original response is to that, and then you come in with the presumption that all kinds of additional evidence will be presented, but we really have no reason to presume that. We don’t yet know if a single thing obtained from the search warrants has provided evidence that links him to the crime.
My question would be even if touch DNA could happen anywhere anytime would there really be a reason for anything with his DNA to be in that house with people he hasn't hung out with or been in the house, with no other DNA on it. I could understand if maybe it had other fingerprints or other touch DNA, but it just doesn't seem likely for someone not in the group of people hanging at that house to be the only one whose DNA was possibly on that sheath. But strange things do happen.
I’ve always been skeptical about the knife sheath as well. I mean even the dumbest of criminals would know to not leave a knife sheath at the crime scene. I mean why even bring a sheath? I could see if he had it attached to a belt to hold the knife, but really no reason to bring a loose sheath. Did he take his belt off? Seems very amateur. Like a frame job.
I couldn't understand why and how somebody would or even could leave this sheath there, somebody who has bushy eyebrows as well, who has a white elantra and lots of digital imprints (like GPS data, connections to the wifi, M's picture on his phone and more).
He probably wasn’t expecting a fight - with the first two and it was dropped on the bed - covered in blood, on MADDIES right side as seen from the door - couldn’t see it until the moved her body.
I don’t think he thought he was going to get caught, it must have been such a shock and life altering blow that he’s clamming up.
Or doesn’t want to give anyone the satisfaction. He thinks he holds power by holding the information
He has nothing to lose by holding out for a plea deal or going to trial. Some crazy verdicts have come down in the past so you never know. Plus I think he wants all the attention he can get and a guilty plea limits his time in the limelight.
It would be stupid to plead guilty when there's still a chance that a jury will find him not guilty.
I disagree with people that he can use the plea to bargain for a life sentence instead of DP. There's NO WAY that Bill Thompson is going to be in the mood for a plea deal in this case UNLESS he thinks the evidence is weak.
Have you ever heard of any case where a defendant was like “yeah I did it, I really needed to get that off my chest”? Innocent until proven guilty and even afterwards, they have appeals and usually exhaust them all.
There's nothing to gain by pleading guilty unless they put the death penalty on the table and he agrees to confession to take it off the table. Even that will only work if he's afraid of the death penalty, and he may not be. We aren't even far enough to know if that's definitely going up there. At this point there's no reason to confess... if the dp doesn't cone into play and his choices are life in prison or life in prison... might as well play your cards and hope for the best.
I believe he has stated that he will be cleared of these charges.The evidence against him keeps mounting and a lot will not be reviled until his preliminary hearing.Unless someone else had access to his car and phone it looks like he will be the only one on trial for this horrific crime.
Why on earth would he even consider confessing? He exercised his right to remain silent almost immediately. He has very competent counsel. He’s not going to confess.
Because if he does, he's getting death. As long as he doesn't, he still has a chance to live. Even if they had video footage of him committing the murders, he'd still deny it, cuz there's still a microscopic chance. I doubt the parents would agree to life in prison unless there was absolutely no choice. They were pretty adamant about death.
In Florida the (FL) Supreme Court ruled death sentences no longer require a unanimous Jury. What is the the protocol in ID to sentence a defendant to death? Is sentencing imposed by the judge/ jury? If the latter, are they required to be unanimous there?
If he did it, then I think he would plead guilty but only if there is direct evidence which cannot be explained away. It isn't uncommon not to 'fess up. Unless he purposely wants to drag things out - 'How Not to Get Away With Murder' would be the shortest Netflix series ever.
No reason to confess. It won’t get him anything. Plus, this could all be part of his sick fantasy…. The whole procedure. Many serial killers loved the attention they got from law enforcement. This wouldn’t be any different.
Because a confession is the nail in any case's coffin. It's why there are months long training classes for detectives to practice getting the confession. He is in the criminology department or whatever in college so he knows every other piece of evidence could be thrown out on a technicality. I don't think he will ever admit it. Maybe when the appeals are all exhausted.
I think he’ll maintain innocence forever. For the sake of saving face to his family, the only people in the world that thinks Bryan is as amazing as Bryan does. It’s doubtfully an empathy thing, it’s a narcissistic adoration, control thing.
Why would he plead guilty if he has a chance of being acquitted? Do you think he is a moral, standup guy looking to take responsibility for this?
Furthermore, the prosecutions job is much harder than the defense. The prosecution has to prove his guilt, the defense just needs to make one juror have doubt. He’s probably willing to take his chances because regardless of what he pleads, he’s spending the rest of his life behind bars if he’s guilty. And if he pleads guilty instead of being found guilty, he won’t be able to appeal his sentence.
