Idaho College Murders of Four College Students.

[SteveGrabowski]

Wow big surprise, alleged murderer a student in criminal justice and criminology. So probably preparing to be a cop.

 

[dawp]

Wow big surprise, alleged murderer a student in criminal justice and criminology. So probably preparing to be a cop.

maybe he thought that background would let him get away with it.

 

[hal2kilo]

Press conference now in progress.

 

[hal2kilo]

Press conference now in progress.

Apparently, they treat the accused in the state of Idaho with kit gloves.
Basically, no info other than his name, and that he had an apartment in Pulman.

 

[eelw]

Arrest warrant can’t be unsealed until suspect is extricated back to Odaho

 

[hal2kilo]

Arrest warrant can’t be unsealed until suspect is extricated back to Odaho

Maybe Pennsylvania will squeeze out SOMETHING!

 

[hal2kilo]

Apparently, they treat the accused in the state of Idaho with kit gloves.
Basically, no info other than his name, and that he had an apartment in Pulman.

By the way, I thought I screwed up, but it can be kit or kid. (young fox/young goat)

 

[eelw]

Okay only important piece released, knife has not been recovered.

 

[Indus]

From https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/idaho-university-student-murders-update-12-30-22/index.html

Hmm that last paragraph is perplexing.. did he really try to get willing victims to do what I think he did??

 

[skyking]

Apparently, they treat the accused in the state of Idaho with kit gloves.
Basically, no info other than his name, and that he had an apartment in Pulman.

It is an extreme high profile case and those prosecutions are often fraught with jury pool problems. I suspect they will do everything they can to plug all the loopholes to get a successful prosecution.

 

[hal2kilo]

View attachment 73690

View attachment 73691

From https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/idaho-university-student-murders-update-12-30-22/index.html

Hmm that last paragraph is perplexing.. did he really try to get willing victims to do what I think he did??

Thanks. More than a scintilla of information that came from the useless press conference. I guess that's what bugs me the most. Should have only lasted about 5 minutes. Instead, they spent most of the time patting themselves on the back.

 

[Muse]

View attachment 73690

View attachment 73691

From https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/idaho-university-student-murders-update-12-30-22/index.html

Hmm that last paragraph is perplexing.. did he really try to get willing victims to do what I think he did??

He was trying to get people to submit their personal stories to fuel his study.

He was seeking participants for a research project "to understand how emotions and psychological traits influence decision-making when committing a crime."

I saw more on this on ABC network news last night. He assured participants that they would be anonymous in their contributions to the study.

I have to wonder. Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment is about a man with a fascination for this kind of idea. What happens in the mind of the perpetrator of a crime, in particular murder. The character commits a murder, thinking he could escape the consequences of his conscience if he was sufficiently aware of his emotions, sufficiently in control (Aside: I have never succeeded in getting past the beginning of this book of which I have a copy, but I know some of the basic ideas involved). In the book, the central character commits a murder thinking he had the mental power necessary, but it turns out he cannot escape the consequences of his actions. I don't remember ever hearing of something happening "in real life" like Dostoevsky's novel. I have to wonder if he read it. Obviously, he too has failed to escape the consequences of his actions. I suppose his motivations may become more clear in time. Maybe he is similar to Raskolnikov, Dostoevsky's protagonist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_and_Punishment

From the Wikipedia treatment of Crime and Punishment:

Raskolnikov (Rodion Romanovitch) is the protagonist, and the novel focuses primarily on his perspective. A 23-year-old man and former student, now destitute, Raskolnikov is described in the novel as "exceptionally handsome, taller than average in height, slim, well built, with beautiful dark eyes and dark brown hair." On the one hand, he is cold, apathetic, and antisocial; on the other, he can be surprisingly warm and compassionate. He commits murder as well as acts of impulsive charity. His chaotic interaction with the external world and his nihilistic worldview might be seen as causes of his social alienation or consequences of it.

Despite its title, the novel does not so much deal with the crime and its formal punishment as with Raskolnikov's internal struggle – the torments of his own conscience, rather than the legal consequences of committing the crime. Believing society would be better for it, Raskolnikov commits murder with the idea that he possesses enough intellectual and emotional fortitude to deal with the ramifications, but his sense of guilt soon overwhelms him to the point of psychological and somatic illness. It is only in the epilogue that he realizes his formal punishment, having decided to confess and end his alienation from society.

