Keep Your Head Above the Bullshit
About a quarter of a century ago I really got into the JFK assassination and all the controversy. A most educational site, not just in terms of the crime itself, but for critical thinking, is John McAdam’s extensive body of work on debunking the vast number of conspiracies around the case.1 What goes for those conspiracies also goes for 9/11, and unfortunately, the State of Idaho vs. Kohberger.
Did you know that the Warren Commission Report2 and the 9/11 Commission3 have something in common? They have never been debunked. Discussed endlessly perhaps, and they are imperfect in parts but their conclusions remain sound.
Kohberger is innocent until proven guilty. That said, it is my opinion he will be convicted of this crime. Am I certain of this? No. I stick to the great Carl Sagan’s approach: “Keep an open mind, but not so open your brain falls out” I think on the evidence presented so far it is unlikely, very unlikely, that anyone else is involved.
So where to start? It is all about examining what you know; hypothesise, test, and repeat. Dr. Ben Goldacre wrote:
the most important question anyone can ask on any claim is simple: ‘how do you know?’4
This simple check would prevent so much illogical spaghetti, if people just bothered to verify what is being said. Even writing about this case, I have realised I’ve developed misconceptions and assumptions that aren’t correct (or stated anywhere official). It is a constant process. For example, did you know the PCA offers no explanation for how the suspect entered the house? There are persons on reddit who will berate you and claim the PCA says the suspect entered via the rear sliding door. It says no such thing. Doesn’t even touch the subject. The origin of this is a press conference I don’t have a link for, but it shows how easy it is to conflate sources and trip up.5
A phenomenon I have noticed with this case is the tendency for internet rumour to work its way into fact. For example among the many rumours of the case, there is the assertion that survivor and witness ‘DM’ shouted that the occupants of the house should be quiet6 (this is the polite version…) during the apparent noise of the murders. It’s completely unsubstantiated. It’s from a NewsNation story and they acknowledge it contradicts what has been officially released. However, and this is key: It is repeated as fact.
Early on in the case, during the interminable live streams on YouTube that covered the crime, a woman came forward claiming her daughter was a student at WSU, and boy did she have a story. It is in fact the origin of a lot of deeply disturbed and disrespectful rumours that must be terribly hurtful to the victim’s families.
The gist of it is roughly as follows:
- Numerous sorority and fraternity members were aware of the crime long before the police were told, and had been in the house before police arrived.
- The house was known for drug use.
- Multiple assailants (anywhere between 3-5) were involved in the murders.
- Graphic descriptions of victim’s injuries.
- The claim that one of the victims was pregnant
It’s all bullshit. There’s no evidence for any of it. Zero. There are obvious problems (under ID law Kohberger would be charged on 5 counts if he killed an unborn child, also no way anyone public knows the condition of bodies) if you just think for a second about all of this, but the community has only just started to realise that perhaps this woman is full of shit. Well-publicised cases attract the cranks and hoaxers looking for their fifteen. It’s just the nature of these things; it is up to the reader or viewer to be critical.
There are numerous YouTube creators that are cynically and ruthlessly exploiting the crime for their own gain. One of them has a gimmick wherein he dresses as a clown. That should really tip you off to the veracity of the material. The videos are well made and look good, but so does shit covered in glitter and a little red bow. This person claims there are tunnels under the King Road house, and that these tunnels were (somehow?) involved in the crime. There aren’t any tunnels. There’s municipal water and sewer lines, and the University of Idaho, like many campuses around the US (including the one I am familiar with) has a subterranean service network, providing water and steam (not murderers)7.
The drug rumours also led to the speculation of cartel involvement, in the thriving drug market that is Moscow Idaho. They also recruited fraternity members, known for their discretion and ability to keep a conspiracy under wraps. Yes I’m being sharp, but come on.
There is of course an element of entertainment in all of this; people have fun imagining the most outrageous theories, then trying to sell them to the world as a realistic scenario. Except they rarely get that far. Here’s another truth: Most conspiracy theorists avoid offering a hypothesis because in almost every case it makes them look stupid, insane, or both. What they instead will do is take something that is reasonably true (there are steam tunnels on the UoI campus) and connect it in some nonsensical way to give it meaning it does not actually have. Oliver Stone uses this technique a lot in his films (especially JFK) but that’s a post for another day. John McAdam called these ‘bogus factoids’ and they’re all over most conspiracy theories.
This is not entertainment. True Crime can be a fascinating intellectual exercise, it appeals to many human instincts, but at the end of this are four murdered young people that died under horrific circumstances. They have family. It is not entertainment to them.
I’m of pretty average intelligence and I can learn to do it. So can you. Be the best version of yourself, in all things.