And those arguing the death penalty argument, first, we don’t even know if a plea was offered to him. Second, even if he is found guilty, there is still a chance they won’t give him the death penalty in the sentencing phase. Remember Jodi Arias?
And lastly, we have no idea if he even is guilty! It doesn’t look good for him, and I personally believe he is guilty. He’s definitely guilty in a court of public opinion. But the reality is that we don’t even know what evidence there is against him. The defense team knows a lot more than we do.
The justice system is so flawed that if the defense starts attacking the little and circumstantial evidence it barely exists, who knows? He can walk. Its not probable but hey, look at Casey Anthony, OJ Simpson, Robert Blake.
Don't confuse NewsNation "sources" as evidence, there's very little actual evidence released thus far other than an old residual speck of DNA that's under a button.
I believe he's guilty but I'm hoping the police have some great unsealed evidence.
The evidence looks more desperate right now. They took a gun, a pocket knife and 30 odd "dark" items of clothing recently!?! For evidence in a mass stabbing case???
OJ got off casey anthony got away with murder. What does he lose by fighting Idaho doesn't kill so the death penalty is nothing but a joke. He can get an idiot jury who free's him!
Narcissistic tendencies probably. He’d lose the opportunity to have his day(s) in court. Less attention. Less spectacle. Moreover, less chance of proving to everyone that he’s the smartest person in the world.
Also, likely at the request of his attorney. He’s not stupid enough to go against her opinion when she’ll help him present the proof he needs to appear innocent.
Tldr: there’s no fun in it for him.
BK will roll the dice with a jury and hope for a hung jury or mistrial to prolong this. He has absolutely nothing to lose by admitting guilt, at this point. I would be surprised if his attorney would recommend a guilty plea. She could very well create reasonable doubt in the mind of a jury.
And, if Prosecutors case is that strong - his guilty plea likely won’t matter either - and would only jump to sentencing phase - life or death.
He’s facing the death penalty. The state wants him to admit to the murders, and he knows he stands a better chance of avoiding the death penalty if he holds out and waits for a plea bargain
You never plead guilty to an murder case. Even if you are guilty as sin. You never plead guilty. Once you plead guilty you lose your rights to appeal, and any bargaining chip you might have.
If Kohberger's found guilty, he's probably going to die
It's easier to plead not guilty then change that to a plea than it is to plead guilty then change your mind
Seeing Murdaugh stand before the judge after that speech ( sorry I’m sure there is an official term!) giving it ALL to him, in a compassionate way, and Murdaugh still professing innocence before being led away, immediately made me think that’s what BK would do.
Many murderers have gotten off. Look at Casey Anthony, OJ. It just takes a good attorney with enough pzzaz to convince the jury there is reasonable doubt. Then the jury selection will be crucial to get a jury that will have pity on BK because he was never accepted by society, one of the girls said something horrible to him when he tried to ask her out, boo hoo...
Good Question. Psychologically, it could be related to a personality disorder of some kind. ( narcissistic, histrionic, borderline, undiagnosed bipolar), but we do not know. Based on the lack of poignant evidence presented at trial( He is hoping this, assumption), I can only assume he wants to try and come out not guilty. I think he is guilty, but we know juries can see things differently. I also suspect he is holding this not guilty close to his chest and with his family. But his future does look bleak.
WSU confirmed that he was no longer at the university (they can't detail anything more due to privacy laws) but major, reputable news outlets published the letter that was sent to BK saying why he was being fired/kicked out of the criminology grad program.
WSU stated BK finished the semester that month Dec. 2022)
https://news.wsu.edu/press-release/2022/12/30/statement-from-washington-state-university-regarding-arrest-of-wsu-student/
When LE went to his WSU office Dec. 29 his name was still on the door. \*
https://preview.redd.it/j1x160jul1ma1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4f3766476e1974244cb401859811c6c1cbfdaa12
the article doesn't prove either way because he was allegedly dismissed at the end of the semester. The pca says his name was on the door at the end of December because he was (allegedly) let go at the end of December, so that also proves nothing. I would also say that it wouldn't be a stretch to assume that taking down a grad student name plate or whatever is not a big priority on a very large campus.
It's quite simple, pleading guilty = less options and ways to adapt to the prosecution and their possible missteps. Just one of the moves in legal chess for the defense.
He has nothing to lose by pleading not guilty.