 

[eelw]

I get it, that’s the lawyers job. But my client looks forward to proving his innocence. Sure this case is far from an open and shut case but will how methodical this investigation went, really think they covered their bases to prove guilt.

 

[Muse]

I get it, that’s the lawyers job. But my client looks forward to proving his innocence. Sure this case is far from an open and shut case but will how methodical this investigation went, really think they covered their bases to prove guilt.

His white Elantra was seen there. They have his DNA from the crime scene. It's him.

 

[Paratus]

His white Elantra was seen there. They have his DNA from the crime scene. It's him.

What? But how can you possibly make that determination before he’s been tried and convicted?! Innocent until guilty? Have to wait until all the evidence comes out! What about the lying press! What about his rights?!

Oh wait I thought this was about:

• Trump and the FBI @ mar a lago
• Ahmuad Arbery case
• Kyle Rittenhouse

Nevermind. Dude is totally guilty unless……

….hey does anyone know how conservative he is?

 

[Muse]

What? But how can you possibly make that determination before he’s been tried and convicted?! Innocent until guilty? Have to wait until all the evidence comes out! What about the lying press! What about his rights?!

Oh wait I thought this was about:

• Trump and the FBI @ mar a lago
• Ahmuad Arbery case
• Kyle Rittenhouse

Nevermind. Dude is totally guilty unless……

….hey does anyone know how conservative he is?

They got him basically the same way they got the California serial killer ex-cop, mining DNA databanks with samples they got at the scene of the crimes. They got hits of relative(s), worked up family tree(s) of those people and exhaustively researched the hits. In this case, one owned a white Elantra and lived near the crime scene. He became suspect #1. They found where he was living and copped some of his DNA somehow, maybe they already had it from another source. Bingo! They had their man. Guilty in MY mind, lots more info to come as he's processed, returned to Idaho, etc.

 

[Moonbeam]

He was trying to get people to submit their personal stories to fuel his study.

He was seeking participants for a research project "to understand how emotions and psychological traits influence decision-making when committing a crime."

I saw more on this on ABC network news last night. He assured participants that they would be anonymous in their contributions to the study.

I have to wonder. Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment is about a man with a fascination for this kind of idea. What happens in the mind of the perpetrator of a crime, in particular murder. The character commits a murder, thinking he could escape the consequences of his conscience if he was sufficiently aware of his emotions, sufficiently in control (Aside: I have never succeeded in getting past the beginning of this book of which I have a copy, but I know some of the basic ideas involved). In the book, the central character commits a murder thinking he had the mental power necessary, but it turns out he cannot escape the consequences of his actions. I don't remember ever hearing of something happening "in real life" like Dostoevsky's novel. I have to wonder if he read it. Obviously, he too has failed to escape the consequences of his actions. I suppose his motivations may become more clear in time. Maybe he is similar to Raskolnikov, Dostoevsky's protagonist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_and_Punishment

From the Wikipedia treatment of Crime and Punishment:

Raskolnikov (Rodion Romanovitch) is the protagonist, and the novel focuses primarily on his perspective. A 23-year-old man and former student, now destitute, Raskolnikov is described in the novel as "exceptionally handsome, taller than average in height, slim, well built, with beautiful dark eyes and dark brown hair." On the one hand, he is cold, apathetic, and antisocial; on the other, he can be surprisingly warm and compassionate. He commits murder as well as acts of impulsive charity. His chaotic interaction with the external world and his nihilistic worldview might be seen as causes of his social alienation or consequences of it.

Despite its title, the novel does not so much deal with the crime and its formal punishment as with Raskolnikov's internal struggle – the torments of his own conscience, rather than the legal consequences of committing the crime. Believing society would be better for it, Raskolnikov commits murder with the idea that he possesses enough intellectual and emotional fortitude to deal with the ramifications, but his sense of guilt soon overwhelms him to the point of psychological and somatic illness. It is only in the epilogue that he realizes his formal punishment, having decided to confess and end his alienation from society.