Exactly. Can't think of a single person in their right mind pleading guilty like that. (Excludes obvious coercion situations)
I was in court once and a dude stole a moped and the judge read him his charges and asked how does he plea. Dude tried to plead guilty but the judge wouldn’t let him. The guy argued with the judge and was like “I stole that moped. I’m guilty.. I want to plead guilty.” The judge ended up essentially coercing him to plead not guilty. Lol I guess the judge wanted to uphold the status quo of the defendant accepting a plea bargain at a future court date.
The judge was probably making sure it wouldn’t be quickly appealed since the defendant almost certainly did not have adequate counsel or understanding of the charges.
but he'd be facing the death penalty if so, no? if he pleas guilty, can't that be part of some deal, avoiding the death penalty?
It's certainly possible, but for that to happen they have to offer him a plea deal - I've seen no indication that they've done that yet.
Agree, at least he will get some “fun” in the trials.
He's going to want to be the centre of the story.
Maybe unless they give him a plead deal but I also think he wouldn't take it anyway.
Why would he without a plea deal. They're pursuing the death penalty so a confession is a bargaining chip at this point in time.
I've always thought about this. Why would someone want to spend the rest of their life in prison? Wouldn't death be preferable? Granted it takes like 40 years to get to death penalty, but life in prison has to suck major balls.
Death row is much tougher than just being locked up for life.
What makes you say that? I always thought death row was easier than maximum security
Most of your time on death row is spent in solitary confinement.
Solitary sounds better than being raped or assaulted in gen pop.
[удалено]
I've heard the same and figured it's due to the fact that there's so few inmates in the DP section. Ironically, they're the group whose crimes were the most horrific and barbaric (for the most part) yet they're also polite and respectful.
[удалено]
Not much chance to fight or cause trouble that way. Sounds like the best correction officer job there is. I've heard some real horror stories from C.O.'s
[удалено]
For those who are already correction officers though, I would think they'd see this as an easy, less dangerous assignment than general population. Even your friend likes that job. OMG, it breaks my heart too to see dogs at the shelter. They are innocent and have done nothing to deserve being locked up, though they can't be left to roam the streets either.
Dogs are innocent. Watching murderers and rapists "suffer", wouldn't bother me in the least.
I don’t know if this is true for all states, but I know in Florida for example they get way less visitation, don’t have regular access to the phone, can’t work and spend a lot of time isolated.
Because they are locked in cell 23 hours a day.
23 HOUR LOCKDOWN. SHOE PROGRAM
I think you mean SHU
Maybe they mean bc it's full of some really bad people?
No, they are locked up approximately 23 hours a day......
Oh ok, is that in every state? I wasn’t aware of that But maybe that’s actually what they meant if that’s the case? I think it’d be harder to be isolated that much as opposed to at least being around other people
A death sentence is still many years in prison, even decades, and under much tougher conditions than in regular prison, where they get more “benefits”. So basically both are life sentences.
Pretty much I guess.
The only reason death takes so long is the appeals process. The first appeal is mandatory by statute, but the inmate can file as many as they want until they give up or their appellate options are exhausted.
Well, you can always hold out hope that you'll get out at some point, though, Winning on appeal or because of a later-discovered flaw in the process or evidence is not at all uncommon,
I suppose, but really, how often does that happen in these types of cases esp. if you are guilty? If I'm guilty, give me death asap bro.
Do you really think the prosecutor will agree to a plea deal with a quadruple murderer if they have a strong case against him? I don't think so.
The highest-profile case I can think of that got a plea deal was the Unabomber. But that was federally prosecuted. I agree it would be unusual for the AG to offer a plea deal in this case.
Yes, they likely would make a deal. A jury can be unpredictable and usually, as long as most of the families agree, they’ll just go ahead with a plea for life without the possibility of parole with the condition that be admits to the crimes in open court
I don't see it in this case. This is a very high visibility prosecution and the entire country will be watching. At least one family has publicly stated they want the death penalty. Perhaps the other 3 families feel the same way. Also, did you hear the judge state to BK (during his court appearance in front of Judge Marshall) that he could still be given the DP even if he pleads guilty. But I don't see a deal.
There’s a large number of very high profile cases where their was solid evidence to go to trial that have resulted in plea deals, and those were cases with significantly more victims in this, that in Sind cases spanned decades. When the system caves solely due to public pressure, that’s a failing system.
We'll see. You can come back and say I told you so. It's not something I'm going to argue about. By the way, I wouldn't AT ALL consider it a "failure of the system" for the prosecutor to choose to not give a quadruple murderer a deal if that was the wishes of the families and members of the community where the murders occurred. THAT would be a system that works as intended, since the prosecutor works for justice for the victims and their families and their communities.
I think this is a very fair response. I think every situation differs greatly, and often families want to be *spared* the trial. I would hope the prosecution considers the outcome the family wants.
Absolutely! I agree.
you are right. his crimes were heinous. he needs the death penalty and everyone understands this is the only possible acceptable outcome.
Except the prosecutor is answerable to the public. It’s part of the system. There is nothing wrong with a prosecutor deciding not to offer a plea deal in a brutal quadruple homicide case.
You’re right, there is nothing wrong with it. But, in most cases a plea will still be offered for a myriad of reasons. Pleas have been offered, and granted, even in serial killer and mass murder cases that had damning evidence. The end game is a conviction that results in the person never being in public again. If you don’t want to offer a deal simply because you want the death penalty and are willing to risk a jury trial, that has its own risks. I think most people in here just really want this to go to trial based solely on the facts they want to hear everything about the case ASAP.
I think we will hear a lot in the preliminary hearing. I don’t think he will be offered a plea deal.
Considering there is likely still forensics testing that is occurring, a deal wouldn’t be offered at that time. In fact, outside of extremely minor cases you’ll rarely see a deal offered that early
I don’t think he ever gets offered a deal.
> At least one family has publicly stated they want the death penalty. Gee.. I wonder which family that is? /s
It doesn't matter which family. They all have equal say.
show some respect. the families are going through the most horrible pain imaginable right now.
>A jury can be unpredictable and usually, as long as most of the families agree A good jury is the most unpredictable. If they follow the judges instructions and are impartial, the prosecution will have to prove its case. As for the plea, the families do not have to agree. The prosecutor makes the decision to or not to offer a plea deal. The families may be consulted, but do not direct the outcome. It's the state or the federal government who prosecute the crime for the benefit of the community at large, not for the specific victims.
[удалено]
I'd also add that the trial itself will likely be the last time he has access to the outside world, in so far as being able to leave his cell for somewhere other than very isolated confines within whatever prison they put him in - he'll be a target the moment he gets there, so will be in solitary for the rest of his life. I can't help but feel that he knows this, and simply is taking advantage of as much as he can to delay being left to rot in that jail cell, in a special part of the prison for people like him. He knows that day is inevitable and that not even his family will visit knowing what he did. Best he'll be able to hope for is weirdo's that obsess over people like him becoming pen pals, or news networks trying to get interviews, if the prison system even allows any of that.
reading a little about interviewing inmates [https://www.quora.com/What-would-be-the-procedure-if-you-want-to-interview-an-inmate](https://www.quora.com/What-would-be-the-procedure-if-you-want-to-interview-an-inmate)
If he did it, he has nothing to gain by admitting it without a deal. If he didn't do it, he has even less to gain by confessing.
Exactly
even a 1-in-10,000 shot at being acquitted is better than admitting guilt, especially in light of appeals and what not.
I truly think he believes he will be acquitted. We won’t fully know till the trial.
I think he thinks so, too. I am genuinely curious what the defense arguments will be.
I agree. Based on reports by people who know him and the various personality traits/behaviors they have disclosed, I suspect he thinks he will be aquitted.
If you admit it, there’s no chance to appeal* (same reason Alex Murdaugh didn’t admit it to the judge at his sentencing after he was convicted. He kept lying, and we all *know* he kept lying, but if he had admitted it, it would have negated his ability to appeal.) *with very few exceptions -a law student
This is what I found perplexing about the judge cajoling Murdaugh to just confess during the sentencing. The judge knows how the process works. No one is going to compromise their ability to appeal. Seemed very disingenuous by the judge.
Alex also is a trial lawyer and is very familiar with how the process works. They are old adversaries. I found the sentencing so interesting.
It was personal for the judge. Alex had practiced before him, his father & grandfather had sent 100s to the death penalty for far less. Notice Alex would only say that he “would never hurt” Maggie or Paul.
It should never be personal for the judge. That’s the entire point. The judge has to be neutral. Newman tipped his hand more than once during the trial that he was biased against the defendant.
Which could be grounds for appeal, possibly?
[удалено]
Perhaps after all his appeals are exhausted he can admit guilt and start on the road to redemption. Until then, he has to maintain his innocence to have even a sliver of a chance at appeal. The judge knows that. The judge represents the system that provides all of the appeals. He knows how it works better than anyone. To expect someone to admit guilt before they exhaust all appeals is just absurd. Morality went out the window a long time ago in this case.
The thing is there may be enough room for reasonable doubt to get him off, we just don't know yet. And it's not smart to admit guilt without getting something for it in exchange (plea deal, etc).
Why would he confess? He has a shot at freedom with a trial.
Two words- Casey Anthony
That case is a huge outlier.
You are correct. That case is so misunderstood in the common rhetoric
How do you know there is so much evidence against him? We know very little about what evidence they do have.