As the Western Rationalists of Dostoevsky's day missed their reflection in Crime an Punishment, I think you might have missed this as it's real point:

Nihilism, rationalism and utilitarianism
Dostoevsky's letter to Katkov reveals his immediate inspiration, to which he remained faithful even after his original plan evolved into a much more ambitious creation: a desire to counteract what he regarded as nefarious consequences arising from the doctrines of Russian nihilism.[27] In the novel, Dostoevsky pinpointed the dangers of both utilitarianism and rationalism, the main ideas of which inspired the radicals, continuing a fierce criticism he had already started with his Notes from Underground.[28] Dostoevsky utilized the characters, dialogue and narrative in Crime and Punishment to articulate an argument against Westernizing ideas. He thus attacked a peculiar Russian blend of French utopian socialism and Benthamite utilitarianism, which had developed under revolutionary thinkers such as Nikolai Chernyshevsky and became known as rational egoism. The radicals refused to recognize themselves in the novel's pages, since Dostoevsky pursued nihilistic ideas to their most extreme consequences. Dimitri Pisarev ridiculed the notion that Raskolnikov's ideas could be identified with those of the radicals of the time. The radicals' aims were altruistic and humanitarian, but they were to be achieved by relying on reason and suppressing the spontaneous outflow of Christian compassion. Chernyshevsky's utilitarian ethic proposed that thought and will in Man were subject to the laws of physical science.[29] Dostoevsky believed that such ideas limited man to a product of physics, chemistry and biology, negating spontaneous emotional responses. In its latest variety, Russian nihilism encouraged the creation of an élite of superior individuals to whom the hopes of the future were to be entrusted.[30]
Raskolnikov exemplifies the potentially disastrous hazards contained in such an ideal. Contemporary scholar Joseph Frank writes that "the moral-psychological traits of his character incorporate this antinomy between instinctive kindness, sympathy, and pity on the one hand and, on the other, a proud and idealistic egoism that has become perverted into a contemptuous disdain for the submissive herd".[31] Raskolnikov's inner conflict in the opening section of the novel results in a utilitarian-altruistic justification for the proposed crime: why not kill a wretched and "useless" old moneylender to alleviate the human misery? Dostoevsky wants to show that this utilitarian style of reasoning had become widespread and commonplace; it was by no means the solitary invention of Raskolnikov's tormented and disordered mind.[32] Such radical and utilitarian ideas act to reinforce the innate egoism of Raskolnikov's character, and help justify his contempt for humanity's lower qualities and ideals. He even becomes fascinated with the majestic image of a Napoleonic personality who, in the interests of a higher social good, believes that he possesses a moral right to kill. Indeed, his "Napoleon-like" plan impels him toward a well-calculated murder, the ultimate conclusion of his self-deception with utilitarianism.[33]

Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, and others foresaw what God's death would mean for Modern civilization. From the hateful rage expressed in this forum from liberals to conservatives the result of egotistical self-righteousness based on impotent yet fanatical certainty that longs to explode into violence, the notion that one can commit the crime of justifiable murder in the name of the good without a faith in divine justice. becomes more and more tempting.

Joseph Frank (1918–2013) is the greatest co-creator of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s life in our time, and his path to the top was thrillingly irregular. He was not a professional Slavist. True, in the late 1930s he attended university classes, but in 1942 he began working as an editor and literary journalist. An innovative essay on European modernism won him his first fame and a Fulbright scholarship to Paris in 1950. After earning a PhD at the University of Chicago (like the critic Mikhail Bakhtin, without a BA), he taught at Princeton from 1966 to 1985, and then at Stanford.

That’s the outside institutional envelope. The inside story, which stretched over a quarter-century (1976–2002), was his vast biography of Dostoevsky: five volumes totalling 2,500 pages. It grew out of his interest in the French Existentialists. Frank was vexed that their analyses of Dostoevsky were either personal and psychological, or else philosophical and theological. His task would be to fill in the middle space with the author’s daily stimuli, concrete provocations and constraints. He would do this without any relishing of private vices or pathological drives. Underneath his project was the old-fashioned and yet novel assumption that profound creativity is always a sign of profound mental health. Reviewing the fourth volume in 1995, A. S. Byatt wrote: “Frank is that increasingly rare being, an intellectual biographer, and his real concern is with the workings of Dostoevsky’s mind”.