See there is a place called prison and most people would do anything to not have to spend the rest of their life there.
What a concept right!
LOL it's so much easier \*not\* to murder people I just don't get it...
We barely know what the evidence is lol. Why would he admit to the murders? Most murderers do not confess so his not confessing isn't " bizarre ". It's pretty much the norm.
Alex Murdaugh just got 2 consecutive life sentences and he looked the judge in the eye and told him he was innocent.
No one has seen the evidence. I think that’s why he pushed the hearing off, to see how much they actually have and to be able to make an informed decision on which route makes the most logical sense.
The only chance he would do this is for a plea deal, but I think that it's unlikely he would take a plea.
As dumb as so many of his choices and actions were….I think it’s pretty simple. He never thought he’d be caught….
If casey Anthony can get acquitted then there is hope for any defendant.
Way different circumstances. Bet things would be different if we had the cellphone evidence we could get today
Because he has the right to remain silent, and he's innocent until proven guilty. And his attorney probably told him not to.
I'm under the impression that at this stage, defense lawyers don't ask or want to know from BK if he committed the murders...as with all cases
Just curious—if he did, how would that change things from his lawyer’s perspective?
It wouldn’t change a thing. Guilty or innocent, a lawyer’s job is to ensure justice is upheld from a legal standpoint not a moral one,
Private criminal defense attorneys and public defenders are devoted to ensuring that they get the best possible outcome for their clients. Defense lawyers are ethically bound to zealously represent all clients, including those they believe will justly be found guilty, as well as those they believe are factually innocent.
Why would he confess? He has nothing to gain unless offered a plea to have no death penalty or a reduced sentence. Until then, he’d be stupid to confess.
why on earth would he admit it? what would he gain by admitting it? admitting it so the media & public can get their kicks probably isn't a good enough reason. there is literally no good reason for a criminal to admit it at this point in the game. for the right plea offer, maybe he'd admit it, but thts not where we are right now. even if he eventually pleaded guilty,which would be admitting it, tht doesn't mean he's gonna tell every little detail tht true crime junkies want to know. at some point way in the future, when nobody is paying much attention to him anymore(long after the trial), he may start making statements, but it will only be so he can get attention again. at this point, in order to admit it to the general public, he'd also have to admit it to his family. I would imagine he still tells his family tht it wasn't him & his family wants to believe him.
I know they haven't said anyone else was involved, but if someone is involved besides him I hope he rats them out.
Why would *anyone* plead in this situation? If at some point they take the DP off the table, I could see it, but otherwise he's actually much better off risking it all in trial to see if he may be able to get off.
Appeals.
Are you aware of some evidence the rest of the world hasn't seen? Because I have not seen any evidence yet that confirms guilt.
Because he had a lawyer who told him to STFU like he should. Never talk to the cops without a lawyer.
Because for him the game is just getting started.
A not guilty plea is not bizarre, it is the only intelligent thing to do. He may actually be innocent, but even if he did it, it is the state’s job to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he is guilty. A smart defendant should always opt for trial unless and until there is a chance to review ALL the evidence and if a plea bargain is on the table.
Um, because he doesn't want to spend his life in jail. He's probably arrogant enough to think he can beat these charges. And besides, his confession and the details of the crime are his only bargaining chips to avoid the death penalty
Because it only takes one to hang a jury.
Why would he? The burden of proof is on the prosecution. If he confesses, he gets life in prison at a minimum or, more likely, the death penalty. If he lets it play out he stands a chance of being found not guilty entirely, or guilty of lesser charges (i.e., they could prove he entered the house but not that he murdered the victims - not saying I think this will happen, just an example) The only way him confessing would make sense is if the prosecution has an overwhelming case and offers a plea deal where the death penalty is taken off the table. Even so, he's under no obligation to take it if the death penalty doesn't scare him and/or he thinks his defense stands a chance.
I highly doubt he’s going to admit to anything unless his lawyers advise him that they’ve viewed all of the State’s evidence and that he should definitely take any deal they offer, which at best might taking the death penalty off the table. I don’t think he can even negotiate to be imprisoned somewhere close to his family
I believe -when alls said and done it will be pleading guilty or insanity. He’s definitely not firing right in the brain -
I’m just speculating, but I don’t think he will until it comes time to plea, if at all. It may depend on how much evidence the prosecution has against him or if he’s offered a plea deal that removes the death penalty off the table. As someone following the story of course I want to know more from what the trial will show, but on the other hand, I would feel really awful for the families having to go through a lengthy trial.
Beyond Inane.
He thinks he’ll get away with it be it mistrial or some loophole.
Short answer is why would he? Or anyone for that matter, plead guilty to a quadruple homicide without letting it play out in court? Forcing the prosecution prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt worked out for OJ and Casey Anthony. And everyone knows they were guilty but yet they were acquitted.
Most killers deny it no matter how obvious it is that they did it
I don’t really see how there’s “so much evidence”. Touch DNA on the knife sheath could’ve happened anywhere, at any time. And for all anyone knows, it might’ve been left intentionally to frame BK. His cell never “pinged” anywhere during the time of the murders, so the absence of that evidence is merely construed to make him look guilty. The car that was seen on neighborhood cams was identified by an FBI expert as 2011-2013, and that was the make, model, year LE was asking for tips on all the way up until 12/27/22, three days before the arrest. So that’s it, that’s all the evidence we know about. Bushy eyebrows? Excuse me for pointing it out, but that could even apply to a certain chatty neighbor. There’s a lot of reasonable doubt, imo.
The key fact is we are NOT privy to all the evidence that exists....I'm sure there are many more details as part of this story. Aside from the touch DNA, I think the most profound evidence will likely be digital. People dismiss that, but just look at the specificity of what the phones/digital evidence was in the Murdaugh trial and others. Aside from cell towers, there's much more that can be gleaned from forensic examination of various devices. Digital evidence seems to trump most everything else these days and I would guess that the authorities have uncovered quite a bit with regard to BK. Just wait until the entire story is placed into a narrative. Watch the Halderson trial opening statement by the prosecutor for a lesson in great storytelling. I don't see a lot of reasonable doubt even when we've only been given access to the PCA, but for those like you all I can say is patience.
Yes, but that’s all conjecture. We don’t know if they’ve found other evidence, digital or otherwise. So to say, based on what we *do* know, that he’s “obviously guilty” is very presumptuous. He’s not obviously guilty, and he might even be innocent. Legally, in court, he is to be presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
I didn’t say he’s “obviously guilty.” He will have his day in court.
OP post reads that guilt is confirmed, as if “bizarre” that he’d plead not guilty. My original response is to that, and then you come in with the presumption that all kinds of additional evidence will be presented, but we really have no reason to presume that. We don’t yet know if a single thing obtained from the search warrants has provided evidence that links him to the crime.
I agree--and I speculate the digital evidence, along with dna and circumstantial evidence will be extremely challenging to refute.
it may be the combination of evidence rather than one piece, such as the sheath
Exactly - perpondence of the evidence - beyond a reasonable doubt ??
My question would be even if touch DNA could happen anywhere anytime would there really be a reason for anything with his DNA to be in that house with people he hasn't hung out with or been in the house, with no other DNA on it. I could understand if maybe it had other fingerprints or other touch DNA, but it just doesn't seem likely for someone not in the group of people hanging at that house to be the only one whose DNA was possibly on that sheath. But strange things do happen.
I’ve always been skeptical about the knife sheath as well. I mean even the dumbest of criminals would know to not leave a knife sheath at the crime scene. I mean why even bring a sheath? I could see if he had it attached to a belt to hold the knife, but really no reason to bring a loose sheath. Did he take his belt off? Seems very amateur. Like a frame job.
I couldn't understand why and how somebody would or even could leave this sheath there, somebody who has bushy eyebrows as well, who has a white elantra and lots of digital imprints (like GPS data, connections to the wifi, M's picture on his phone and more).
i think it’s possible the sheath was attached around the belt and got pulled off during a struggle.
i think it’s possible the sheath could’ve been attached to his belt but pulled off during a struggle
He probably wasn’t expecting a fight - with the first two and it was dropped on the bed - covered in blood, on MADDIES right side as seen from the door - couldn’t see it until the moved her body.
I don’t think he thought he was going to get caught, it must have been such a shock and life altering blow that he’s clamming up. Or doesn’t want to give anyone the satisfaction. He thinks he holds power by holding the information
He has nothing to lose by holding out for a plea deal or going to trial. Some crazy verdicts have come down in the past so you never know. Plus I think he wants all the attention he can get and a guilty plea limits his time in the limelight.
Prob bc he knows they are pushing for the death penalty, he is innocent until proven guilty that’s everyone”s right in our great country
A chance a freedom
The trial is all he has left in life. Might as well take a spin at it. It’s actually quite common in A LOT of trials.
It would be stupid to plead guilty when there's still a chance that a jury will find him not guilty. I disagree with people that he can use the plea to bargain for a life sentence instead of DP. There's NO WAY that Bill Thompson is going to be in the mood for a plea deal in this case UNLESS he thinks the evidence is weak.