***

Frank’s lecture on The Idiot takes up the perennial problem of its central hero Prince Myshkin – a would-be Christ figure who worsens everything he touches. That Myshkin fails doesn’t matter because he “is neither actor nor victim but a presence, a kind of moral illumination”. His purpose is not to save or punish but to stir up conscience, to precipitate in those around him a “conflict with their usual selves”. A final chapter on The Brothers Karamazov (tellingly, there is no lecture devoted to Demons) identifies Dostoevsky’s prerequisite for surviving inner conflict: “a faith that needs no support from the empirical and tangible”. Each brother (and the two major heroines as well) must confront the challenge of this necessity for faith, which demands an irrational Kierkegaardian leap. The loving resilience of the youngest brother Alyosha is proof that such a leap can be sensible, pragmatic, even bursting with health. What Dostoevsky, his characters and his contemporary readers share is something more modest than the eternal questions of Good and Evil: it is the “need to live in a meaningful world that does not make a mockery of one’s self-consciousness and the dignity of one’s personality”.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Have you seen the weirdo in custody?

He looks mentally ill just to look at.

Such a waste of young lives.

https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/accused-university-of-idaho-killer-bryan-kohberger-was-creep-to-girls-at-school-former-classmates-allege/news-story/147afb65411afd1dea02d84538e04bb8

 

[Pohemi]

Have you seen the weirdo in custody?

He looks mentally ill just to look at.

He looks like an uglier Jake Gyllenhaal.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

HOLY WALL OF TEXT^^^^
above two posts
@Moonbeam nobody is reading that. Far too much info for a forum post.
I recommend trimming that to a short paragraph or better a few sentences.

 

[Moonbeam]

Something on:

HOLY WALL OF TEXT^^^^
above two posts
@Moonbeam nobody is reading that. Far too much info for a forum post.
I recommend trimming that to a short paragraph or better a few sentences.

Let me tell you a secret a wise person managed to get to me. "The answer to a fool (or to fools for that matter) is silence, but experience has shown that in the long run any other answer will have the same effect."

I hope, now, you can see that there isn't any real virtue, in my opinion, to be had even in the extreme brevity of silence. What I say is meant only for those who, for whatever reason, may want to listen. I found the material I posted to have value. I did so because I read it. I therefore wanted to offer it to others in case they concluded the same.

If I am not mistaken, the story that suddenly springs to mind right here in the process of posting this comes somewhere from the man of interest in my post, namely Dostoevsky. A mAN DIED AND WAS SET ON THE ROAD TO HEAVEN, a million miles down but refused to walk. So he sat there on the side of the road for a million years till he finally got so bored that he started walking. No sooner dis he arrive than he said, I would walk a million times farther for this.

Often the value of things comes from the effort to achieve them. I read a lot of words before I learned that though I was doubtless told so early on.

 

[eelw]

Often the value of things comes from the effort to achieve them. I read a lot of words before I learned that though I was doubtless told so early on.

Not when 90% of the stuff you add to your posts isn’t needed. Getting to the point better than being a fortune cookie.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Not when 90% of the stuff you add to your posts isn’t needed. Getting to the point better than being a fortune cookie.

This is EXACTLY whatI was going to do

 

[Moonbeam]

Not when 90% of the stuff you add to your posts isn’t needed. Getting to the point better than being a fortune cookie.

Do you post what I think is needed? I post what I think is needed. I do so because you and I have different ideas about what is needed. I have no problem doing so without a need to point out that 90% of what you say isn’t needed. I post to suggest there is need and there is need and the assumption that you know what it is isn’t the same as the opinion of someone who may have discovered that what people imagine they need may not be what they really need and it may actually be, instead, something they think they don’t need.

So thank you for telling me I need a way to tell people who think they know things they don’t know at all, but in a way that will not offend them. I decided to go with the alternative. Try to please others and somebody will be offended. Try to please yourself and somebody will be offended. Which would you suggest?

 

[eelw]

Do you post what I think is needed?

*snip*

Unfortunately I’m not a professional copy editor, but all this gibberish could probably have been said in 2 sentences and without using need 9x