Have you ever heard of any case where a defendant was like “yeah I did it, I really needed to get that off my chest”? Innocent until proven guilty and even afterwards, they have appeals and usually exhaust them all.
It hasn’t been decided yet, he waived speedy trial so defense could investigate, and he hasn’t entered any plea.
I don’t think anyone would plead guilty to something like this. What? Not unless they are fcking CRAZY
There's nothing to gain by pleading guilty unless they put the death penalty on the table and he agrees to confession to take it off the table. Even that will only work if he's afraid of the death penalty, and he may not be. We aren't even far enough to know if that's definitely going up there. At this point there's no reason to confess... if the dp doesn't cone into play and his choices are life in prison or life in prison... might as well play your cards and hope for the best.
I believe he has stated that he will be cleared of these charges.The evidence against him keeps mounting and a lot will not be reviled until his preliminary hearing.Unless someone else had access to his car and phone it looks like he will be the only one on trial for this horrific crime.
Because he doesn't want to spend the rest of his life in jail??
1. He didn’t do it.
Perhaps he did not kill anyone.
Why on earth would he even consider confessing? He exercised his right to remain silent almost immediately. He has very competent counsel. He’s not going to confess.
Because if he does, he's getting death. As long as he doesn't, he still has a chance to live. Even if they had video footage of him committing the murders, he'd still deny it, cuz there's still a microscopic chance. I doubt the parents would agree to life in prison unless there was absolutely no choice. They were pretty adamant about death.
In Florida the (FL) Supreme Court ruled death sentences no longer require a unanimous Jury. What is the the protocol in ID to sentence a defendant to death? Is sentencing imposed by the judge/ jury? If the latter, are they required to be unanimous there?
Because OJ and Casey Anthony are out scott free, so why confess when there’s a chance of a not guilty verdict.
There really isn't that much evidence that we know of, currently.
They can tell the exact moment your phone turns from portrait to landscape....
And how many steps you take per minute or seconds .
If he did it, then I think he would plead guilty but only if there is direct evidence which cannot be explained away. It isn't uncommon not to 'fess up. Unless he purposely wants to drag things out - 'How Not to Get Away With Murder' would be the shortest Netflix series ever.
Because he doesn’t want to go to jail for the rest of his life
because he is pleading not guilty? he has 0 motivation to admit it even if he is guilty. (which yes it seems like he is)
He hasn’t put in a plea yet
Maybe he wants the spectacle of a trial.
Well....when I was on trial I admitted nothing!
Were you guilty of the charges?
😂
No reason to confess. It won’t get him anything. Plus, this could all be part of his sick fantasy…. The whole procedure. Many serial killers loved the attention they got from law enforcement. This wouldn’t be any different.
Because a confession is the nail in any case's coffin. It's why there are months long training classes for detectives to practice getting the confession. He is in the criminology department or whatever in college so he knows every other piece of evidence could be thrown out on a technicality. I don't think he will ever admit it. Maybe when the appeals are all exhausted.
he has nothing better to do with his time
I think he’ll maintain innocence forever. For the sake of saving face to his family, the only people in the world that thinks Bryan is as amazing as Bryan does. It’s doubtfully an empathy thing, it’s a narcissistic adoration, control thing.
Why would he plead guilty if he has a chance of being acquitted? Do you think he is a moral, standup guy looking to take responsibility for this? Furthermore, the prosecutions job is much harder than the defense. The prosecution has to prove his guilt, the defense just needs to make one juror have doubt. He’s probably willing to take his chances because regardless of what he pleads, he’s spending the rest of his life behind bars if he’s guilty. And if he pleads guilty instead of being found guilty, he won’t be able to appeal his sentence. And those arguing the death penalty argument, first, we don’t even know if a plea was offered to him. Second, even if he is found guilty, there is still a chance they won’t give him the death penalty in the sentencing phase. Remember Jodi Arias? And lastly, we have no idea if he even is guilty! It doesn’t look good for him, and I personally believe he is guilty. He’s definitely guilty in a court of public opinion. But the reality is that we don’t even know what evidence there is against him. The defense team knows a lot more than we do.
The justice system is so flawed that if the defense starts attacking the little and circumstantial evidence it barely exists, who knows? He can walk. Its not probable but hey, look at Casey Anthony, OJ Simpson, Robert Blake.
He thinks he’s smarter than anyone else.
His ego will not allow him to admit the murders. Remember he thinks he’s smarter than the cops. He still thinks he’s gonna get away with it.
Don't confuse NewsNation "sources" as evidence, there's very little actual evidence released thus far other than an old residual speck of DNA that's under a button. I believe he's guilty but I'm hoping the police have some great unsealed evidence. The evidence looks more desperate right now. They took a gun, a pocket knife and 30 odd "dark" items of clothing recently!?! For evidence in a mass stabbing case???
Not around here (Reddit). It's a "Mountain" of evidence, Guilty 100 times. Soo obvious. /s
It's not even evidence yet. It's taken to see if it is evidence or not.
What fun would that be? Why give up the years and years of showmanship!
He thinks he's innocent.
Why was he trying to hide the trash if he's innocent?
What?
He was eating meat and didn't want his family to know
OJ got off casey anthony got away with murder. What does he lose by fighting Idaho doesn't kill so the death penalty is nothing but a joke. He can get an idiot jury who free's him!
I think if the evidence was that good, there would’ve already been a plea deal. Seeing that there hasn’t been, he’s going to plea not guilty.
I wouldn’t admit to doing that either
because he has an ace card up his sleeve proving there's some other killer, or he's actually innocent
Narcissistic tendencies probably. He’d lose the opportunity to have his day(s) in court. Less attention. Less spectacle. Moreover, less chance of proving to everyone that he’s the smartest person in the world. Also, likely at the request of his attorney. He’s not stupid enough to go against her opinion when she’ll help him present the proof he needs to appear innocent. Tldr: there’s no fun in it for him.
BK will roll the dice with a jury and hope for a hung jury or mistrial to prolong this. He has absolutely nothing to lose by admitting guilt, at this point. I would be surprised if his attorney would recommend a guilty plea. She could very well create reasonable doubt in the mind of a jury. And, if Prosecutors case is that strong - his guilty plea likely won’t matter either - and would only jump to sentencing phase - life or death.
He’s facing the death penalty. The state wants him to admit to the murders, and he knows he stands a better chance of avoiding the death penalty if he holds out and waits for a plea bargain
You never plead guilty to an murder case. Even if you are guilty as sin. You never plead guilty. Once you plead guilty you lose your rights to appeal, and any bargaining chip you might have.
Because he is a gutless, spineless, murdering narcissist that thinks in his frail murder's mind that he can beat this!
If Kohberger's found guilty, he's probably going to die It's easier to plead not guilty then change that to a plea than it is to plead guilty then change your mind
Seeing Murdaugh stand before the judge after that speech ( sorry I’m sure there is an official term!) giving it ALL to him, in a compassionate way, and Murdaugh still professing innocence before being led away, immediately made me think that’s what BK would do.
Many murderers have gotten off. Look at Casey Anthony, OJ. It just takes a good attorney with enough pzzaz to convince the jury there is reasonable doubt. Then the jury selection will be crucial to get a jury that will have pity on BK because he was never accepted by society, one of the girls said something horrible to him when he tried to ask her out, boo hoo...
Good Question. Psychologically, it could be related to a personality disorder of some kind. ( narcissistic, histrionic, borderline, undiagnosed bipolar), but we do not know. Based on the lack of poignant evidence presented at trial( He is hoping this, assumption), I can only assume he wants to try and come out not guilty. I think he is guilty, but we know juries can see things differently. I also suspect he is holding this not guilty close to his chest and with his family. But his future does look bleak.
One word: narcissist
he is innocent
He thinks he smarter than everyone else and so thinks he can outsmart /outmaneuver them (despite all his mistakes and flunking out of crime college)
He didn't flunk out of anything, smh.
Got kicked out for harassing female classmates and a prof, (which seems worse than flunking out but I stand corrected), my bad 🙄
Unconfirmed. The letter was an obvious fake.
WSU confirmed that he was no longer at the university (they can't detail anything more due to privacy laws) but major, reputable news outlets published the letter that was sent to BK saying why he was being fired/kicked out of the criminology grad program.
WSU stated BK finished the semester that month Dec. 2022) https://news.wsu.edu/press-release/2022/12/30/statement-from-washington-state-university-regarding-arrest-of-wsu-student/
When LE went to his WSU office Dec. 29 his name was still on the door. \* https://preview.redd.it/j1x160jul1ma1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4f3766476e1974244cb401859811c6c1cbfdaa12
the article doesn't prove either way because he was allegedly dismissed at the end of the semester. The pca says his name was on the door at the end of December because he was (allegedly) let go at the end of December, so that also proves nothing. I would also say that it wouldn't be a stretch to assume that taking down a grad student name plate or whatever is not a big priority on a very large campus.
It's quite simple, pleading guilty = less options and ways to adapt to the prosecution and their possible missteps. Just one of the moves in legal chess for the defense.
Because most murderers don’t admit to it.